BAST EUROPtrAN MONOGRAPHS, NO.

THB 9OSNIAN CHURCH:

ANEW INTERPRETATION
A Study of the Bosnian Church and lts
Place in State and SocietY from the
13th to the 1Sth Centuries

I
l"t ',"
JOHN V.AJ FINE, JR.
//

EAST EUROPEAN QUARTERLY, BOULDER

DISTRIRUTEI] BY COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS
NEW YORK AND LONDON
7975
I

PR,
q01
,8(p'i
r5t,
y {i t"5
,"n[s
- ?

TO MY PARENTS

John V. A. Fine jr. is Associate Professor of History

at The University of Michigan

AUBURN UIIIUTRSITY ilBNANII$

AUBURI{, fiTAEAMA 3S830

Copyright @ 1975 by East European Quarterly

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 75-6226
rsBN 0-g147to-03-6

Printed in the United States of America

 CONTENTS

Acknoubdgments

Terminologlt lv

Abbreuiations vtt

Map ix

INTRODUCTION I
FOOTNOTES TO INTRODUCTION 6
CHAPTER ONE, RELIGION IN BOSNIA'S PEASANT SOCIETY 9
I: Peasants and Religion 9
II: Language, Experience & Thought 20
III: Family Structure 2'
lV : Bases of Moral Order 27
V : Relations Between Rulers and Peasants 28
VI: Contact with and Spread of New Ideas 30
VII : Unrealistic Historical Models of Conversion ?,)
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER ONE 33
CTl,4PTER ]-IYO,.AN EXAMINATION OF THE SOURCES 4t
Native South Slav Sources 42
Catholic Church Sources 46
Papal Sources 47
Inquisition Documents t4
Franciscan Sources 59
Chronicles 62
Pius ll 63
Orbini and Pietro Livio of Verona 6'
Luccari and Resti /t
\\'estern l3th Century Chronicles 74
Franciscan Chronicles 7t
Defters and Turkish Laws 77
The Gospel ltl anuscripts 8t
The Apocryphal Tales 83
Traditions 84
Cmvestones 88
Churches 93
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER II: 94
 XII: Patarin Diplomats 264
APPENDIX A FOR CHAPTER TWO: On Forged
- Documents lOq
XIII: Social and Political Position of the Bosnian Church 267
Footnotes to Appendix A 108
I'OOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FIVE: 277
APPENDIX B FOR CHAPTER TWO: An Alleged Tract of Jacob de Marcia (l IAP'| IlR SlX. BOSNIA FROM l44l to 146) 295
Against Dualists in Bosnia I l0
Ill
I: 1440's
Increased Mention of Dualism in Sources from the 295
Footnotes toAppendixg Vuktid
II : Civil War Between Ste{an Toma! and Stefan 299
(.ITAPTER /11.,BOSNIA FROM THE END OF THE TWELFTH CENTURY III: King Stefan TomaYAccepts Catholicism 301
1"O THE ACCESSION OF STJEPAN KOTROMANIC, ca l3l1 lr3 IV : The Bosnian Church: The DragiYii Charter and Radosav Ritual 303
l: Background: Catholicism and Orthodoxy in Bosnia and Environs rtj V: Progress of Catholicism f.rom 1446 30,
Il: Heresy in the Balkans and Dualism lrt Vl: Papal Mention of Manichees 1447-145) 307
III: Ban Kulin and Catholicisnr t2l VII: Stefan Vuk[ii's Political Affairs (11r1r8-1451) and Religious
IV: Charges of Heresy and Foreign Interference t2) Associations 310
V: The Bilino polie Renunciation 126 VIII: The Herceg's Economic Problems War with Dubrovnik 112
Vl: ReligiousAffairsfrom 1203 tothe 1220's t)4 IX: Peace'I-reaties of lrt5)-)4 Role of-Gost Radin 117
Vll: Chargcs of F{eresy in the 1220's t)) -
X: 'fhe Pavlovi6i and Patarins in the 11r50's 321
Vlll: Papat Action and the Hungarian Crusades in the l2J0's 137 XI: The Herceg's Dealings with Catholicism and Orthodoxy 322
lX: Bosnian Catholic Church Sublected to Kalocsa r4t Xll: The Question of Kudugers 324
X: Establishment of the Bosnian Church 148 XIII: Catholic'Orthodox Rivalry Begins in Bosnia 726
X[: Reference to Heretics from the 1280's to l]05 1tl XIV : The Turkish Threat and Proposed Leagues to Meet it 328
XII: Died Miroslav of the Bosnian Church ltt XV: Kotruliic's Evidence 329
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER THREE rt7 XVI: Catholic Progress in the Final Years of Stefan TomaY n0
(.l1AP'1ER FOUR; BOSNIA FROM Ca' l)15 to 1391 167 XVII: Persecution Launched Against the Bosnian Church in 1459 332
l: Ban Stiepan Kotromanif : Early Political Successes and Relations XVIII: Three Bosnians Ablure Fifty Manichee Errors in Rome 335
with the Different Faiths 167 XIX: -Ihe Turkish Conquest of Bosnia and Part Played by Religious
ll: Continued Papal Concem About Heresy in Bosnia l)2,-1338 t77 Differences 338
III: The Establishment of the Franciscan Bosnian Vicariat 180 XX : The Position of the Bosnian Church in the Last Years of the
IV : Tvrtko Establishes H imself in Power : Relations with the Kingdom 341
Different Faiths 187 XXI : Mention of Religion in the Hungarian Banate of Jajce 34'
V : Papal Letters About Bosnia in the 1370's 192 FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER SIX: 346
VI: -f vrtko's Involvement in the Hungarian Civil War r97 APPENDIX A FOR CHAPTER SIX: The 50 Points Renounced Before
V II : Italian Documents about l)ualists in Bosnia r99 Cardinal Torquemada and their Irrelevance for the Bosnian Church )55
VIII: Tvrtko, Catholicism and the Bosnian Church 200 al I AP'fER SEtzEN: HERCEGOVINA FROM 1463 to 1481 363
I.OOTNOTES TO CHAPTER FOUR 201
I: Patarins in Hercegovina atter 7463 363
(.HAPT'I:R flvE. BOSNIA FROM 1391 rc11t43 211 II: The Herceg's Relations with Different Faiths in his Last Years 364
I : Characterof the Bosnian State l39l-1443 2tl III: The Testament of Gost Radin 365
ll : Three Religious Sources : The Serbian A nathemas, the Batalo IV: Patarins in Hercegovina After 1466 370
Gospel, the Gospel of Hval Krstjanin 2t2 FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER SEVEN 373
III: Political Events l39l-1421 andRoleof the Bosnian Church 219 (,IIAPTER EIGHT, RETIGION IN BOSNIA AFTER THE TURKISH
IV: Patarins in Secular Service and Relations Between Secular CONQUEST 375
Leaders and the Various Faiths 238 I: Patarins and Other Heterodox Christians in the Turkish Period 375
V : Jacob de Marchia and the Franciscan Mission 21+11
lI: Main Trends in Bosnian Religious liistory 1463-1600 377
Vl: Bosnia and the Church Council at Basel 248 I,OOTNOTES TO CHAPTER EIGHT 187
V II : Roman Catholic Gains in Bosnia 250 BIBLIOGRAPHY 39t
VIII: The KosaYa Family: Church Building and Relations with the Information about the Organization of the Bibliography 391
Onhodox Church 2tl Key to Abbreviations Used in the Bibliography 393
IX: Political Events from the late 1430's to 1443 and the Secular I: PRIMARY SOURCES 39J
Role o{ Patarins 254 A: Written 395
X: Patarin H izas and Dubrovnik 256 B : Archaeological and Epigraphical 40t
X[: Gravestone Inscriptions Giving Information about the Il:
Secondary Works 406
Bosnian Church 260 REGISI'ER OF PERSONAL AND PLACE NAMES 4)J
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The path along which an American of non-Balkan origin travels

before reaching the decision to study a small medieval Balkan state could
hardly have been direct; thus it is only fitting to acknowledge the in-
fluence of those who introduced me to this field. During my un-
dergraduate years at Harvard four scholars had great influence on me:
Professor Robert L. Wolff had the greatest impact in attracting me to
I{istory in general and to medieval Eastern Europe in particular.
Professor Albert B. Lord introduced me to the culture and folklore of the
South Slavs. Father Georges Florovsky introduced me to medieval Slavic
Church History and the late Professor Clyde Kluckhohn opened up to
me the fascinating world of Anthropology ancl the importance of ap-
plying its rnethods to ttre study of [Jistory. Upon graduation I receivecl a
Jugoslav Government Grant (through the Institute of International
Education) to attend courses at the Filozofski fakultet in Beograd during
the vear 196I-1962. There the excellent lectures of Professor Sima
6i.ttuli introducecl me to the fascinating history of medieval Bosnia.
With the above background and Professor Wolff's encouragement,
when the time came for me to choose a topic for my doctoral thesis what
could have been a more natural subject that heresy in medieval Bosnia?
Once again I was fortunate to be able to spend a year in Jugoslavia
(1966'67). This time Harvard University provided travel funds and the
Jugoslav Government (through its Commission for Cultural Affairs
with Foreigners) generously awarded me a stipend for a year's support.
This time I was based at the Filozofski fakultet in Sarajevo. This in-
stitution helped me in every possible way; it provided me with an office,
use of its library and contact with its stimulating faculty. There, I had
the rewarding experience of working with the late Professor Ante Babii.
He was a remarkable guide through the maze of sources; he not only
made sure that I missed none but also that I should be aware of the
innumerable complications connected with them. Through my many
discussions with him I was saved from numerous pitfalls and faulty
hypotheses. I also want to thank the following members of the Sarajevo
History Department who all helped me in every way they could:
Professors Miloracl EkmeEi6, Desanka KovaieviC, Rade Petrovid,
Marko Suniii, and Milan Vasi6.
I arn also grateful to thc Zcrnaljski nruz.ej of Sarajevo which rnadc
to me all of its facilities
- its library and exhibits
available (Ar-
chaeological and Folkloric). There I had the opportunity to spend many
valuable hours with its stimulating scholars
and Archaeologists
- both Anthropologists
who warmly received me and shared with me
-
 Medieval Bosnian Church Medieval Bosnian Church lll

grant in 1968-69 that released part of my time frorn teaching for work
experiences frorn their fielcl work. ltr ltarticular I acknolvledge the hel;r
and advice of Doctors Mario Petrii and Vla jko Palavestra with whorn I
on the manuscript. The Russian and East European Center at the
spent many hours of fruitful discussion and friendly debate. The staff of
University of Michigan financed the preparation of the manuscript for
presentation to the press and the Horace Rackham Graduate School of
the Commission for the Preservation of Cultural Monuments was also
helpful to me. There I am particularly grateful to Professor Zdravko the University of Michigan generously provided a subvention to enable
Kalrnakovii with whom I spent many stimulating hours. At the the book's publication.'I'o all three o{ these institutions I am most
Oriental Institute I anr rnost appreciative of the lgng discussions I was appreciative.
able to have with the late Hazim Sabanovi6 about Bosnia at the time of
I am also greatly indebted to my wife Gena who not only put up with
the f'urkish conquest as well as about the Turkish sources for the all the difficulties to be undergone when a spouse undertakes such a long
period. I am also inclebtecl to the Narodna Biblioteka in Saraievo which project, but who helped me in every way she could and in particular
allowed me to use its valuable collections' with her firsthand knowledge of Serbian village life. And finally, I am
'I'he Jugoslav grant was generous enough to allow me to travel about most grateful to my parents, Professor John V,A. Fine and Elizabeth
'l'hus Ihad the opportunity to visit rnany villages and Bunting Iiine, who have always encouraged and supported me in every
Jugoslavia.
nredieval site$ in Bosnia ancl fiercegovina. I was also able to speld tirne way in my academic work. lt is only fitting that this book be dedicated to
in Beograd where Professor Cirkovi{ was helpful to me. ln addition I was them.
able to visit and use the archives at I)ubrovnik and Zadar. At Dubrovnik
Professor Zdravko Sundrica was most helpful to me and at Zadar I am
most appreciative of the assistance of Professors ForetiC and Usmijani.
I returned to Harvard in the fall of' 1967 and the thesis was written
during that academic year. I am grateful to the Russian Research Center
which had previously (IC)64 66) given mc fellowships -- which then
Save ure a double fellowship for 1967-19(t8 so as to enable
me to devote
a fuli year (without having to teach) solely to writing the thesis which
macle it possible for me to finish the writing in one year. lt is hard to find
the rvords to expfess rtry dcbt and apprcr:iatiott to l)r6fcssor Wt.rlf{, wlxrst:
advice and encouragement throughout was always helpful, but whose
guidance through the writing process was instrumental. I am also in-
clebted to Dr. Angeliki Laiou, the second reader of my thesis, who
though tackling a work not in her field gave the text a most careful
reading ancl who suggestecl many helpfll irnprovernents. Bqth Professor
Wolff 's and Profcssor Laiorr's ctltttlttettts wcrc valtlable fol thc work's
revision into its present fornr as were tlte conttllcrlts of two friencls whrr
have read the complete manuscript: Professors Edward Keenan and
especially Bari(a KrekiC *hose careful reading spared me from a variety
of embarrassing errors. Professor William Lockwood in Anthropology
read and rnade helpful suggestions concerning rny chapter on peasants
and religion. Of course, none of the scholars and friends, whose help is
ackowledged above are responsible for any errors of fact or of in-
terpretation that may remain, and neither will they all necessarily a9ree
with the conclusions I have advanced.
The text was revised for submission to the press in the course of
1968'1973.l-he Russian Research Center of l]arvard awarded me a
 Medieval Bosnian Church
lv

trut also Serbia, Croatia, parts of Hungary, Srem, Bulgaria, Bohemia,

TERMINOLOGY USED IN THIS STUDY Transylvania and Moldavia. Catholic sources may use the term
Bosnia which
"Bosnia" to refer to the state, the diocese, or the vicariat.
The terminology for the history of religion in medieval The term Catbolic requires no definition. The term Ortbodoxrefers
is complex that before we can begin we
we shall trace in this study so
to the Eastern Church and, after 1219 (unless otherwise stated) to the
must define our terms. Serbian Orthodox Church. The term orthodox(with a lower-case "o")
been termed
Even though the medieval Bosnian might better have refers to the mainstream of Christian thought
paganthan Cbrisrion, we are going to call him a Christian'
since the - Orthodoxy,
Cathoiicism, or any other movement that had developed from them
to be used in this study
,,unau.a for a man's membership in a confession which, though schismatic, was not based on heretical doctrine. Of
wiilnotbebasedonhisdoctrinalbeliefs,aboutwhichweknowfartoo course, a body called orthodox, existing in the Bosnian setting, may
little'butonwherehisloyaltylay'Thisstandardhasbeenforcedonme well through ignorance have deviated considerably from the Catholic or
bythefactthat,as*"sh"ll,"",th.ologyisfairlyirrelevanttomedieval Orthodox Church in certainof its beliefs and practices, and some of its
was so shallow
Bosnia. Christianity, even among bishops and monks deviations may even have been derived from the influence of heretics.
that no one could possibly be called a Catholic if by the term is meant
The term Bosnian Church(a translation of. BosansAa crkua, the name
strictadherencetoallthedoctrinesofRome'Yeteveryoneappearingin used by the medieval Bosnians themselves) re(ers to the independent
felt himself to be, a
rhe sources called himself , and therefore presumably Bosnian Church established after the emigration to Slavonia of the
christian. Thus because everyone is found weak in doctrine, we must
m-ade a man
Catholic hierarchy. First reference to this name in the sources is in the
make loyalty our test of confession - loyalty to Rome 1320's. The bishop of this church was called the Djed (literally
made a man a
Catholic und loyalty to the Bosnian Church hierarchy "Grandfather"); a djed is first referred to in the sources in 1305.
Bosnian Christian. The term Patarin has a complicated history. This Italian name was
The name Bosnia designates different areas at different times, and
is
Vrelo Bosne near Vrh- first used in the eleventh century to refer to a political party in Milan
derived from the River BJsna, which flows from
opposed to the Bishop of Milan. By the thirteenth century this term had
bosna (modern Saraievo) north into the Sava' The
term then came to
the area of Visoko- come to designate ltalian dualists who had links with the French
,"f..,o the i'upa(county) of Bosnia, which included
Cathars. Papal and Hungarian letters from the beginning of the thir-
Zenica.Vrhbos.,a-Kre3euo-Foinica.Travnikandwasthedirectholding teenth to the middle of the fifteenth centuries on occasions used this
of. the Ban (the ruler) of Bosnia.(l) However,
at various times in the
over various term about Bosnia, always without defining it. From the end of the
medieval period, the Ban of Bosnia also was suzerain fourteenth century, Dalmatian (particularly Ragusan) sources con-
(state) far as the Sava River.
territories to the north ofhis banate as
sistently use the term Patarin to refer to members of the Bosnian
These lands (Sol, Usora, GhI, Vrbania, Zemlianik' and the Donji
Church, chiefly to its ordained clerics. However, on occasions
kraii) were {requently referred to as Bosnian lands' A magnate
who held
name Bosnia to his Dalmatians used the term to designate lay members of the Church (e.g.,
,o.. o, any of these territories frequently added the
the central core of the Patarin slaves soldin Dubrovnik (Ragusa), or great noblemen who
ii,t.. ttt. batholic diocese of Bosnia included
supported the Bosnian Church). I shall use the term Patarin in the
state and all the territory in the north as far as the
Sava'
Bosnia Dalmatian sense to refer to ordained clerics of the Bosnian Church.
The title ol Bishop i7 Bosnlarefers to the Catholic Bishop of However, since I shall cite sources in their own words, the term
and who then in the 1250's,
who resided inside Bosnia until the 1230's "Patarin" (in quotes) appears occasionally bearing the meaning
after a period of dislocation, settled permanently in
Diakovo in-Slavonia'
whatever it may have been
-
in ,t he still ruled over this lafge Bosnian diocese' but his actual - intended by the sourcesn authors.
When a source says Cbristiaz, it means the branch of Christianity to
"o.y
authority in the state of Bosnia for most of the period from.1250 to
.146) which the author ofthe source belonged. I shall use the term in a general
wasnon.existent.Hisactivitiesweregenerallylimited.toaffairs'in sense to encompass all the different strains of Christianity found in
Franciscan mission
slauonia. In the middle of the fourteenth ientury the Bosnia. The term krstjanin (literally "Christian") is a special Bosnian
to the South Slavs was established; the territory the Franciscans
term for an ordained member of the Bosnian Church.(2) At times a
op..ut"ainwascalledtheBosni'anaicorial.Thisvicariatwasan Ragusan source will refer to such a cleric as "Christian so-and-so";
.io.rnou, territory that included not only the whole diocese of
Bosnia
vl Medieval Bosnian Church vii

only in the Turkish defters(" cadasters") does the term at times seem to LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
acquire a broader meaning to include lay members of the church as wAll.
I shall use the word krstjaninin the narrow Bosnian sense. See bibliography for full titles of monographs cited with shortened title.
t
Also see Bibliography when a writer's name is cited by itself (e.g.,
t Orbini) for if a work is cited in that way (and does not apPear on this list)
it means that it is the only work of that particular author used.
I

AB, (E. Fermendiin ed., Acta Bosnae potissimum ecclesiastica,

MSHSM, 23, Zagreb, 1892.)

FOOTNOTES TO TERMINOLOGY CD, (T. Smiliklas, Codex Diplomaticus regni Croatiae, Dalmatiae et
Slauoniae, II-XV, Zagreb, I9O4 1934.)

, 1. Many peasants today still use the term "Bosnia" to refer to the region of
the medieval iupa as opposed to the much larger area incruded in the riodern I Dini(., Iz dubrouatkog arhiaa,III, (SAN, Zbornik za istoriju, jezik, i
Republic of Bosnia. (oral communication from wm. Lockwood. He notes that knjiievnost srpskog naroda, III odelienje, knj. XXII, Beograd, 1967).
peasants from the vicinity of Bugojno speak about "going to Bosnia', when ,
they
go to towns such as Travnik.) GlD, (Godiinjak Istoriskog drulna Bosne i Hercegouine, which
_ 2. That this term krstjanin is used to refer only to ordained clerics in the to GodiYnjak DruYtua istori/ara Bosne i Hercegouine,
changed its title
Bosnian Church, will become apparent in the course of this study. On every
charter witnessed by nobles and clerics, only the clerics are called krsrjani; the published in Sarajevo, l, 1949')
lay figures, even ifsupporters of the Bosnian church, never bear this titie.
GZMS, (Glasnik Zemaljskog muzeja, Sarajevo, I, 1889 - which began
a new series in 1946 -)

JAZU, (Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i umietnosti, Zagreb; this

academy has published a variety of important sources as well as two
major periodicals, Rad,l,1867-i and Starine,I' 1869-)

MSHSM, (Monumenta spectantia historiam Slavorum Meridionalium,

series of sources published by JAZU,l, Zagreb,1868 )

Prilozi, (Pritozi za knjileanost, jezik, istoriju i folklor, Beograd, I,

1920-)

Rad, (Rad, JAZIJ, Zagreb, I' 1867-)

Radovi NDBH, (Radovi Nau[nog druitva Bosne i Hercegovine,

Saraievo, l, 1954')

SAN, (or prior to the revolution SKA, Srpska akademiia nauka i

umetnosti, Beograd; this academy has isssued a variety of important
- a monograph series, posebna izdania SAN, as well a
publications as
series of works of a variety of institutes, Zbornik radova . . . instituta ' ')
v111 Medieval Bosnian Chulch Medieval Bosnian Church 1X

'fheiner, MFI (A. Theiner , Vetera tnonutllenta bistorica Hungariam

sdcram illu.strantia, I-lI, Rome' 1859 62)

Theiner, MSM (A. Theiner, Velera ntonurrTenta Slauorunt

Meridionalium bistoriam illustrantia, l, Rome, 1863' Il, Zagreb,
187 5).

YZA. Vjesnik Zemaljskog at'kil)a, Zagreb, I-XXII, 1849'1920'

ZRVI, Zbomik radoua VizantoloYkog htstituta, SAN, Beograd' I'

1952 )

*"t
: f-j '
\ "* \*
"rttev (Jr)|(

*o-*o^u\
^\,

:{e froces ol Krslioni

'F in furkish Defters

6 froces of Krstioni
w in Medienol Sources

5 *f;55i,s!:'
I o.thodo* Churches
ond Monosteries

DIFFUSION OF DENOMINATIONS IN BOSNIA

(Rgprinted by permission from 5. CirkoviC, lstorijo sredniovekoyne bosonske

drfove. Beogrod,1964. Poge 284)
 INTRODUCTION

.I
Many books and articles have dealt with the religious situation in
medieval Bosnia. The sources speak of a Bosnian Church and of a
heresy, and most scholars have assumed that the two were synonymous,
and that a heretical Bosnian Church dominated religious life in Bosnia
from the end of the twelfth century to the Turkish conquest (1448-
1481). Yet there has been no agreement regarding the nature of this
church or heresy, and some have argued that heresy is not an accurate
term for this Bosnian movement. Two main views (one of which occurs
in variant forms) about this movement have been predominant in the
literature.
The first view asserts that the heresy was synonymous with the
Bosnian Church and that its doctrine was dualist. Though called by
other names, the Bosnian Church should be viewed as part of the same
movement as the Bogomils in Bulgaria and the dualist heresies of
northern Italy and southern France, and thus as one among many
successors of the Manichees or the Gnostics. The essence of a dualist
world view is that there are two principles
- a good principle usually
identified with the spirit and considered to be the creator of heaven and
the soul, and an evil principle identified with matter and considered to
be the creator of this world and the human body. Here on earth is waged
one phase of an eternal battle in which human beings, with their good
souls and evil bodies, play a role and at the same time strive to achieve
salvation. ( 1 )
Evidence supporting the contention that dualist doctrines akin to
these existed in Bosnia has been drawn almost exclusively from papal
and inquisitional documents, This material was utilized by the noted
Renaissance humanist Enea Silvio de' Piccolomini (better known as
Pope Pius ll, 1458-1464).(2) His works, describing the heretics as
Manichees, were incorporated into the writings of the late fifteenth-and
early sixteenth century writers Marc Antonio Sabellico and Raphael
Volaterrano,(3) and thereafter into a vari€ty of later chronicles and
histories. Whether accurate or not, therefore, Pius II is the source and
founder of the school of historical thought that has continued through
the eighteenth-century writers Farlati and Raynaldi down to the
 Medieval Bosnian Church
present.(4) This view has been the predominant one among scholars; it
was most persuasively argued in Bogomili i Patare4i, the major work of
the ninereenth century scholar Franja RaEki.(5) V. Corovii, S. CirkoviC,
A. BabiC, D. Kniewald, A. Solovjev, and other twentieth-century
historians have more recently expounded and elaborated on it.(6)
The second view, and the one that appealed particularly to Serbian
writers, maintains that the Bosnian Church, though often called
heretical, really was not, but was, rather, essentially Orthodox in
doctrine, differing from Serbian Orthodoxy only in that it was governed
by its own Bosnian hierarchy. This view rests on abundant material in
the sources. Scholars have found proof both in Bosnian domestic
charters and in diplomatic records of Dubrovnik that Bosnians who were
members of the Bosnian Church accepted a variety of standard Christian
beliefs and practices that were foreign both to dualism and to the
practices ascribed by Italian Catholic documents to the Bosnian
heretics.(7) The most famous proponent of this view was V. Glulac,
who advanced many sound reasons for scepticism in regard to RaEki's
interpretation, but whose general use of sources can only be called
cavalier. Sources in support of his views were utilized, while those
contradicting them were ignored or rejected for absurd reasons.(8) The
vehemence with which he advanced his opinions and the tone of in-
vective in academic replies to his work illustrates the degree of
emotionalism that has characterized so many of the works discussing
religion in medieval Bosnia.
The Orthodox theory also has its drawbacks. Not only is it con-
tradicted by papal and inquisitional sources, but it is also refuted by
various Serbian sources. Bosnian churchmen are anathematized in the
Serbian sinodiks (texts drawn from the edicts of Church synods). In
addition, two medieval Serbian biographies (one from the fourteenth and
the other from the fi{teenth century) refer to tle Bosnians as heretics.
Thus it is not surprising that we find serious attempts by scholars to
propagate a variant of this second view which claims that the Bosnian
Church was neither dualist nor Orthodox, but was more or less "or-
thodox" (with a lower-case "o")(9) in belief yet in schism with both
East and West. This view was put forward and strongly defended by J.
Sla* up until 1953(lO)-when he adopted a position in'basic agreement
with RaEki. Since 19J3 Sidak has written a number of excellent critical
studies on specific aspects of the religious history of Bosnia.(11) In 1953
Fra L, P.(etrovid) published a stimulating work, KrYtani bosanske crkue
(Christians of the Bosnian Church),(12) which also takes this view and
makes a devastating attack on the dualist viewpoint. His emphasis on the
. Introduction
monastic character of the Bosnian Church also deserves serious con-
sideration, although I believe he exaggerated connections between the
Bosnian Church and earlier Catholic movements in Croatia.
Thus we are left with two basic theories: that the Bosnian Church
was dualist, and that it was independent and schismatic but more or less
orthodox in doctrine. Both views have a variety of sources to support
them. One needs only to place side by side two documents of the 1460's
to see this vividly; the fifty articles that Cardinal Torquemada drew up
to be renounced by three Bosnian "Manichees" in 146I , and the Will
of the Bosnian Church leader Gost Radin in 1466, which contradicts
several of Torquemada's points and does not exude a Manichee spirit at
all. Thus it is not at all surprising that serious scholars have advocated
such opposing views and that the problem still has not been resolved.
To advocate one of the two basic views of the heresy, one needs to find
legitimate reasons to reject a whole collection of sources. Because no one
has yet been able to justify the discarding of such a large number of
documents on the basis of solid arguments,(13) a totally different
solution must be sought and a model created that takes into con-
sideration these contradictions.
In 1601 when Gost Radin's will and many Bosnian charters were still
buried in various archives, Mauro Orbini, writing his history of the
Slavs, noted contradictions between the dualist tradition in the
chronicles whose material can be traced back to Pius II, and the material
contained in a now lost chronicle, most probably written in the first half
of the sixteenth century, by Pietro Livio of Verona. Orbini took the
natural way out of this dilemma and decided that there must have been
two movements or heresies.(f 4) Three hundred years later, in 1892, an
Orthodox cleric writing under the pseudonym of Atom wrote that
historians had taken separate facts, (i.e., that in Bosnia there were
heretics and that in Bosnia there was a Bosnian Church) and combined
them to produce a Bosnian heretical church. Atom pointed out that the
two need not refer to the same religious movement.(l)) However,
except for Orbini and Atom, no other historians have considered the
possibility that there might have been two movements. And even Atom
never followed through on his idea, but instead quickly fell in with the
Orthodox point of view which he argued with considerable vehemence.
It is clear that Orbini did not clearly differentiate between the two
movements and at times attributed to one what should have been at-
tributed to the other. Yet his general idea does provide a means for
resolving our dilemma. In fact, it is the only solution that does not
require the discarding or ignoring of a large number of sources. Thus the
possibility that Bosnia contained both a dualist heresy and a schismatic
 Medieval Bosnian Church lntroduction

non-dualist Bosnian Church is seriously examined in this study. shall in all cases faithfully follow the terminology of each document. It
The hope that heretofore unknown sources will yet be discovered is should be kept in mind, however, that medieval writers were not always
not totally bleak. Recently scholars have begun to utilize the Turkish careful about the way they used terminology, and as a result of lack of
archives, which contain defters (Turkish cadasters) describing Bosnia, knowledge or for the express purpose of slandering an opponent,
most of them still unpublished. The type of material to be found in them sometimes used the wrong term.
is described by T. okig, who also presents considerable actual material
I intend in this study to utilize only sources concerning Bosnia. Many
drawn from the defters.1l6) This material is tremendously important for
scholars, having decided that the Bosnian heretics were dualists, have
the student of the Bosnian Church. It is to be hoped that the detailed and
filled in gaps, resulting from the dearth of source material, by describing
tedious work necessary to enable editions o{ these defters to see the light
the practices of dualists elsewhere. However, even if there was dualism
of day will be carried out in the near future. In addition to the Turkish,
in Bosnia it is necessary to remember that Bosnia was a backward and
the Italian archives have not yet been exhausted by scholars working on
uneducated country; hence the practices of any religious confession
Balkan problems, and from time to time they yield a previously
there would be bound to acquire significant deviations from those of
unkno*n prize. Only recently, M. Sunjii found an interesting their co-religionists elsewhere. Thus a practice not attested in sources
document about Gost Radin in the Venetian archives.(17) Whether the
concerning Bosnia can in no way be assumed to have existed there. Such
labor of going through these Italian materials, much of which has
analogies tend to cloud the issue and bury the content of the few sources
already been examined by Balkanists, will yield results proportional to
that do exist about Bosnia beneath a weighty mass of irrelevant material.
the time spent is doubtful. But it is hoped that scholars using the
The only way we can untangle Bosnia's complicated religious history is
Venetian, Veronese, and other Italian archives for other projects will
to rely on Bosnian sources, or foreign sources specifically about Bosnia.
look for material pertaining to Bosnia. Perhaps even a copy of Pietro
If these sources are insufficient to solve the problem, then we must
Livio of Verona's lost chronicle about Bosnia still exists somewhere in
reconcile ourselves to the fact that the problem cannot really be solved.
Italy.
Moreover, many scholars have ignored the environment of Bosnia
when they treat heresy there, and have assumed that heresy in Bosnia,
Bulgaria, northern Italy, and southern France can be discussed in the
II
same way, simply in terms of the ideas supposedly propagated. Bosnia
differed from these other regions in many significant ways, and these
This study differs from previous studies on the Bosnian Church in
differences must have had important effects upon religious beliefs and
several ways. First, its research has been carried out with no conscious
practices. For this reason, before discussing the history of the Bosnian
preference for any of the conflicting viewpoints. And even as I write I am
church, or the sources from which our picture of its history has been
bothered by contradictions in the sources and must admit that I am not
drawn, I shall first describe (drawing on some of the findings of An-
completely satisfied with the validity of any explanation. One thing,
thropology)(l8) Bosnia's peasant society and assess the effect such a
however, is very clear and that is that we should not seek a simple
society would presumably have had on ideas with which it might have
solution. It is highly unlikely that the dualist theory, the Orthodox
come into contact, as well as how its members would have regarded
theory (or its variants), or any other single-explanation theory is suf-
religious phenomena. In this way we shall have a realistic background
ficient to explain all aspects of the religious turmoil in medieval Bosnia.
against which to view the doctrines found in Bosnia and we shall not fall
We should, therefore, be willing to admit the possibility that there was
victim to the common tendency of treating ideas as if they had existences
more than one religious group in Bosnia which could be considered
independent of the people who used them.
suspect in the eyes of Rome. This means that it is important that the
Since no religious movement can be considered in a vacuum, we shall
sources be presented in their own terminology. One common fault in the
discuss also other religious groups in Bosnia and shall take into con-
work of many scholars is that, once they have decided to their own
sideration the limited material that exists about Catholic and Orthodox
satisfaction that the heretics were of a particular character' they, when
churches, priests, and populations in Bosnia and Hercegovina. It is also
summarizing sources, substitute the label they have accepted (e.g.
impossible to discuss any religious confession outside of the general
Bogomil) for the word "heretic" that actually appears in the sources. I

Medieval Bosnian Church
historical framework. None of the beliefs and institutions of any con-
fession existed independent of the social factors and political events of
their time. Thus instead of skipping from document to document about
the heresy and Bosnian Church with only passing references to
historical figures and events, I shall in the narrative sections of this
study present a brief but general historical survey of Bosnia (at times
dif{ering somewhat from standard accounts) into which I shall fit the
documents about religious matters as each becomes relevant. This will
make the study longer than I had originally intended, but since the
heresy and Bosnian Church were Bosnian phenomena and not narrow
religious issues, the benefits to be gained by this approach in terms of
understanding will make the added length well worthwhile. This
chronological method of presentation, though unfortunate in many
ways, is necessitated by the fact that certain common generalizations in
the historical literature hold true for only limited periods of time.
It also should probably be stated here that my study is not focused on
theology. I am primarily interested in Bosnia and its society. And while
we shall try as best we can to clarify the nature of the Bosnian Church's
doctrines, our main interest will be the role of this church (and/or)
heresy in the Bosnian state and how this "church" and all other
religious organizations were related to political events and to society. In
so doing, I hope to achieve a broader understanding of the nature of
religion in medieval Bosnia. It is to be hoped that, by asking many new
and different questions of the sources, we may be able to come up with
some new insights into the religious history of Bosnia, as well as some
new explanation for (or ways of looking at) some puzzling aspects of this
history.
Finally, it should be stressed here that though much emphasis will be
placed on religious syncretism and the weak grasp of Christianity among
Bosnia's uneducated peasants, I am in no way claiming that rural
Bosnia was more backward than other rural areas of medieval Europe.
Much of what I say about the medieval Bosnian peasants holds true for
peasants the world over well into the twentieth century.
FOOTNOTES TO INTRODUCTION
l. For a brief discussion on dualism, as well as for bibliography on the subject,
see Chapter III.
2. Pius lr,Earopa Pii Pontificis
Maximi nosrroran ternpolurn uaias continens
/tistorias, Basel, 1101, and his comrnentarii rerant memorabiliam, qaae
temporibus suis contigerunt, Rome 1j84.
Introduction
3. Marc Antonio Sabellico, Rbapsodiae historiarum ab orbe condito En'
neades,2 vols., Venice, 1494'1t04, and Raphaelo Volaterrano, Com'
menlariorum urbanorum, Paris, 1510.
4. D. Farlati, Illyricum Sacrum, 9 volumes (especially Vol' IV), Ve
lTtl-1819, and O. Raynaldi, Annales Ecclesiastici. Continuatio Baronii, 15
volumes, Lucca, 17 47 -)6.
). RaUki's work was originally published serially in Rad(JAZU, in Zagreb),
in 1869 and 1870. It was reissued in book form by SKA in Beograd in 1931. I
shall cite the SKA edition.
(r. V. CoroviC, Histoija Bpsne,SKA, Beograd, 1940; A. Babit, Bosanski
lteretici, Saraievo, 1963;-S. CirkoviC, Istoriia srednjouekoune bosanske dfraue,
Beograd, 1964 and his "Die Bosnische Kirche," Accademia Nazionale dei
l-incei, Problemi Attuali di Scienza e di Cultura, Rome 1964, pp' 547 -564: D.
Kniewald, "Vierodostoinost latinskih izvora o bosanskim krstianima," Ral,
0AZU, Zagreb) 270, L949, pp. Il5'276. A. Soloviev has produced a large
number of articles on the subiect, see bibliography for details.
7. For example: fourteenth and fifteenth- century Bosnian Gospel
manuscripts, some clearly copied by Bosnian Churchmen, but so Orthodox in
form that they were in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries used in Or-
thodox churches, and which contain religious.pictures including the portrait of
John the Baptist (who was supposedly hated by the Bogomils); plans for the
participation in a Ragusan Catholic Church festival in 1426 by the prominent
Bosnian nobleman and supporter of the Bosnian Church, Sandali Hranii; the
Last Will and Testament of the Bosnian Church leader, Gost Radin, written in
1466 which has a large cross (a symbol rejected by dualists) down the left
margin and whose content strikes the reader as being quite orthodox and not at
all dualist. These documents areall discussed in detail in the narrative chapters.
8. V. Glulac, "sredniovekovna 'bosanska crkva,' " Prilozi, lY , 1924, pp.
l-)). Also his, Istina o Bogomilima, Beograd, 194).
9.ln this study "orthodox" with a lower-case "o" means the mainstream of
Christian doctrine at the time, i.e. Catholicism and Orthodoxy, while Orthodox
with a capital "O" will refer to the Eastern Orthodox Church, usually in
reference to the Serbian Orthodox Church.
tO. i.Siaat, "Problem'bosanske crkve'u na"soi historiografiji od
PetranoviCa do Glulca, " Rad(JAZU), 259, 1937, pp. 37 -182.
ll. See Bibliography.
12. Published as a book length article in the Sarajevo Franciscan iournal,
Dobri Pastir, 1911. The Sarajevo Franciscans also sell the off-print in book
form.
I 3. In fact serious source study has been carried out only to show the validity
of sources supporting a particular theory such as Kniewald's discussion of the
Latin sources or Solovjev's of the Orthodox sources. D. Kniewald,
"Vjerodostojnost.. .," Rad,27O, 1949, pp. ll5 276; A. Soloviev, "Sv-
iedotanstvo pravoslavnih izvora o bogomilstvu na Balkanu," GID, V , 1953'
pp. 1-103. Both works tried to establish the reliability of the s'ources, that
showed the Bosnian heresy to be dualist. However, what is necessary is to
scrutinize all sources, regardless of their content and point of view, collect what
data we can about each document so that we can evaluate its authenticity and the
reliability of its content, and only then on the completion of this task, try to
come up with some conclusions about the heresy's nature. In this study we shall
8 Medieval Bosnian Church

try to do iust that and in addition to the detailed chapter devoted to sources, we
shall treat in the narrative chapters problems connected with the sources as we CHAPTER I
come ro them. It is to be hoped that in the near future more scholars will turn to
the necessary task of source study and the.evaluation of the documents upon
which our knowledge about medieval Bosnia must rest.
RELIGION IN BOSNIA'S PEASANT SOCIETY
14. M. Orbini, Il Regno de gli Slaui, Pesaro, 1601. Having spoken of the
Patarini as described by Pietro Livio and having described the conversion of
many by the Franciscans, Orbini (p.354) writes "Pellegrino . . . having con-
verted the Patarin heretics, ofwhich there were another sort in Bosnia, called
Manichees. Which (according to Volaterrano and Sabellico) . . . . " (Great Trodition) religions are tbe producl of urban and piestll'
15. Atom, "Kakva je bila srednjevekova'crkva bosanska,' 'vjera bosan-
tbeir acceptance among peasants is problematic.
classes. Tbe extent of
ska,' " Bosanska aila, 1892, p. 168.
In general the etistence of an undercurrent of belief distinct ftom that'
l(r. T. Okiq, "Les Kristians (Bogomiles Parfaits) de Bosnie aprbs des o.[ tbe educated strata, often in dilect opposition lo it, cbaracterizes
Documenc Turcs in6dits," Sddost-Forschungen,19, 1960, pp. 108 133. The pedsant socielies. Passed along b1 uord of mouth from generation to
material fgom the defters will be discussed in Chapter II.
generation, onQ fragments of tbis underground tradition are likellt to
I7. M. Suniif , "Jedan novi podatak o Gostu liadinu i niegovoi sekti," G/D,
XI, l9(r0, pp.261-268. This document as well as the details of Gost Radin's lind tbeir wa1 into historical records, and then uery likei in a
listorted form (1)
colorful career are treated in Chapter VII
18. The use made of Anthropology in this study consists in putting to the
Bosnian sources some of the questions anthropologists put to the societies they
Tlte culture of a peasant communi4t . . . is not aulonomous. It is an
study, making use ofethnological data on recent Bosnian peasant society and
dspect or dimension of tbe ciuilization of whicb it is a part. As a
making use, for comparative purposes, of descriptions of the function and role of
peasant societ! is a ltalf-societ1, so the peasanl culture is a balf-culture.
religion in various other societies. I make no attempt to apply concepts such as
animism or totemism to which ceftain anthropologists have unconvincingly
. . To maintain itself peasant culture requires continual com'
munication lo tbe local communiry of tbougbt originaling oulside of it.
tried to give universal validity. 'lbe intellectual and oflen lhe religious and moral hfe of a peosant
Since History tends to look at a society from the top down emphasizing the
to knou
it tends to present a picture of society that-is too neat and or-
t'illage is perpetually incomplele; the student needs also
ruling classes
-
derly. Thus Anthropology which tends to think {rom the bottom up from the
somelhing o.f ubat goes on in tbe minds of rernole teacbets (or) priests
Ievel ol the individual village on up to the local district will be a-helpful an-
.. wbose thinking a/fects and perhaps is affected b1 the peasantry.
- Seen as a "slncbronic" syslem, tbe peasant culture cannot be fulll
tidote. For after all, religious beliefs and practices in a peasant society are present
understoql t'rom what goes ot, in the minds of the uillagers alone.
on an individual, family and village level and are not dictated
effectively
- at least not
from the top down. And in fact, with the exception of certain taxes
Second, tbe peasant uilhge inuites ts to allend to the long course of
- interaction betueen the communitlt and centers of ciuilization' Tbe
and possibly military service
to the central state
- probably as often rendered to the local noble as
most of our villagers probably had little contact with or l)easant culture bas an euident bistory; and tbe bisto1t is not local: il
-
feeling for the central state. f'heir ties would have been to the local noble who
is tbe bistoryt of the ciuilization of whicb lbe uillage culttre is one local
etpression.(2)
usually did all he could to assert his independence from outside interference and
who presumably acted both toward the state and his peasants with as much
license as he could get away with.

I: Peasants and Religion

One of the first things that should strike the student of heresy in
Bosnia, but something that is generally ignored, is that Bosnia's entire
religious history took place in a rural environment. This fact at once
differentiates Bosnia's heresy from the heretical movements in southern
France and northern ltaly, which were essentially urban movements. In
Bosnia, on the contrary, the towns, which began to develop only in the
 l0 Medieval Bosnian Church
Religion in Bosnia's peasant Society ll
second half of the fourteenth and the early fifteenth centuries, became
sect'"(3) This sort of approach is just what we
the centers of the catholic restoration. This was largely because must try to abandon.
Those who think in these rerms *un,
significant numbers of foreigners, the most important o{ whom were ,o ignore tf," poputu. ojnion,
which are real * and which therefore ,nuri
catholic merchants from Dalmatia (especially Dubrovnik), established b" the sufy"ct rui,l, ,nu,
interests the historian and to seek refuge in the unreal worrd
commercial colonies in those Bosnian centers most vital for their trade. - yet of ab-
srract rheology and theory. in ,n enuiionment like that of Bosnia a
They provided a solid nucleus of Catholics in these towns; they built
consistent and constant abstract theologicar
churches and they attracted the Franciscans thither by offering them creed did not and courd not
exist'All that courd exist would be a basic core of beliefs
support and security. The Franciscans, in turn, had the major role in una p.r.ti..,
associated with what peopie thought
winning large segments of the Bosnian population to Catholicism. was christianity. An iitii"."r.
society like Bosnia simply aoes notlook upon
But even after the development of these towns, the overwhelming its religion theologically.
Practice is more important than belief, and much that is considered
majority of Bosnia's population remained rural, engaged in farming and
basic to a theologian is just not known,
herding. And this means that many standard methods for examining and let alone understood.(4)
This will at once become apparent when we
studying heresies do not prove relevant when we apply them to Bosnia. examine the case of a
catholic Bishop of Bosnia who was removed
Yet even so, such methods are usually attempted and the results are from office in tiil to,
incompetence. This bishop did not know
frequently quite meaningless. Thus it will be helpful to discuss a the baptismal tor*utu,"liu"a
with a heretical brother, and did not seem
religious movement in a rural environment and explain what methods to realize that his brother was
heretical' obviously theological analysis is irrelevant
to. u t
"."r/ in ,
can and cannot be used. some of the applicable methods will not be able
country where such a situation courd arise. This
to be successfully employed because the sources are so scanty, but if we become,
uneducated as that,"u"n-.i"rr".
when we stop to ask: If the bishop was an
are aware of them, we can at least avoid making erroneous the priests and common people like2())
,i*-r.."
generalizations.
Nor does this bishop seem to have
This chapter focuses on how peasants regardless of which con- been exceptional; ignorance
fession they belonged to
- theology shows through in
a.tui[Jao.ument that exists, from the
of
- regarded and reacred to religion. There will
be considerable discussion of religious syncretism. Although syncretism
1203 renunciation "u..y
oi..ro., by tt..nont , at Bilino polje, to pope
may have been responsible for accusations of heresy against the Gregory XI's replies to the question, ,ui,ni,r.d
to him by Franciscans
working in the Bosnian.vic_ariat ;n
Bosnians, and in fact may have resulted in practices that educated
visitations or of travelers in the
n)3, to the reports of Catholic
foreigners felt were heretical, it must be stressed that this syncretism ,"u.n,""nih, eighteenth, and nineteenth
centuries' The pope's letter of r373
r,,as found among peasants of all faiths,including Catholics. Thus we refersto orthodox christians from
somewhere in the Bosnian vicariat
should make a distinction between "heresy" arising spontaneously who were not aware of the existence
of the schism between the Eastern
from a combination of old and new religious practices, occurring in uni *"ri.." churches and who did
differing patterns in different villages, and an actual heretical morrement not know the fundamentals of their
own faith.(6) The level of un-
derstanding can be seen even more
with defined doctrine such as neo-Manicheeism. Such distinctions vividly in the report of a visitation to
frequently do not seem to have been made by the medieval churchmen nearby Srem in 1612 by the
Jesuit Surih;lo.nu"us KaEii.(7) The Or_
thodox here also did not know of
who wrote our sources, and too often modern scholars have fallen into the ,chism-und did not know the bases
of the christian faith' The writer
the trap of analyzing heresy in medieval Bosnia in the manner that the r"r the articles of the
Confession, the Ten Commanclm".r,r, ^r-"nr."own:
authors of our sources did. ifr.'rords of any prayer, the
sacrament of the Eucharist, and
Thus, one of the greatest mistakes often made in studies of the of the cross. The
Bosnian heretics (or any of the other religious groups in Bosnia) is to "u"n',r*--"aning
local priests did not exprain anything
,o ii. f"opr", who knew no more
than that thev were ttillani. r<rrrr
examine in a sophisticated fashion religious ideas and to try to work ?."rJ'ir,i, t"u"t of ignorance among
these ideas into some kind of system. one clerical scholar expresses this
the Orthodox all over Srem.
The historian must therefore resist
dubious approach in general terrns: "one of the more difficult tasks in the tempration to put too much
emphasis.on theologicf is.sue1,.
attempting to assay the doctrines of a dissident religious group is to thougi the inquisitional sources
untangle emotional and popular opinions from the actual creed of the
speak in these terms' He shourd "u"n
..*.-b"r?at no slavic source abour
Bosnia, be it Bosnian, Dalmatian,
S";;i;r;gives a detailed account of
".
 Medieval Bosnian Church Religion in Bosnia's Peasant Society t3
t2

of the attaching the old domestic ritual to the person of a Christian saint, he
theology. This means that the only descriptions of the doctrines had come to consider the slaoa and the practices going with it as the
A
Bosniin ..dualists" come from Catholic anti-heretical writings. fundamentals of Christianity.
its is always a dangerous
source written about a movement by enemies
In addition to rituals for specific holidays, there are and were a vast
source, but in this case it is doubly so, for the Catholics
who wrote the
well they un- number of magical practices and charms used for specific goals, good
treatises were also foreigners and theologians' How
beliefs and evil. These magic practices also have not always been considered as
derstood this foreign culiure and how much they knew about-
of the order and part of a separate system from Christianity. A Ragusan chronicle
found in Bosnia is open to question' Also, much
discussing Ston, formerly the capital of Hum, for 1399 speaks of Serbian
systematizing we find in their tracts may have been the result of the
monks and priests there as schismatics and infidels "who did not believe
ti'reologians trying to put order into the hodgepodge of their.opponents' in God or the Saints but in dreams, soothsayers and incantations."(11)
not have
doctriies in order better to refute them. These theologians did Lead tablets unearthed near Mostar,(12) FoEa(l3) and Prozor(l4)
beliefs were a haphazatd
the anthropological grasp to see that Bosnian invoke the name of Christ and quote from the Gospel of John in hopes of
mixture oi *iny different cults, from paganism, Catholicism' and protecting crops from assaults by nature and the Devil. These tablets
heretical ideas, to new beliefs arising from a mixture of the three,
and
through ignorance reflect a practice that is still employed in Bosnia today: peasants go to a
from an unconscious drifting away from the three
priest or hodja and buy from him a piece of paper on which he has
and misunderstanding. Not only would heretics in one village
hold
written a prayer. The Christian prayers are generally addressed to
conceptsnotpresentinanothervillage,butcontradictions(apparentto particular saints. The prayer is then worn as an amulet (about the neck),
an intellectual; would have been common among the various
beliefs
which insures the health of the person from a particular disease or in
simultaneously held even by a single individual' some cases from illnesses in general. This means is commonly used by
practice is
Among most Peasants, andcertainly among Bosnian ones' barren women who wish to become pregnant.
much more important than belief' Practices have continued through the
religions; in fact' The wide variety of magic practices found in Bosnia can be seen in an
centuries ..guid1"r, of peasant acceptance of new
a
Orthodox Church document from Bosnia, unfortunately anonymous,
newreligion"isquicklyaduptedtoco-existwitholdpractices.InBosnia which attacks a wide variety of superstitions practiced and specifies the
the peasant may
the basii set of practices, regardless of what confession penalties to be imposed upon those who pracriced them. Truhelka, who
nonrinallybelongto,isthedomesticcult'ThemostimPortantdomestic found the manuscript, dated it no later than the seventeenth cen-
to
..r...,o.,y today among Serbs is the slaua:(8) a family Sathering tury.(15) Clearly, most, if not all, the practices date back at least to the
the saint's day' during which special
honor the famiiy's p^,.J., saint on
will medieval period. The document condemns magic practices which
rites are carried out which, by pleasing or appeasing the saint-' weaken limbs, cause long ilinesses, kill a man, make a man go crazy,
obtain his aid in guaranteeing the health and welfare of the family
most other separate a man from his wife and so on. Reference is made to various
throughout the year. The central part of the slaua and
This is clearly an ancient ceremony and methods to prophesy the future, including the use of barley seeds by
f".tiu,ii, is the ritual meal. gypsies. Poisonous herbs are mentioned, as are special grasses worn as
evidence indicates it was important in medieval Bosnia.(9)
amulets to ward off the evil eye and other evils. Witches had rites to
In addition to observing the slaaa, the peasants hold celebrations on
carry out clear away clouds. Some people carried snakes in their bosoms for magic
other special days throughout the year, and on each occasion
perform a special ritual to insure the acts. Snake skin placed on the eye or ear seems to have been a way to
special practic"s. On on" d,y they
certain ceremonies guarantee cure diseases of these organs. The manuscript also refers to vampires
itealth of livestock, while on another day
and werewolves.
the success of crops.(l0) Each village has its own special holiday
on
for the welfare of the whole From all this it is clear that, in addition to regular annual rites to
which prescribed iituals are performed
ritual' In guarantee health and welfare, magic practices were employed on specific
village. If an epidemic strikes, it requires the usage of a special
a peasant belonged to' occasions. These magic acts (of course now considering only those we
medieval Bosnia, regardless of what confession
would call white-magic) are akin to the regular practices of the domestic
thatconfessionwaslessimportanttohimthanthepracticesofthe cult because they all have the sole purpose of protecting the individual or
peasant set up no
domestic cult . Of course, it should be stressed that the
cult and Christianity' since by family from evil and of coercing or soliciting from the dispensing powers
sort of opposition between domestic
14 Medieval Bosnian Church
Religion in Bosnia's peasant
Society I,
o'this world." The peasant's
one's physicalor material welfare in cult thenumber of priests of any sort
thus is primarily important for matters connected with "this world." in Bosnia was minuscure. In the
twelfth and earry thirteenth
Not surprisingly it consists almost entirely of practices and has almost c""tu.ie, it tt^"re wefe any priests late
than monks like those at Bilino (other
no doctrine.(16) pot" ; i-zol),it.is most likery
were themselves peasants who that they
In stressing practice, we should point out that though the procedure is were more or less illiterate
doubled as prie.sts on special and only
fixed the meaning attached to it is vague, and certainly not particularly occasions. nt tn" end of the fourteenth
c('ntury, the Francisc.ans (the
important. The explanation given for a practice frequently changes over only Catholic clergy present)
fewer than a hundred for ihe numbered
the years. Different people in the same family may on the same occasion *r,Jr" g;.;;an vicariat, a region
larger than the Bosnia.n ,tut".1tsj vastly
give two totally different meanings for a practice which is felt by
communities, the Franciscans'
;;.:;"r" they tended to tive in
everyone to be very important. Each hears the contradictory explanation influence would have been
area around their m_onasteries; limited to the
but neither one seems concerned at the disparity in views, and no people probably rarely or
elsewhere, in regions ;;;;;"r.r,
argument will ensue over it. It is simply not very important to un- even
derstand a practice, what is important is that it be carried out. The
evidence that the Bosnian """". ,ro, a Franciscan. There is no
Cf,u..n-t,ri",
members also rived in monkish
peasants will protest, however, if they believe that the practice is being .o_.n
were few in number the-infruence
unl,,Iillrfii:; :"H;rft;
performed improperly. If the reader prefers to call such a cult as I have g;*irn church monks on
described "magical" rather than "religious," I certainly will not
peasants was presumably "i,i"
restricted to those villagers the
their monasteries. We .un urru^ who lived near
quarrel with him, but I might simply add that any theological approach ,'r,r,'i"rn religions sent out their
members at specified times
to heresy will totally misunderstand the "this-world," practice- probably took prace onJy
to uir;t -o."-.liot. ."gior* but
such visits
oriented Bosnian peasant mentality. once o. r*;." r'r*rr. Therefore
have had only limited they would
It is also clear that any religious doctrine that could have survived in effects on it who would
living as they atways had, keeping "-O"rrr"rlr, have gone on
this environment would have to have been able to meet, or at least adapt ;fJ;;;"r,oms and practices.
to and co'exist with, practices meeting these needs. This immediately we have documentary evidence,
confirmed by observations in
makes one skeptical about the chances for success in this environment of recent times, that in many rural more
places with churches _ and
the dualistic, anti-material, other worldly heresy that is often said to some towns _ it was rare for even in
church services to be held every
have thrived in Bosnia. To have acquired a following in Bosnia, dualism services by a visiting priest wourd u" rr"ra Sunday.
would have had to adapt itself considerably, or have given up trying to Church holidays, p.ri,up, no
on a limited number of
more than five or six a year.(I9)
influence the daily lives of its believers and have been satisfied with times the priest would attend.to At these
simply initiating people on their death beds. Even so, it seems difficult to and absolution. Today,
,".;;;;;, as baptisms, confessions,
in orthodox in the mountains
believe that it would have gained much of a following if it offered no
comes"iii.c.i,.r,rered
of Bosnia and Hercegovina one
benefits for the peasant in this world.(17) In addition, we should note
r-'"rr r*urr wooden churches
appearance little differen,
fr:T. sheds. A priest visits such churchesin
that no source mentions a death-bed baptism in Bosnia. about once a year to baptize
chirdren uo.oriri." his last visit
In areas of Jugoslavia where there has not been Catholic pressure for a general Mass for those and to serve
who died during ,f,"u""..
church attendance, contact with churches, priests, and other aspects of A church buildins is not alwayr r.ii.ii
formal religion are neither regular nor frequent. A peasant deals with Bosnia in Turkish tii.,es, f."que.,tly
vital. Travelers, visiting
the priest usually at times of a birth or a death. Village church at- the custom of holdinp Mass
;;;J,;; absence of churches and
tendance throughout the last two centuries has been sporadic; it is only
inpri".,"-t*r* o. urrd.. the open skies.
olten a portabre artar'would n"
in Catholic areas, and particularly in places near where the Franciscans
,", up ir-u ."-","r, for the service,(20)
Professor Kajmakovic discovereJ
have established themselves, that church attendance by some members church
r;;"-;;t"n of Gacko a medieval
which he believes. was simply .o_po'.r.a
of each family is regular. the area of the church with
of low *uff,
an altar';ir;;;,'l--u, "n.flJi'g
n"u", covered over with
We can be sure that the relationship between peasant and church was a roof'(21) Even where churches
,r" ;;i;;'iil, .o..on even todav
not much different in the Middle Ages. This certainty can be established ain holi days Bosn ian s r,"ri ro
since, throughout the Middle Ages and well into the Turkish period, [" i:["J,:L::rt r..",.", ou rdoors, frequent ty
t6 Medieval Bosnian Church Religion in Bosnia's peasant Society L7

Thus, there is seen a definite distance between the peasant and the acquired no such veneer,
formal religious apparatus. We also see that no strong feeling exists that Many of these pagan practices have survived to the present day, and
the church*building is of vital importance for worship.(22) A
peasant's in the Middle Ages there were clearly more of them.(23) Jire&k cites a
cult and religious loyalty center around his home and his village, and his 1412 glagolitic church document from the Croatian-Dalmatian area,
religion is rna;nty expressed in terms of particular pfactices. His contact that says that he who bows to the sun, the moon, or any created thing
witil church authorities is slight and is generally in regard to particular (stvorenije), and addresses prayers to them commits a mortal sin.(24)
practices, namely those rites necessafy to guarantee the health and This document shows that in the Middle Ages some people still ad-
the
welfare o{ a baby (baptism) or the rest and welfare of the dead, which dressed prayers to the heavenly bodies. When we consider the number of
peasant believes are rites that must be performed by a priest' The superstitions and taboos about these bodies, especially the moon, that
malority of rites connected with one's life, however, are family rites
and survive to the present day, the survival of a sun or moon cult in the
out as prescribed by custom. For many occasions' the head of Middle Ages should not surprise us at all. The Bosnian Orthodox
^.e-c"r.ied
the household performs these rites, though certain rituals require Church document, condemning superstitions (dated by Truhelka as no
specific actions by other cateSories of people ("'8', by twins, by young later than the seventeenth century and already cited in connection with
virgin girls, by children, etc.). magic practices) also condemns following Hellenic (pagan) customs. It
6"ra"-ir, ,p..ifi. problems, such as serious illness, or suspected witch' speaks of dancing in the squares, and refers to a special masked dance
craft (milk is \eing drawn away from one's cow to that of a neighbor's' popular on the eve of the Day of the Assumption (V'znesenie) where
or one's fietdi do not produce properly, etc.) require a specialist. In men wear women's dress and women, men's dress. It also refers to
Bosnia the specialist is simply a woman (often older) or' more rarely '
a
belief in vilas (a species of nymph found only among the South
man, who knows more magic than the average man does, who is called Slavs).(2 5)
in when the peasant's own practices cannot cope with a situation. She
is
be a witch) or When we think of these and the countless other popular dances and
of the same class of specialist as the midwife (who may also
peasant surgeon (who tends to be a man)' ceremonies associated with various festivals, of the variety of magic
the
practices and domestic rituals, of the number of taboos and super-
Muny of the inadequacies found in Bosnian Christiantiy' that were to
cause ftreign clerics to condemn it, were surely not
the results of stitions, and of the folklore that still exists in extraordinary richness and
on variety, it is clear that Christian beliefs and practices had only a small,
heretical teaching but of deviations in customs and beliefs occurrinS
and often superficial, part in the cultural life of the Bosnian peasant.
the individual or village level, where peasants tried to follow
what they
thought were christian beliefs and practices which they did not un-
These old pagan rituals survived, most probably with the original
keepers of meaning lost. We certainly cannot say that the pagan beliefs were
derst"and very well. In time, without supervision by educated
doctrine, great part of any religious system will gradually
a retained. The performance of certain of the old seasonal rituals was
,,degenerate" into error. This will be particularly true in doctrinal probably felt to be important for village welfare, and others may not
matlrs about which peasants have never been particularly clear' have been considered important in this way, but were retained because
accepted' they were entertaining. We should always keep in mind that there is,
Practices, if they seem important and if they have really been
ch"tge less. Aowever, practices which the peasants did not and was, a difference in peasant attitudes toward diferent ceremonies.
are likely to
Some, we would say, the villager treated as religious ceremonies and
.ur.y o,r, themseives but left to a priest to perform' such as baptism'
*or.rid no, have made deep impressions on peasants in a
region with few other beliefs and customs were not so regarded.(26)
priests.Intime,intheabsenceofpriests'theseritescouldeasily These earlier rituals combined very easily with newer rites and
practices. Thus among the anathemas from the Council of 1271 held by
disappear or become bastardized.
the Bulgarian Tsar Boril to condemn Bulgarian Bogomils, is inserted;
Ar*"i,ru"arguedabove,thebulkofBosnianpeasantpracticeswere
"anathema to all those in this heresy, to their practices, to their
not Christian at;11, but eadier rites' Some practices had taken on a
to a nocturnal reunions, their mysteries and . , . ." and later: "To those
veneer of christianity - e.g., the slaua rite becoming attached
but others such as iumping over fires on st. John's Eve who on 24 June, the Nativity of John the Baptist, deliver themselves to
saint's day -
-
or rituals carried out by young maidens when rain was needed - rnagic operations and affect crops and to all infamous evils similar to the
18 Medieval Bosnian Church Religion in Bosnia's peasant Society
r9
Hellenic cult which they practice on this night anathema! "(27) Here the beliefs and practices Rycaut mentions can
are described pagan survivals that were no part
-
of Bogomil doctrine. Yet
easily be explained as
christian survivals mixed with rslam by converts
*ho Lept -u.ryoi tr,"i,
individuals who had accepted Bogomilism seem to have continued to old beliefs and did not whollv unierstand th.
practice these older customs, even though they would have been foreign christian beliefs could have been derived from any
.,.* *iGiir.'rn.
form of ci'ristianity.
to Bogomil thelogy. This shows both how mutually contradictory beliefs The Poturs read the Gospel in Slavonic and
were interested in rearning
can co-exist in one person and also how well a religion (in this case, the Koran; they drank wine in Ramadan but,
to reduce the scandal,
Bogomilism) can blend in and co-exist with the older beliefs. Un- abstained from spices; they had charity
and affection for christiarx and
fortunately we do not know if the Bulgarian peasant thought of these tried to protecr them from the Turks; they believed
rites as part of the same system as, or part of a separate system from , the
th"t Mohammed
was th_e.Holy Ghost promisecl by Christ;
they abhorr.a i.ug", uni tt.
Bogomil beliefs he held. In the 1430's somewhere in the Bosnian f
! sign of the cross; and they circumcized
! themselves, uring tt-" uuthority
vicariat (most likely in Bohemia since that place is referred to later in the of Christ's example for it. f.his is clearly a
hodge_podgl of trlrm ana
letter), according to the Franciscan Vicar (143t-39) Jacob de Marchia, Chris.tianity; a deeper investigation of these p"ofl"-*o.-utd
people met in caves and cellars ar night and poured the blood of Jesus lound much more left over from christianity
su..lf hrue
as well as other Islamic
Christ (wineZ) from ceftain hides lined with tar over themselves and customs which were perverted.
their garments.(28) This sounds very much like the survival of a,
- be it Mithraic or Dionysian.
classical mystery cult How much of the -.Throughout
Bosnia.and Hercegovina Moslems sti' observe certain
original meaning and ritual survived of course we do not know. christian holidays and in some ca"ses participate in
vi'age celebrations
It is not surprising that educated Catholic foreigners looking at Bosnia along with christian They pariicularly have maintained
_vi'agers.
cusroms (many of which are pre-Christian;
and the surrounding regions, would have seen heretics everywhere, for connectld with the Ouy, of
almost no one, regardless of what confession he thought he belonged to, St' George and John the Baptist _- the latter
is worth stressi.[ Jr.,."
would have met the standards for being a good Catholic according to Dualists hated him for his uie of a material
substance (water) for bap_
Rome's doctrine. Jacob de Marchia called those who practiced the rites tism. Also observed are the Days of St. procopius,
St. peter, St. Ilija,
in caves and cellars "heretics." Thus, it seems safe to conclude that the Good Friday, Easter, Christmas and in some
cases the slooa; some
following of such pagan rites and customs was grounds for being con- Moslems who have retained rhe srauaeven
send flowers and oil to the
sidered a heretic. I{ this conclusion is accurate then we have reason to village church on that day.(31) In
certain vilrages of Hercegovina in the
believe that much of Bosnian ' 'heresy'' may well have been merely the last century Moslem women did not
veil themselves.
following of customs that had survived from pagan times. We have seen Also interesting is the phenomenon of
.
forms: The first form is represented by people
double-faith. It appears in two
above how Bogomilism and such practices co-existed in Bulgaria. And who are ufrria to .t".rg"
we can be sure that in Bosnia Christianity had blended with earlier their faith. publicly yet do so secretly. in'rt*ort
all cases ln nornil,lli,
beliefs and practices in a wide variety of different combinations and concerned Moslems, who naturaily feared
rhe severe p"".lir',t.,
different ways. Anthropological literature has many accounts of what followed apostasy, but who wanted ,o
b" Chriu,iuns. They ,..r.rfi ,"n,
happens when a Great Tradition (such as Catholicism) meets Little to the Franciscans for baptism and the
other sacraments.(32) These
Traditions (such as the peasant's domestic cult and rural festivals and q*u{rl" lh:l are really Christians, bur secret ones. The seconcl form
double-faith is that found among uott of
rites). The two become mixed in a variety of ways; very rarely does cilrtians and Moslems who
either tradition remain puraand very rarely is the synthesis that results looked upon both faiths.as religiois ,ho"" -ugi. worked. e., ._r.pf",
identical in two different places.(29) :.Yo:I"*--rnother may bring a sick child to r.iu..h in hopes;;;r".
A few illustrations may serve to show the way these syntheses occur T'his is still a common sight at the
orthodox monastery of visoki Defani
in Bosnia. Unfortunately, owing to scanty sources, our examples must near Pet. When St. Sava's relics were
at Miletevo, ,i," f".trl;J;"
are told even the Jews, honored,
be post-medieval and thus will show syntheses between Christianity and and expected cures from the relics, to
the same extent as the christians. Exampres
Islam. The first is taken from a description of Turcisized Bosnians, ulro u.. found of christian
called Poturs by Paul Rycaut in the 1660's. Soloviev tries to link Potur
mothers taking sick children to_ the Hodja.
visitation reports that Bosnian Franciscans
A seventeen,h ;;;;;;y
beliefs and practices with Bogomil survivals,(30) but this is dubious; all even frequentry urptir.a

;r,
v
l.l

p,
20 Medieval Bosnian Church Religion in Bosnia's peasant Society
21

Turkish children; for the Moslems superstitiously believed that baptism diseases and days of the week take on human form.
Here we have only
brought good luck, success in battle, and was a protection against evil attempted to call attention to the problem of
language, ,li.t iy i"
spirits.(33) The baptism of Moslems, who remain Moslems, for the vocabulary and structure both
purposes of healing and protection, is found throughout the Balkans in
-"y ,ugg"rt new direclions of thought
via associations and also by these samellructurar
features *"y -."rtri.t
-'
regions where conversion occurred. both comprehension and the development of
other .on..prr.
A nineteenth century French traveller reports that Turks (i.e., social structure, duties of kinship, type of life
and vlor'r,,-auily
Bosnian Moslems) prayed to the icon of the Virgin when ill and if they periences, and probrems one regulariy rtut .*-
became sicker they would call a priest for baptism. They did not even
to dear with *.rt i"gltr,",
to be able to"rrunderstand and
to determine the sort of things a man-needs
hide this behavior although it was against Islamic law. Turkish officials the actions he must know how to carry out.
The type of proUi"_r-" n.,ur,
in Travnik even allowed the priests to go to Moslem houses, "as fac-es in his daily life has great influence
on how he will .."ron, io*
doctors."(34) And it is very probable that the Turkish official regarded will relate ideas, what wilr interest him, what sort t"
this baptism not as a religious act but simply as a medicinal remedy.
of iir"g ir.'*il
remember, and how he will relate a given
experience with other ex_
Among Greek Moslems (prior to repatriation to Turkey in the 1920's) periences.In effect then, a man's life Jxperiences and education
(based
it was possible to find Moslem girls wearing Christian crosses for on similar experiences of the preced-ing generation)
protection, and during epidemics, these girls frequently went to limitations within which and wili i-pot"itr"
w'l impose
manner *i,r, *ii.i r,"
Christian monasteries to kiss a revered icon or to allow themselves to be can-observe existing reality and also what meanings he can
attach to that
sprinkled with Holy Water.(35) These last examples all fall under the reality' For ideas and opinions are never interpreted
'.as they are', but
category of practices and it is clear that they are believed to have magical in light of the life situation and manner of reasoning
of him .ho p..-
effects of the same kind as the village healer's rites have. However, all ceives and expresses them.(17) Thus it
is impossible for us to take a
this should cause us to hesitate before we make generalizations about statement of a belief or a.given text used
by a bosnian ctrur.n,n*-1ro,
people being of a particular faith or about their conversions from one exam.ple the beginning. of the Gospel
of
John seems to t u* i..n
which
faith to another. p.opularwith them) and say this passage means such-and-such,
therefore
the Bosnian church herd such-ana-su"ct
a doctrine. For us to know what
the passage meant to a medieval Bosnian,
would require us to know how
II: LANGUAGE, EXPERIENCE AND THOUGHT he thought. And, unfortunately the process of thiniing l, ,ror
ri"naura.
The vocabulary and the structure of a language have great influence
what ideas seem to bear rerationships to each other
or what objects
may be linked somehow togethe, ,^ry the world
upon the way a concept can be expressed, and a concept's expression over. To formulate
knowledge it is necessary to-organize one's perceptions
exercises influence upon what other ideas may be related to it and into categories;
and the way experiences and objects are classifieiu^.i", fro,,, ,..-i.i, ,"
therefore how that concept may develop.(36) The Bosnian peasant,
illiteratc and having little contact with the outside world, would not society; and it is vitally important to
realize this, for on";, togi.,
have been used to dealing with ideas and would naturally have a limited reasoning and whole thought-processes,
and way of relating la""r, iitt
vocabulary. Many words, pafticularly abstract terms, simply would not de'pend upon how he classifies his knowledge.
The Bosnian peasant,s
have existed in his mind and if the ideas for which those terms stood experiences are rooted in such factors as his village,
his agricult"r", lna
existed at all, they would have been in an altered form brought about by his limited contact with the outside world. His
contacr witn ;aeas is
the linguistic means at the peasant's disposal. clearly restricted. In addition, we know that practices
of a magical
The peasant's language would tend to be concrete; his nature- were widespread. Magic requires berief
in a connection u"t#"..,
"speculation" would be confined to practical matters in his daily life two objects, two events or an event and an object
that does not
and, to some degree, to the "*hy" stories necessarily correspond to our present day ideas
- creation myths, etc.
These myths would tend to be framed in concrete terms, and the actors, ideas of logical relationships between ideas.
of cause and effect ; ;u,
Thus it is difficurt to irrgin"
be they gods, men, or animals, would tend to act like people. Thus in how biblical rexts or any religious idea would be
peasants'existence did not change much over
interpretea. rnri'it
village folklore we find a strong tendency to personify. Such things as the yeuis, una tnuiii.y"
22 Medieval Bosnian Church
rarely confronted problems of a different nature from those they had
been dealing with for years suggest that the peasant would have little
interest in speculation
- or certainly speculation in new directions. He
might well be willing to experiment with new home remedies. But it is
uniikely that a peasant would ever think of or have interest in significant
intellectual innovations. The fact that we are willing to think of in-
novation reflects a cultural attitude that we have, but is not a general
world wide attitude. Most peasant societies that are left to themselves,
without changes being forced upon them from without, reflect a certain
stability and are unlikely to think of alternatives to their existing way of
life, practices or ideas. And this is a matter worth emphasizing for one of
the most impressive things, though not sufficiently emphasized, is the
stability and constancy of beliefs, practices and attitudes toward life that
the peasantry hangs on to despite changes of formal religion.
Thus we cannot really say that the peasants were converted to
Christianity at a given time and that later some of them were converted
to Islam. For conversion requires a significant change both in ideas held
and ways of thinking. And what is
impressive about the Bosnian
peasants is that, in accepting a new faith, they accepted a few obvious
and formal new practices, but basically continued to live and believe as
they always had.(38)
ln addition, because the peasants are not attracted to speculation and
because they have had limited contact with ideas from the outside world,
certain logical impossibilities, according to our way of thinking,
frequently appeared in their thought, which cause great difficulty for us
when we try to systematize their beliefs. Anthropologists have noted
that primitive people also hold mutually contradictory beliefs without
being troubled by the fact. And such contradictions regularly appear
even in the thought of one individual.
Serbian peasants may believe a spirit is in two places at once. Ac-
cording to their Christianity, a dead spirit should immediately ascend to
heaven (assuming it is not damned), yet for a full year the deceased's
relatives dutifully carry out a series ofgrave-side practices for the benefit
of a spirit felt by many to be present at the grave. When this in-
consistency is pointed out to the practitioner, he looks puzzled and
cannot explain how this can be reconciled. However, he does not suffer
"disconfirmation" and will continue in the future to hold the two
logically mutually exclusive beliefs. To him no contradiction really
exists.
The situation is well expressed by Evans-Pritchard with regard to the
Nuers:
'flte great uarietl o.f meanings attached to the uord kwoth (all
Religion in Bosnia's Peasant Society 23
spirils) in diflbrenl cotttexts eaefl in the same cefernon! ma!
heuilder us. Tlte Nuers are not confused, because the diffculties
u,bicb ferPlex us do not arise on the leael ofexperience, but onllt utben
attenpt is made to analyze ond rystetnatize Naer religious tbought.
'fbe Nuers themselues do not
feel lhe need to do tbis. . , . Indeed, I
neuer exfeienced, wben liuing witb tbem and tbinking in their uords
and categories, anlt difficultl colnmensarate with that which confronts
me nou when I baue to translate and inlerprel tbem. Tbey moue bach
and forth from tbe general to the particular neuer leeling there was any
lach of co-ordination. Only when one tries to relate Nuer religious
concepls to one anotber b1 abstract analltsis do diff;cullies arise.(39)
The relations the uneducated peasant makes between the general and
particular will also bother us. But though in his "thought" and the way
he relates ideas the peasant will trouble us with contradictions, in his
actions, if we exclude certain magic rites and associations, we see that
he is a practical and logical worker. The peasant, then, is basically a man
of action. And magic and ritual practices are all action activities as op-
posed to being intellectual or speculative pursuits. Practices are done to
make something happen (or prevent it from happening); why a par-
ticularpracticeworks is not important, as long as it works. The peasant
shows curiosity in how to work it, but not how it works. He is satisfied
that there are things in this world that he does not understand, and sees
no need to understand them. All he needs to know is how to deal with
those aspects of the universe that affect his daily life. Things happen for
that is the way God made them, and only let God give us . . . . Yet, we
cannot really call this fatalism, since the peasant does try to alter matters
by means of rituals, remedies, and magic.
When we come across abstract terms we must stop before making any
assumptions. It is clear that the Bosnian Churchmen believed in the
Trinity, but it is not clear how they conceived the Trinity. That they
expressed belief in it in the same phrases and words as more educated
Catholics and Orthodox churchmen does not give us a basis to assume
that they necessarily conceived of it in the same manner. Every abstract
term causes difficulty justice, truth, soul, salvation, paradise. These
-
words all have elusive qualities, for the meaning they have will vary not
only among Bosnians, Catholic theologians, and ourselves, but also
among different Bosnians in different social groups.
This problem of extracting meaning when dealing with words and
phrases in texts is also encountered in our attempt to interpret the
symbols that appear on the srcfci(medieval gravestones). There is, of
course, much dispute on what the symbols mean. Here I only want to
point out that it is likely that several different systems of symbols were
functioning at once. There may have been symbols of a religious nature,
 24 Medieval Bosnian Church Religion in Bosnia's Peasant Society 2,

symbols of a purely decorative nature (which should not be considered

symbols), and symbols connected with rites and practices the meaning
of which was already lost in the Middle Ages but whose presence was
important, since the rites with which they were connected were still
practiced. In addition, many of the marks were probably juridical signs,
substituting for writing in an illiterate society, giving name, family
connection, or occupation of the deceased.
Also a given symbol need not have the same meaning each time it
appears on a stone. A cross on one stone may be a symbol of
resurrection, on anotherit may be a charm against evil either for the
benefit of the deceased in the after-life or for the benefit -of the living, to
keep the village safe from visits from the corpse by preventing him irom
- or it mayGrave
leaving the grave be a charm to threaten andlcare off a
would-be grave robber.(40) robbing seems to have been a
common worry in connection with burial and we frequently find in_
scriptions which curse him who would disturb the bones resting there.
A snake on one stone may have some curtic significance and on inother
simply mean that the deceased died as a result of snakebite. It is clear
that the difficulty we have in reading the language of the pictures on the
grave stones reflects our failure to stand in the shoes of the medieval
Bosnian and view the world as he did and think about it in the terms that
he used.
Before dropping the problem of meaning and patterns of thought, it
ma_l be fitting to quote a true story told by Dositej obradovic ln
the
eighteenth century about a Montenegrin abbot. obiadovic was gazing
out of a window at a rainbow while conversing with prince_dishop
Vasili.
.,And tben tbere cante riding up on an
ars a certain abbot, a
bage
personage with an enolmous beard, prince-Bisbop
Vasili . . caugbt
sigbt of the abbot and said to ,ne;
.
heard uith one buge band, looked at lbe rainbow for a moment, and
then turned on me his large, terrible, black ejtes: tbey uould haue
scard Newton bimself. And instead of answering me he inquired:
. .'Do 1,,ou see tbat jackass of mine?'
. . 'l see it, ' I replied 'but I was not talking about it. What has a jackass
to do with a rainbou,?'
. .'l understand your question,' retorted the abbot, 'but just lel me
tell ;you that that jackass of mine has a lol fitore serrse than ltou haue. '
..'l should like to know how you nieasure m! sense and tbat of a
iachass.'
. . 'l,isten lo me and I'll swear you will find out/' sai.d the abbot. 'Tbat
jackass recognizes tbe chaff that's in front of bim. If you don't belieue
it, look at bim clseu'ing. But despite all the ltears yoa'ue liued you
rlon't.yet hnow uthut a rainbow is/ A rainbow's a rainbout, and not a
hoopfor a tub/ IJut 1ou ask uhy it has many colors. Wby, confound
.1ou, ltou cun it be a rainbow without hauing manjt colors? Did ltou
eaer see a black rainbow anywbere?'(41)
This story clearly shows how the abbot had no attraction toward
speculation, how he regarded the world, and how his mind worked. And
for us the problem of coming to grips with the way of thinking and how
the peasant mind works is far more important than the matter of what
ideas or beliefs were held. Understanding the peasant mind is the key to
understanding our sources and the information they convey. No idea
in a source
appearing existed apart from the people involved. No
examination of the sources about the Bosnian heretics can be successful
if those sources are lifted outside of the context of Bosnia. A heretic is
not everyman, and a Bosnian heretic was a Bosnian peasant with all that
goes with that peasantness first, and a member of a religious
organization second. The way he viewed that religious connection was
from his rural, practical, worldly and unschooled point of view. His way
of thought, his world-view, and his domestic cult and magical practices

were far more important to him than any formal connection with any
','Deacon, I beg1tou, just ask tbat abbot wbar a rainbow is and why ir particular religious confession or church.
has many co lors. '
, I uys ouerjoled at tbe suggeslion. Mlt rniscbieuous heart stailed lo
lell fo1 iol.at the tbougbt-iJ dunOlouiding the big abbot. The door
opened and in utalked tbe abbot. I b)rer1, gaie him time to bou to III: Family Structure
the
bisbop and sit down. Tben I rusbed i)i;e, o go,mecoch and blurted
oal; Families, be they noble or peasant, were patriarchal, and the father of
..'Father Abbot, tell me please, ubar a rainbou is
rnany colors,'
and ublt if bas a family had authority over the activities and behavior of all its members.
On his death his possessions were not passed on according to
,.l lad already begun to feel alnusemenr, anticipating
be disconcerted and would,not
that he uould primogeniture; the inheritance was shared equally by all his sons. If the
.hnow^wbai lo ,"pb, oia t ro"U iiiitl,
keepfrom exploding uith raughter. But if he hid-b"ro disconcerted be family lived under one roo{, one son (usually the eldest) became the
woald not haue been a real Montenegin. He seized family elder and assumed authority over the whole family and its
his great butshlt
26 Medieval Bosnian Church
property, though in theory the property was held iointly and the elder
was expected to consult with his brothers on matters concerning it. This
is confirmed by medieval Bosnian treaties which regularly were wit-
nessed by "N.(the family head) and brothers." If the brothers lived
under separate roo{s, each received an equal portion of the inheritance.
When several generations of a family live together under one roof,
scholars often label the household a zadruga. However, it is hard to
make a clear-cut distinction between the patriarchal family lab'eled a
zadruga and any other patriarchal family. The main feature singled out
to define a zadruga has usually been size. Yet while examples exist of
extended {amilies reaching 50 to 100 members, during the past three
centuries (about which we have data) the average zadruga has always
been under twenty, often nearer ten. At no time were enormous
households standard. Unfoftunately we have no real data on the size of
Bosnian households prior to the eighteenth century. Many scholars
assume medieval Bosnians lived together in large households, but others
believe that it was the insecure conditions accompanying the Turkish
conquest that caused people to band together in larger family units.
However, regardless of the size of households, medieval Bosnian
families were patriarchal and the father (or grandfather) of the family
made decisions on all matters of importance, be it family marriages or
family economics. Thus regarding issues connected with religion, and
anyquestion of conversion, it is safe to assume that the father generally
made the decision and the family followed.
It is inconceivable that a female family member would play a major
role in a family's acceptance or rejection of a particular religious con-
fession. In medieval Bosnia, marriages were a social matter arranged
between two families and had no religiously sanctioned basis. The
husband (or more often the family elder) possessed the right to break off
the marriage arrangements if his wife "was not good." In the four-
teenth century, the Franciscans complained that scarcely one in a
hundred men remained throughout their lives with one wife.(42)
Although this statement is surely exaggerated, it does illustrate the fact
that women had few rights. The Franciscans thus encountered a major
problem in their attempts to win the Bosnians to Catholicism, because
Catholicism regarded marriage as a sacrament, and demanded that its
adherents do likewise. Needless to say, the Bosnians strongly resisted
this view of matrimony.
And in fact, the Bosnians continued, into the Turkish period, to
believe that marriages were not a religious matter but a private legal
relationship; both Orthodox and Catholics frequently were married by
the Turkish kadi("judge") instead of by their respective priests. The
Religion in Bosnia's peasant Society 27
kadiswere liberal in allowing mixed marriages, as well as in permitting
divorces and re-marriages. That the Bosnians were willing to do what
their churches considered sinful shows that the Bosnians believed that
marriage was a private matter of no concern to the church. Thus in the
Turkish period we continue to find Franciscans trying with little success
to make the Bosnians accept the church's view on mariage; in 1600 a
Catholic bishop complained that Bosnian men were simply chasing out
their wives and taking new ones, that mixed marriages were being
contracted, and that many marriages took place without any church
ceremony. In 1618 there is even recorded a case of a Roman Catholic
priest being married before a kadi.(43)
Schoiars have at times linked this situation with neo-Manichee
rejection of marriage and advanced it as evidence for dualism in medieval
Bosnia. This is clearly an unmerited view, for the Bosnians had nothing
against sex and marriage; it was simply that in their family-oriented
culture they did not view marriage as a religious matter or a matter of
concern for anyone other than the families involved. This view still can
be found today in many parts of Jugoslavia, where families will send the
bride back to her family if she proves unsarisfactory, be it a month or
even a year or more after the wedding. Although it is clear that this
concept of marriage was not tied to any religious belief existing in
lJosnia, this does not mean that Catholic writers attacking the Bosnians
did not regard this custom as "heresy." This, and not neo-Manicheen
beliefs, could well have been the basis for the anti-heretical Catholic
tracts' statements that the Bosnians "reject matrimony" or "the
sacrament of matrimony." For most Bosnians did, in fact, reject
marriage as a sacrament.
IV: Bases of Moral Order
In the West one of the most noticeable aspects of heresy was the
clement of protest, Too often students of heresies in other regions
assume that this feature of Western heresy is a universal feature of
heresies. Although it is not to be denied that church abuses and the
immorality of individual clerics were a contributing factor to the
Western heretical movements, possibly the positive sides of the
heretics' doctrines should receive more emphasis than their criticisms o{
Catholicism. It is also certain that all the ignorance and moral laxity
found in the West existed in Bosnia as well. However, there is no
c'vidence of any Bosnian complaints about church or clergy or any sign
t that such moral protest was a factor in the Bosnian movements. Priests
i
t
I
*
$
28 Medieval Bosnian Church
there were important for society only insofar as they played a certaln
part in ritual practices. Most rituals, to be effective, did not require any
moral excellence on the part of the performer. Although Bosnian
peasant society did have strict moral codes of behavior, these codes were
not intimately connected with religion or religious sanctions.(44) The
family and family honor were much nearer to being the bases for the
moral order. In most cases we can assume that the Bosnian Catholic
priest was a peasant himself and part of the village community, who
lived the way everyone else did with no one expecting anything more of
him.
Ideals about the church and priestly behavior do not seem to have
existed in Bosnia. Since the Bosnian Church as we shall see was
created out of the very organization of
-
Catholic monks, whose
-
morals
and way of life had been criticized by the papal legate in 1203, it is
apparent that there was no local opposition to the behavior of Bosnia's
clergy. Thus it should be stressed that in Bosnia this protesting or
dissenting aspect of heresy was absent. Later, after the violence and
destruction caused by the Hungarian crusades, there surely was much
hostility toward Catholicism. But this, of course, was due to external
causes rather than to anything thought to be inherently wrong with
Catholicism itself or with conditions in the Church in Bosnia. The
hostility toward Hungary, however, because it was associated with the
Catholic Church, probably did have the effect of driving some people
into other churches or movements.
V: Relations Between Rulers and Peasants
Bosnia is not only a rural area with few towns, it is also a very
mountainous country. Therefore it is not surprising that medieval
Bosnia was divided up into many counties, most of which were marked
by localisms and very little feeling for a Bosnian entity. Most counties
were under particular families who were, to varying degrees, in-
dependent of the ruler (the ban). Thus throughout most of our period
(except for roughly 1320-53 and 1368-91) Bosnia could most ac-
curately be described as a series of local units loosely connected to the
central state under the ban. The ban continually strove to bind these
units to his authority and hold them together, and the local rulers
equally actively strove to maintain their independence.
The mountainous geography contributed to the localism, and because
of the terrain, communications were difficult both between various parts
of Bosnia and between Bosnia and the outside world. For example,
Religion in Bosnia's peasant Society 29
according to Ragusan records, fifteenth-century caravans from
Dubrovnik took two days to reach Blagaj , four or five days to visoko,
five or six to BoraE, seven or eight to Srebrnica, and ten to zvornik,(45)
Things were not much better in the beginning of the nineteenth cen-
tury; a French traveller gives the following times by horse from
Sarajevo: sixteen hours to Travnik, twenty-four hours to srebrnica,
thirty hours to Zvornik, seventeen hours to ViXegrad and thirty hours
to Mostar; and, of course, between Sarajev. and the outside world
times were even longer: fifty-four hours to Dubrovnik and forty-eight to
Novi Pazar.(46)
In most cases the peasants found themselves uncler the jurisdiction of
local landlords. we have very limited source material on the status of
peasantry. In general, scholars believe that most peasants were more
the
or
less dependent and tied to the land, or, if they were shepherds, they
were tied to the nobleman's flocks for which they were responsible. Life
certainly was not easy ; Bosnia is not a particularly fertile region.
It is often stated, as sort of a general rule about medieval societies,
that the faith of the ruler defined that of his sublects. However, in the
case of Bosnia, I wonder if we should not question this adage.
As we
shall see later, the nobles were tolerant about, if not dow"nright in-
dif{erent to, religious matters. They often had relations with -several
different religions, at times played one off against another, and never
seem to have let their attitudes toward a particular religion be influenced
by any other-worldly consideration. Thus we get a picture of tolerance,
not marred by any signs of fanaticism, among the medieval Bosnians.
No ruler seems to have felt that his salvation or that of his people
clepended on his making his nation follow a particular faith. This
in-
difference should be stressed, as it runs counter to the usual picture
of
the Middle Ages in Europe. It would be perfectry accurate to state that
religion was not a major factor in internal Bosnian history, in spite of
the tremendous attention that scholars have devoted to the ."iigiou,
history of Bosnia. Religion was a major factor only insofar as foieign
powers used religion as an excuse to meddle in these issues which
were
of little interest to the Bosnians themselves. If pressure was put on a
Brsnian noble to change his affiliation or if it seemed that he stood to
gain somethingby doing so, he usually, as we shallsee later,
was quite
willing to make the change.
The indifference o{ the rulers and nobres to the religion of their
peasants is reflected in the ruins of medieval churches found
on their
estates. These churches are, without exception, small and appear
to
have been chapels erected only for the use of the nobre's own family.
In
some cases they are clearly burial chapels. Their small size
shows that
30 Medieval Bosnian Church
they were not intended to serve general village needs' unless the peasant
*os only to attend ceremonies such as baptisms and funerals for his own
family. b,rt i.r any case, the fact that the noble built a tiny church meant
that he accepted this customary behavior and had no interest in making
regular chuichgoers out of his peasants. It seems valid to conclude that
th! nobles did not particularly care what their peasants believed and left
them to follow their own practices.
VI: Contact With and Spread of New Ideas
If or trade route, it had some opportunity to
a village lay near a town
meet new ideas. Other villages, and these were the majority, were quite
isolated, having contact with a few other small villages and one or two
markets. Most of the towns were also small and many of them were
bypassed by trade foutes which means that they, too, had little contact
*,ih ,h" rest of the world. Their functions were that of local military
defensive and administration centers which also provided a local market
place and a place for a limited number of small craftsmen to live and
work. Anyone who wants to obtain a vivid view of the isolation of these
villages ancl the difficulties communication between them and
of
,ny*h.r" else need only take a flight from Beograd over the mountains
'Bosnia
of to Split or Dubrovnik. The lack of frequent contact between
villages is also apparent in the variations even among co-religionists in
clress.-, songs, dances, etc., between villages in valleys
on opposite sides
of the same mountain.
The main source of contact between villages is the market, which is'
ancl was, held at regular intervals. A town mafket usually
would be held
once a week. The most common pattern is that of overlapping market
areas. This means that, although a village might have a near-by market
which its villagers attend regularly, some of the villagers more or less
regularly also go to one or two other markets. This pattern is the normal
on-e, since it is rare to find villages where all the peasants
go to only one
market. In a region with a denser population, like central Bosnia' it is
likely thar villagers would attend as many as two to four different
markets, depenJing on the proximity of their villages to the market
places. When this situation exists, market days are staggered with one
to*n hauing its market on Monday and the second town on a Tuesday
ideas and
an6 so on.(27) A market is a potential source for the spread of
customs; and this overlap of market cycles facilitated their spread'
In recent times we have been able to observe the in{luence town
markets have on surrounding villages in such matters as dress and the
Religion in Bosnia's Peasant Society 31
wide variety of household items which made their appearance first in
towns. However, william Lockwood has demonstrated that markets are
a poor medium for the spread of. ideas, His field work in Bosnia has
shown that the peasants coming to market are primarily concerned with
business; they socialize only after business matters are completed and
then they socialize in small groups with their own associates (e.g.,
relatives, in-laws, fellow-villagers, etc.). They tend not to meet new
people and do not start conversations with strangers. At markets where
people of different ethnic and religious groups buy and sell together, he
found little or no mixing among the different peoples, other than in their
economic relations.(48)
In our medieval Bosnian markets, then, it is uniikely that the Bosnian
peasant would have spoken with strangers, including Dalmatians,
unless he lived near one of the Dalmatian colonies in Bosnia and had
friendly relations with them over a period of time. If a foreign missionary
approached him, it is unlikely that he would have been receptive to new
ideas from him,
Thus, most often, if the peasant encountered religious ideas at the
nrarket, he very likely would not have understood them and would have
walked away unaffected or negatively affected. He already had his
christianity and the rites he connected with it; that was how his father
and grandfather had done things and only let God give him health, and
health to his family and animals, and let God grant weather conditions
ncccssary for the prosperity of his crops, and that was all there was to
the matter" In fact he probably would look upon religious speculation
and new ideas as dangerous and likely to tempt the fates. on the other
hand, if someone at the market had a new remedy or spell to cure
rhcumatism, well that was a matter worth looking into.
T'hus markets were not an ideal place to preach a new gospel.
Il.wever, they still provided the basic conduit through which ideas
could be spread, and because market cycles overlapped, eventually most
of the population would have heard of any significant idea that was able
to attract the interest of peasant vendors. whether a religious idea would
t:rptivate the interests of these vendors, however, is a debatable point.
-fhese
peasant attitudes and the limited communications between
t.lifferent regions must give us pause. And we should not make hasty
generalizations about the diffusion of any religious doctrine across
Ilosnia. Despite the alarmist remarks in papal lerters about the rapid
spread of hcresy, it seems probable that it
- and any other religious
idras *- circulated slowly; and this view is borne out by the relatively
slow cxpansion of Islam in Bosnia after the Turkish conquest.
 Medieval Bosnian Church Religion in Bosnia's Peasant Society 33
32

of Conversion many Christians; and finally, after about sixty years, whole villages
VII: Unrealistic Historical Models were converted. However, the rates of conversion varied from place to
has been ignored by place, and in some villages conversion was rare, with the population
Too often the way people and societies react remaining predominantly Christian. Thus in the case of Islam, a well-
For example' the "great
historians who deal with Bosnian history' propagated religion which was also the religion of the conquering state,
by a particular in-
;;;" il".y, which ha' hetesy brought to Bosnia hordes of people in the rate of conversion was slow and occurred over a long period of time.
dividual, who was then instrumental in converting is a If there is any question of conversion, rather than drift, in the Middle
record time and in some sort of church organization'
"st.blirhing the type of Ages when the cults were not being propagated by the state or any other
popular one. Such th;;; dol' not take into
consideration
" level apparatus with real authority, and when there were few preachers, it is
society found in g*"it'i'igj rn a country
of Bosnia's intellectual
ldt"' do not spread as easilv.as that' In certain that the rate of conversion from one Christian faith to another
;;;";;;phical condition', iust
to think about was much slower than that of conversion to Islam.
.lJrir"r, hi.tori"n, *to totio* this approach do not stop that masses of
the process of .onu"t,ion'(50) They ielieve
it possible
pt*l'o'", *itt change religions.ina short
peopie, under no g.."t easily
arapid spread of heresy in Bosnia'
;;iJ of time. Hiving^visualizedtend to accept the inflated Franciscan FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER I
such historians then f?equently
claims of tens of thousands of converts
during the first decades of the
fourteenth century and thus
Franciscan mission in the middle of the l. B. Moore, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracl, Boston, 1966,
large-scale return to
a"fi.t norrrian society undergoing a rapid and did have considerable
p.456. The conflict between popular and official religion is also stressed byV.
Catholicism. No one i"ni"' th*at the Franciscans Lanternari, The Religion of the Oppressel, New York, 1963 (Mentor edition),
However
r*."*, i*Oecially when we consider their limited numbers)'in so brief a time
' p.246. Lanternari describes this confiict as one between "the demands of the
people and the needs of their society on one hand, and the action determined
no one should accept claims of so many conversions
from'above' by the clerical hierarchy on the other.'' See below, Note 29 of this
without solid evidence' we mean by chapter, for a discussion of more natural pressure-free syntheses between Great
In addition, their success was not in "conversions"'if and Little Religious Traditions.
conversion changing the belief of heretics'
It is doubtful that the 2. R. Redfield, Peasan t Society and Culture, Chicago, L9)6, pp. 4O-4I.
FranciscansdidmorethancomeintopriestlessafeasfullofChristians 3. A. S. Shannon, in a book review in Speculurn,XLl,1966, p. 182.
never
and- who.had 4. B. Malinowski illustrates this point well: "When we say that'Roman
who held a wide variety of religious misconceptions
been baptized. The ;;;;; *;t presumab.lv relatively pleased to see the Catholics believe in the infallibility of the Pope' we are correct only in so far as

*i1[;f;;pii"a'^una probabtv never felt that it had
;;;;';'
undergone any change in its religion'
rapid and wholesale
The historian, who describes conversions in this
There came a heretic and
manner ends up with a very unreal picture:
troops and many were con-
lonu"r,"a un ,r"u, then came Flungarian-troubles
then beset Hungary and
verted to Catholicism but internal
Franciscans and a great many
*unfr"uo,ed to heresy, then came the is a significant
were converted again'and then' Conversion
as easily nor as often as some historians
ft"to*.not; it does not occur look at the Turkish defters' which
would have us believe. We need only
(from Christianity' confession
show the rates of conversion to Islam this
r"rp".ii"al o., a uittage tevel, to tT Ylit a gradual phenomenon
we mean that this.is the orthodox belief , enjoined on all members of the church.
The Roman Catholic Polish peasant knows as much about this dogma as about
the Infinitesimal Calculus." Malinowski stresses the need to distinguish bet-
ween studying Christianity as a doctrine and as a sociological reality. (B.
Malinowski, Magic, Science and Religion and Other Essays, (1948) Anchor
book edition, p. 273.)
1. Unfortunately, we do not have any detailed descriptions of the intellectual
level of medieval Bosnian peasants, However, we cannot expect them to be
much more learned than their fellow tillers in Western Europe whose
theological grasp is amusingly expressed by G. G. Coulton, Medieual Vilhge,
Manor and Monasterl, Cambridge, 1925 (citation from Harper Torchbook
edition, p.217): "The peasant had scarcely the vaguest idea of the Mass
service, except that at a certain moment, the priest 'made' the Body of God.
Berthold of Regensburg finds it necessary to explain the different stages of the
service to his congregation as though they were little children. They commonly

was. In the first y"^i ^ft.. the Turkish conquest, there were few came in late, and departed before the end; as soon as the priest had held up the
consecrated Host they went clattering out (complains St. Bernardino) 'as if they
generation, the rate was increasing but still there were
converts; after a had seen not God but the devil.' "
34 Medieval Bosnian Church
Religion in Bosnia,s peasant Society
35
(l. Text given in D. Kniewald, "Vferodostojnost . . . ." Rad,270, l9tt9, p. l9' R' Gruiic' "Konavri pod raznim gospodarima
od XII-XV
I 17. For details on these and other passing references to Bosnian events, see my .\trtmtnih, SKA, LxVI, 1926, p.
lt0.'l"";;*" places a priest may veka,,,
narrative chapters. .hurch onry once a vear (e.g. on'rhe
thc Bosnian
r*rrr'prr"i"r, in Montenegro.iust visit a
7. Text given by Dr. F. M. (Zagreb) editor, "Dva savremena izvieYtaia o border). across
Bosni iz prve polovine XVII stoljeia," GZMS, XVI, 1904, p.261 . 20. M. A. Chaumette-des.Fo;s61," Vy.olo{l
en Bosnie dant les ann/es 1g07
8. Now the Slauais found only among the Orthodox. However, Catholics of 1,y(i 8, Paris, I 8 I (r. n. 70 et
; see also M . Srn,iC, l* Vryrg;;;,
Bosnia and Hercegovina also practiced the s&uawell into the nineteenth century i ta fin tu XVrrt e'ribrr,_,t))'7,;;;,;;';i;'r_et pays ];r;i''"i1, A^r*
'i'Du.'uJ"-"n'
te tet qi,its t,ont,,u,
until a campaign carried out by the Catholic Church forced Catholics to give up
this practice.
9. Though some scholars question its presence in medieval Bosnia it is
'tf;'i?fri,i13r:'ii?!,1
;'1"dno
' (t';;';i i^iii^ii ' "'
probable that it was important then under the name of. Krsno irne. See ,.ri\'{;{;t"rakovii'
starije kultno m jesto, " Nause srarine, xI, t967,
discussion, Chapter IV, note 20. 22 ln neighboring Montenegro, where we have no
evidence of heresy in the
10. The connecting of a Christian hotiday with agricultural needs is seen in a iddle Ages, we find the ru*" ottitud.,;;;;;.1";;;;il;r.;';i)1*.
l\,1

Christmas greeting from the vicinity of Glasinac in -Bosnia, "Christ is born so Russian envoy visit.ing Mortenegro i"
r zoo a"r.'ri;;r;h;';;;;;;,.T'i;:il,_"."
o
that our g.ri.r g.o*t. ("Hristos se rodi, da nam Yito rodi.") M. FilipoviC, s. miserable as to be hardly rec:ognizable as
..hu..h"s, ., U,";"g
"BeleYke o narodnom Yivotu i obilaiima na Glasincu," GZMS, n.s. X (ist- rhem were to be found^n"ith". ".rorr.r, ;.;;, "n'p,vl'inrid"
nor books (cited by M. E.
etn), 19)5, p. 12). I)urham, Some fribat Origins, U*l ia-drnlns
of tbe Balkans,
ll. London,
Annales Ragusini Anonlrni, edited by S. Nodilo (MSHSM XIV, 1928, p. 77). similar desciiptions oi
taken by scholars, who have assumecr-"ai"*r'Bosnian
churches have been
Scriptores l, Zagreb, 1883, p. )1. trr. *irring objects were rerected for
12. Tablet from Hodbina. See GZMS,XVIII, 1906, pp. 540'41; and also M. theological reasons! to indicate ,rr. pr.r.i.'oi
i"rrii-lrrr. nin'n','.n'.grin
Yego, Zbornik srednjoujekounih natpisa Bosne i Hercegouine, I, Sarajevo, rxample shows that crosses and icons
ian be absent for reasons having nothing
1962,pp.40-41. Attention should be drawn to the fact that the language and to do with dualism. The Montenegri;; rl*-l;;
nor respecr their clergy; an
style ofpresenting those powers being called upon to defend the field against the A u strian envoy in 1 78g heard u
.or.on.. ,.f iif,. Vluaita, .Holy Bishop, you
devil is very similar to that of the curses against whosoever will violate the terms lie likc r dogl I will cut your.hear,
p"int of _y knife!,; Th;';;;.y,,
of the medieval Bosnian charters. Both types of documents reflect the same style (onlment was that except for_keeping "", ""-if,.
the fasts the fllont"n.gr;nr-h;;; ,"
of thinking and an expectation ofheavenly action in the affairs of this world. (Durham, op. cii.,r.-
13. GZMS, Xvill, 1906, pp. 349-3t4.
'"liql9:
llll) 17) The ;;r;, ;;;; so slovenly there that as rate
it was nccessary forprince
'rr Danilo to rrsue, l"* ,.q"i'ri"g .r.i;lri"r,
14. GZMS,I, 1889, pp. 100-102. L() to church every sunday- and to keep ttr. .trur.t ,o
cl.an ariJ a p1".*"riiy
15. GZMS, V, 1894, pp. 449-463. thc canons of the church (l)urham, ,; ;;, ,;.;i;. "u"y
1(r. There are various general beliefs in spirits, demons and strange per- 23. Following V. Lanternari, ,f he^Retigions
(r: "By 'paganism' we of ,n, Oplrrrrsed, p. g2,footnote
sonifications (such as diseases or days of the week) but these are usually vague, mean native re[!iou, fJrm, prior to the
( hrisrians. p;rganism. in fact, coming of
vary from place to place, and are clearly more of a folkloric nature. Basic [| has.nori;":i;;;;;';,her than, historicaily, rharthe
practices are almost never tied to them though particular superstitions and t rr ir f.rm of rcligion thar antecedcs it
1 Ciristianitv and to *i ;;';;;;;;1"ri,y ,,
taboos may be. Legends and superstitions about these spirits should not be i r'rp.sed. Naturally everv form of paganism
is, lri ,urn, the crowning phase of a
corrsidered part of any belief system which we might call religious. i a"t",-i,"[Juy;;;;;; it shoutd not be evatuated
That the function of religion in medieval Bosnia ':"'il:::,::l':,"ricalprocess in
village and family solidarity - besides contributing to
was primarily to achieve goals in this world
F
a ncgatrve sense! as is so often the
'',r.qrnism' to signify crase among those *rr" ,r"'ii-"
**a
- an inferior r"t;g;o* r*.lit unror,uno,"ri
rather than to procure salvation in the hereafter is also seen in medieval kn.wn abour sruth sravic paganism; i,
tie bulk of our knowredge (and".ry'i;,,r"
more often
gravestone inscriptions. References to the hereafter or to salvation are rare. Far lrvp.thcses) comes fronr
;;;gr;;;ri
more common than asking God to forgive one's sins is the request that the living 'rnd folk customs. And of "'rrudy "f lait if",r.. tru" nr_"r,
c-ourse the
folk tales, folk beliefs
onty been
do not disturb the deceased's bones. The content of the inscriptions tended to after the demise of anv and utt fo.m._oifrg.;;; recorded cenruries
'l-hc a living
praise the worldly achievements of the deceased- The deeds noted were rarely of literatuerc on rhese ror,, berief's,Tuf"rri,i."-. religious system.
a religious nature. It is only after the Turkish conquest that God's forgiveness vr\t ..V,";.k;';;;i'n"taboos and practices is
for instance, E,.L1lek.
Sec
i, eorn. iHercegovine,.
begins to be sought for with any frequency. c/.,vs, vt,_ tr{94, pp. r4r,t 66,2t9'r8'l'.
17. It, of course, is not to be ruled out that a dualist movement could have Kcmp, IIea\ing
ii,j_jbe, $t 674; in Enerish:ee
Srudie, ii i*b"icu,-ooa frodunr."1',ir"E)i',,lr"r,
acquired a following in Bosnia on non-religious grounds e.g. political or '.'\/ar'i, London' 1935.Ritu,tl,
Arso.scattered throughJri,i" foilowing journals
social. However, as we shall see later, there is no evidence - that the Bosnian ,l marerial about folk betiefs and p;;;?;,;;;rry is a mass
Church or.9he heretics as a group supported any specific political or social cause. rcgions, but sometimes according L
p."r"ii.J';;;;,,.
,uU;..i *rii
18. G. eremo(nik. "Ostaci arhiva franjevatke vikarije," Radoui (Nautno r,,.ri"r, ,buut ;h;;;;;:fun..ur p',*i;;;j,';Zt;i'rL/,,Zfi'uf,:^t'i?tji.,
druXtvo BiH), III, Saraievo, l%5, p. 19. lrt'e key to abbreviations for Bibliography'.)----'-
36 Medieval Bosnian Church
24. K. Jire{ek , Istorija Srba(trans. by J. Radoni6),1,pp.93-94.In his chapter
pp. 91-103 Jirelek mentions a wide variety of other pagan survivals retained by
South Slav Christians including various other beliefs and practices reilecting
veneration o{ the heavenly bodies.
2t. GZMS, VI, 1894, pP. 449'463'
26. To determine whethCia belief or practice is taken seriously one should
study emotional reactions. As Malinowski points out, "To describe the ideas of
the natives concerning a ghost or a spirit is absolutely insufficient. Such objects
of belief pronounced emotional reactions, and one ought to look in the
"rour.
first place, for the objective facts corresponding to these emotional reactions."
(Malinowski, op. cit., p.241) If we find that the peasantshave little fear of or
other emotional reaction to a spirit or to the imporunce of a certain cefemony
we may conclude that it does not really hll into the cateSory we would.label
religious. Thus we should not simply categorize peasant beliefs from the point of
ui"i of whether they are part of the Great of Little Tradition; for certain
elements of both traditions are taken seriously while other elements of both
traditions are eitheinot understood or are considered trivial'
27. H. Puech and A. Vaillant, Le Trai$ contre les Bogorniles de Cosmas Iz
Prttre, Paris, 1945, p. 344. M.Popruzhenko, B'lgarski Starini, VIII, 1928.
28. G. Fejer, Codex diplomaticus Hungariae Ecclesiasticus ac Ciailis, X, pt.
7, Budapest, 1834, pp.812-813, 883-884.
29. It is pointed out that in Madras nowhere is there to be found a single
unequivocal version of the Great Tradition but instead there are several
overlapping and competing versions with varying degrees of admixture of
regional and local traditions. (M. Singer, "The Great Tradition of Hinduism in
the City of Madras," in C. Leslie, Anthropologl rf Folk Religion, New York,
1960, p. I 10). India proves to be an ideal place to study great and little cults and
their syntheses and variations. We find that rarely are all the major Hindu
festivals observed in any one place; which ones are observed vary from place to
place. The malor festivals of every town include many regional and local festivals
that have equal importance, in the eyes of the inhabitants, with the Great
Tradition festivals. Even in the case of Great Tradition festivals, the bulk of
ritual and practice accompanying their celebration has nothing to do with the
Great Tradition but are local customs or a localization of elements in the Great
Tradition. The {orm this localization takes varies from place to place. Both
traditions evolve with each other; the two traditions at times mingle and at
others remain separated yet are seen by villagers as being one tradition. (M'
Marriott, "Little Communities in an Indigenous Civilization," in Leslie' op.
cit.,pp. 169-214). This description has much in common with conditions in
rural Jugoslavia. The slauahas equal importance with major church holidays
like Easter, many of the rites connected with Christian holidays such as
Christmas have nothing to do with Christianity, which saints' days are par-
ticularly singled out and celebrated vary from area to area or village to village.
Much of the practice connected with celebrating these days has nothing to do
with Christianity but the peasant views both aspects as being part of one
tradition. The Yucatan provides us with examples of the variety of ways
Catholicism may mix with pre-Christian beliefs' Agains we find that how
synrheses occur! varies from place to place, The Catholic and pagan elements
have many different ways of mixing. In peripheral communities they tend to
become more closely united and blend into a single religious system with
Religion in Bosnia's Peasant Society 37
catholic ritual being incorporated into pagan practices. when priests leave an
area, those rites that it is believed can only be celebrated by them tend to
disappear, while others felt not to be dependent on them are incorporated into
popular ritual. In other places we find that the two cults remain separated, with
both being considered equal pans of public worship, complementary ways of
dealing with the supernarural. Each cult is equally respectable and equally
prowerful yet distinct, each with its own priests; but they are not seen as rivals to
one another. (R. Redfield, The Folk Culture of the Yucatan, Chicago, 1941.
The pertinent parts are given in Leslie, oy'. cit., pp. 337 -390.)
30. A. Solovjev, "Le t6moignage de Paul Ricaut sur les restes du
Bogomilisme en Bosnie," Bjtzantion, XXUI, 1953, pp. 73-86; P. Rycaut,
Present State of tbe Ottoman Ernpire, Cologne, 1676, p. 111.
3l. Much material on Christian customs kept by these Moslems can be found
in the interesting study of T. Djordjevid, "Preislamski ostaci mediu
Jugoslovenskim Muslimana" in his multi-volume work, Naf Narodni Yiuot,
vol. VI, Beograd, 1932, pp.26-)6. Among the many observances carried out
by Moslems on Christian holidays are: Moslems refusing to work on Good
Friday, coloring eggs for Easter, decorating houses with flowers on St. George's
Day. The largest number of observances are kept about St. John's Day; both
christians and Moslems of Banla Luka then bathe their cattle before sunrise to
protect them from disease, while elsewhere people bathe themselves before
sunrise for the same reason. The preceding evening is celebrated in particular by
the young who jump over fires, make love charms, etc. Moslems also attend the
dances held on hill tops on st. Iliia's Day. In addition many Moslems fear that if
they fail to observe the Day of St. Procopius they may be struck by lightening or,
as Hasluck observed, their crops may be ruined by the angry saint. (F. W.
Hasluck, Cbristianity,and Islam under thesultans, vol. I, Oxford, 1929, p.7l).
32. K. Draganouii, "Izvje!6e apostolskog vtzitatora petra Masareit,il, o
prilikama katoliEkih naroda u Bugarskoj , Srbiji, Srijemu, Slavoniji i Bosni g.
1623, 1624," Starine, XXXIX, 1938, p. 24.
33rOn the interesting problem of the double-faith, see also M. FilipoviC,
"KrYteni Muslimani, " Zbctrnik radoua Etnografskog Instituta,SAN, Beograd,
II, 19t1, pp. 119'28.
34. M. A. Chaumette-des-Fossds, op. cit., p. 7).
35. M. Hardie, "Christian Survivals among Certain Moslem Subjects of
Greece," Contemporary Reuiew (London), CXXV, 1924, p. 229.
36. See E. Sapir, Culture, Language and Personaliry, Berkeley, 1964. (A
collectionof papers written in the 1920's and 1930's.) See especiaily
"Language" (1933), pp. I-44. Sapir, p. 36, stresses the importance of
vocabulary as an index of culture.
J7 K. Mannheim, Ideologlt ond Utopia(1936), Harvest Book Edition, p. )6.
38. Malinowski's discussion of the influence of missionaries on native beliefs
in the Trobriand Islands is useful for comparative purposes: "As to the danger
of their (the natives') views being modified by missionary teaching, well, I ian
.nly say that I was amazed at the absolute impermeability of the native mind to
those things. The very small amount of our creed and ideas they acquire remains
in a watertighr compartment of their mind." (Malinowski, op, cit., p.252)
Lanternariagrees, ". . . so-called'conversions'are more apparent than real,
touching only the surface of native belief and never reaching into their true
religious life . . . Bengt Sundkler, commenting on this situation, maintains that
 38 Medieval Bosnian Church
it can be demonstrated that groups as well as individuals (in South Africa) have
gone from the mission church to the Ethiopian, from this to the Zionist, and
finally crossing the bridge of native Zionism, have returned to African animisrn,
whence they had started out. Referring to Melanesia and therefore to an
altogether different cultural environment, other anthropologists and
missionaries have arrived at identical conclusions. Peter Elkins for instance
remarks that the work of the missionaries is for the most part superficial as far as
native life is concerned. With few exceptions, most of the natives preserve their
fundamental beliefs and their traditional religions; their ancient rituals are
performed or remembered in hiding, ready to be resumed in the open as soon as
the opportunity arises. .. Fison a missionary in the Fiji Islands in 1884 . . .
spoke of the nominal acceptance of Christianity by the natives. . . . The passing
o{ the Wainimala tribe from paganism to Christianity he felt had been a nominal
conversion and only a few charlatans could describe it as the 'conversion of the
people' in a theological sense . . . and in recent times the situation on the islands
is still such as to make it most improper to speak of the 'conversion of native
communities.' " (Lanternari, op. cit., pp. 2)0-)l).
39. E. Evans-Pritchard, Nuer Religion, Oxford, l9)6, p. 106.
40. It has been theorized that the reasons that such enormous gravestones
were used in medieval Bosnia were either to prevent grave-robbing or to keep
the corpse in the grave since there are various beliefs about stones having the
ability to keep a corpse bound to his grave through the stone providing a house
for the soul.
4I . Tbe Life and Aduentures of Dositej Obradoaif, edited and translated by
G. Noyes, Berkeley, 1953, pp. 3ll-3I2.
42.Text given by D. Kniewald, "Vjerodostojnost...," p. l18. It is to be
noted that what a villager, acquiring a wife, seeks is to gain a hard-working
woman to do her share of work in the household. If she does not fulfill this
function well she isnot "good" and thus ought to be replaced by someone else.
The ruling classes were equally casual about matrimony though they married
ancl divorced for considerations different from those of the peasantry.
43.The material about marriages in Bosnia under Turki.sh rule comes from
M. Filipovid, "sklapanje irazvod hriJCanskih brakova pred kadijama u tursko
doba," in Radoui (NDBH), 20, 1963, pp. 18) 9).
41t. The absence in South Slavic popular belief of a definite connection bet-
ween ethics and religion should be stressed for it, too, should make one skeptical
about the chances for success of a dualist religion among the Serbs, Croats and
Bosnians. In their folk tales religious figures frequently appear with com-
binations of sympathetic and evil traits. CajkanoviC sees the origin of such
combinations in the tendency of primitive religions to make their gods not
ethical figures but gods of specific functions (e.g., thunder). Thus we may find
the Devil portrayed sympatherically in certain folk tales (e.g., A.Savi6 Rebac,
"O narodnoi pesmi 'Car Duklijan i Krstitelj Jovan,' " Zbornik radoaa(SAN),
vol. 10, Institut za proufavanje knjilevnosti, knl. I,19t1, pp.266-67). On
txcasions.lhe Devil is credited with teaching men certain skills and trades. S.
OuEiCl"Ziuot iobidaji plemena Ku6a," StZ, SKA, vol.48, 1931, pp.286-
87) gives examples of the Devil returning favors, helping people and teaching
them healing methods. See also, V. Calkanovii, O srpsAotn urbounom bogu,
SKA, Beograd, 1941, especially pp. l0)-l l0 but throughout the book. We also
Religion in Bosnia's Peasant Society 39
tinJ rurh ppular expressions as "The Devil isn't as black as people say"
tl.rtkarrovrC, (,f . cit., p. 49). On thc Devil see also. T. M. BuXetiC. "Vr:rovanja
i' l)jrvtrlrr -- v okrugu Moravskom," 5l'2, SKA, vol. 32, 1925, pp. 4OO 40t.
()n the orher hand St, Sava (like such other saints as St. Procopius and St. Iliia)
has a vrndictive streak. He flies into quick rages and damns with slight cause. We
hnd hinr tlamning a whole village for the sins of one man. He also takes revenge
uhen people failto observe his day: "You had better keep St. Sava's fast or the
*olvcs will get y(xrr flock." That wolves are his weapon is derived from one oi
hrrlessraintlyattributes-beingpatronof wolves. (Lajkanovi(, op. cit,p. 15).
l'hcsr bcliefs reflect a society possessing a value system quite different from that
t'l tlualism. Thc family, not a religious creed, is the basis for the moral order.
J\toral excellence by the performer does not rnake rituals more effective. And
Iolk talrs about religious figures depict them as powerful supernatural beings
*ho can either aid or harm you through a combination of their beneficial or
r rndictive traits, which in turn are derived from the {unctions attributed to those
lr gu res.
K. Jirctek, 'frgouatki drumoui i rudnici Srbije i Bosne u srednjem uijeku
.11.
qrrans. I)1. Pelanovit), Sarajevo, l9)1, p. 96.
{(r. l\1 . A. Chaurnette-des-Fossds, op cit., pp. 33-41.
47. A good description of markets and the role they play in peasant society can
hr found in W. Lockwood, "The Market Place as a Social Mechanism in
lrerrant Society,' ' Kroeber Anthropological Societl Papers, 196), pp. 47 -67 .
r\ revrsed and far more detailed firesentarion. with specific emphasis on Bosnia,
trn be krund in his dissertation, Car\ija i selo; T'he Market Place as an In-
tc11ralel Mecbtnism in Bosnia, Yagoslauia, Berkeley, California, 1970. I have
alxr profited from discussing markets with Dr. Lockwood who has generously
rhared with nrc much still unpublished material.
,18. Oral communication from W. Lockwood. This point is treated in detail
rntl demonstrated in his dissertation (see note 47).
49. ln a separate study I have discussed and argued against the role in
rpreading heresy attributed by several historians to two heretical goldsmiths
lrom the coast. See, my "Aristodios and Rastudije a re-examination of the
()uestion, " G ID, XVI (19(r5), Sarajevo, 1967, pp.- 223 229. The problem is
also discussed in Chapter III of this study.
J0. See abovc, footnote 38.
 CHAPTER II

AN EXAMINATION OF SOURCES

We must devote considerable attention to the sources before we can

arrempt to draw any conclusions about the character of the Bosnian
Church. Our problem is made immensely more difficult because of the
unsarisfactory nature of these sources. We do not have a single narrative
source about Bosnia from the medieval period. At the beginning of the
seventeenth century three chronicles about medieval Bosnia still
existed, at least two of which were written by foreigners: they are the
Chronicle of Hrvoje Vukfid written by Emanuel the Greek,(1) and
Bosnian chronicles by Pietro Livio Veronese(2) and by a man bearing
rhe improbable name of Milich Velimiseglich.(3) Nothing is known
about any of the three writers or about the character of their work. We
do nor even know in what centuries they lived, since all we have about
rhem is the fragments of their work that the seventeenth century
historians chose to excerpt.
From the excerpts, we know that Pietro Livio discussed religious
nr,rrters in Bosnia fairly extensively: Orbini and a visitation report from
1623 1624 drew considerable material from him. We do not know if the
other two chroniclers discussed religious matters, since surviving
r\lerpts from them deal with secular affairs.
\\'e do not have a single work written by the Bosnian Churchmen
ihemselves, except for manuscript copies of the Gospels and notations of
.r:ri;n.doctrinal nature in them. Thus we must draw our material about
lhrs church from domestic charters and Dubrovnik records, mostly of a
iru'iness and diplomatic nature, that mention members of the Bosnian
Church: from papal letters about heresy, which generally simply
tri!('rate old phrases and give amazingly few detaiis; and from ar-
chaeological material.
ln addition to the lack of firsthand chronicles, no archive in Bosnia
rniiuding those of the pre-ottoman Franciscan monasteries) contains
*r:r clcx-uments from the period prior to the Turkish conquest of the
I'l{'iJ's. Thus we must be satisfied with documents (such as charters,
refxfls of diplomatic missions, ietters about internal and foreign affairs
r::+rt often written by non-Bosnians) that have been preserved in ar-
chrt'er outside Bosnia. The most important of these archives are in
 Medieval Bosnian Church Examination of Sources 43
42

T'he theological references in all these Bosnian documents

Dubrovnik,the Vatican, Budapest,and Venice' In addition' material can charters or wills
- be thcy
reflect orthodox theoiogy. This fact has been noted
archive)' -
be found in Zagteb, Vienna, Kotor, Split (only the Cathedral before; but various scholars, who describe the Bosnian Church as
as the archives
ancJZadar (where all the Dalmatian city archives as well dualist, have argued that it is of little significance. They maintain on the
Islands, excluding Dubrovnik and cities lying south o{
of the Adriatic basis of analogies with the behavior of dualists elsewhere that this was a
Dubrovnik,havebeencollected).Withthepublicationin196Tof deliberate attempt by Bosnians to hide their heresy behind orthodox
Professor Dinii's third volume of materials from the Dubrovnik
ar-
about phrases. However, unlike the French Cathars and Italian Patarins living
chive,(4) scholars can be satisfied that all documentary material in the midst of zealous intolerant Catholic societies, the Bosnian Church
the Bosnian Church existing in any archive in Jugoslavia has been
new material will existed in the midst of a society indifferent to religious matters, in which
hope that be
fublished. However, we can always the Catholics were a minority. There were no persecutions of the
turned up in the ltalian or Turkish archives' Bosnian Church by Bosnians until 14)9 (4 years before the Turks put
an end to the medieval kingdom) and this persecution may well have
been limited to clerics of that church. Thus without persecutions against
Native South Slav Sources
thcm there was no need whatsoever for church members to depict their
religious beliefs and practices in a false way. And with no reason to do
If we take documents (charters, letters, Dubrovnik registry material) so, it would be absurd for religious leaders to put into documents
as a whole, we find that they contain considerable
information, though
value in any given religious beliefs and practices which they considered sinful. Thus it
it is rare to find more than one or two items of
a few of which are makes sense to take the content of these documents at face value and
document. we have a variety of Bosnian charters, *..
conclude that the theological references in these documents are there
witnessed or guaranteed by members of the Bosnian church. These fi
it because church leaders believed in these things and wanted them there.
provide information about the church's hierarchy and the position
g",i

'held (chiefly minutes of the
in the state. The Dubrovnik documents
the
town councils and reports of its diplomats) tell a great deal about
diplomatic role of uuriou, individual members of the Bosnian Church;
iniorm us about the role of the church vis-h-vis the Bosnian state; and
also give many details about the locations and functions of
the houses
(monasteries) of the Bosnian Churchmen'
All of these documents, except certain Bosnian charters, are of
unquestioned authenticity, though they may sometimes contain
inaccuracies through ignorance or design' However, some
forged,
by emigrd
charters exist, fabricatel aft.. the fall of the Bosnian state
families trying to prove that their ancestors had been prominent nobility
forgers had access to
in the days of tn" Bosnian kingdom. Since the
imitations' Thus
original .ir.r"., they were able to make convincing
sch"olarly opinion is divided on the authenticity of a variety
of charters.
particular care must be used in regard to any charter bearing an un-
Unfortunately
familiar name which has not appeared in other charters. a
The most valuable Serbian sources on Bosnian heretics are several
{i. editions of anathemas written to be recited as part of the Church service
I'i during the week of Orthodoxy which condemn a variety of heresies,
i.i
ancient and contemporary, and include anathemas of the Bosnian and
li.
*i I{r-rm heretics. J'he anathemas give a limited amount of information
$i"
s: about their practices, and single out various heretics by name.
Though most of the names cannot be identified, a few of those
darnned as Bosnian heretics are clearly members of the Bosnian Church.
'fhus the anathemas show that the Serbs anathematized as heretics
nrembers of the Bosnian Church, which is strong evidence against the
Ilosnian Church being basically a Serbian Church but with its own local
hierarchy.(6) These anathemas, as will be shown later. were compiled
in thc late fourteenth century after Tvrtko was crowned at Milelevo in
1377 as King of Serbia as well as of Bosnia.
'Ihere are also three other Serbian
sources that may or may not refer
tohcretics in Bosnia. The first is clearly about Bosnian heretics, though

..girt". of names for Bosnia has never been
,uJt of checking names formidable' Since many forgeries
members of families who regularly supplied
forgeries often turned up in the archives -of
doJu,n"nt, found in these monastery archives
tioning these family names should always be
up, which makes the nothing is told about their beliefs or pracrices. The Life of Stefan
drawn
were made by Dragutin (King of Serbia 1276-7282 and subsequently Ban of Matva
and Usora, who died in 1316) written by his contemporary Archbishop^
Franciscans' and since the
Danilo mentions Dragutin's work in teaching and converting ,.heretics
monasteries'
Franciscan
of the Bosnian land"; presumably he found them in his realm, which
and documents men-
was in the north of Bosnia: Malva, Usora, and probably Sol (Tuzla).
given special scrutiny'(')
 44 Medieval Bosnian Church
Exanrination of Sources
45
The second is a notation in a Serbian Gospel text found now on Mount
on thc coast, speaks or manv heretics
Athos dated 1329 which tells of the rebuilding of a church of St. illilil,'il'll":1':.u""'"- in
Nicholas in the Bishopric of D'bar and refers to godless Babury.(7) ln
various Serbian texts about Serbia, Babunl refers to Bogomils. The
rac k <,f
"
;,,.;; ;i
;:::rxll
Split. I lis information will
il*l
i:,j,:[lH;;l :r:ilffi,,"",;
bc di.scussed in Lhapter III.
question here is: where is D'bar? At times it has been thought to be Most usefu'r c.tections .,f
near the Bosnian-Serbian border on the River Lim. Strong arguments B;;i;r-serbian-Dalnrarian documenrs
published prior to 191+0.are
have also been advanced that it is meant to refer to Debar in the vicinity
rirr"J ll'e.^siiir *i,i, brief commeni,
thc type of material in the ,uou,
of ohrid in Macedonia. But be it the Lim or Macedoni a, in rj29 neither
co,ec'ti"i,-rrr" ,-r,ives the documents
fronr, rhe degree of came
of the editorr,
was part of Bosnia. And in any case, nothing in the notation suggests pubtished sin<.c 1940,.j.:shoultl ",. 1f I Thefollowing editions
these Babunlt had any connection with the Bosnian Church. b;-";;;;,"'
l. G. Cremo(nik, .,Ostaci arhiva
The final Serbian source is a life of Despot Stefan Lazarevi€ (1389- hosanske fran jevaFke
1427)by Konsrantin Filozof, written in I43I-I432, which refers to a JilTli";il'tl,l'hou,h "n dn*ni'n,'in'i"o n,,u, to t463,u,u,u"J
;n
council held by the despot in the town of Srebrnica shortly before his n,
". *,"" 1,,;.11Xu"'i; T,T :,'iii::;|, i:,,j.:,?:; "
;:,,t,,:. t :::
r

(.remolnik drscrrsscs ,h".;;;;;,;;i',n"r"

death. Thetown, lying near the Drina, had been in Bosnian hands for ,r.n,".s, givcs thc rexrs ol
lrulls and d()(.unrents thar
much of that century, but at this moment was held by Serbs. There are have
su m m ar izes pr
ev io u.sr y p; ; ;;;.,;:;
".,."r""i rn,-""l
several manuscript editions of the text and in one of them, and only in lt;
comrnc,nts and cxca.sionirlly. :: ".:ro
-u -n"* :"i:l
supplying ,lut". "t"."in??li
one, following the mention of the council in Srebrnica, is added the 2. M. Dini6. tz ,trt,rorui.t,,i,r;;;;,ini. IIr.(ta)
remark that the town's inhabitants are all of the Bogomil heresy. Ex- ua'lc rr rlle. 1on,,t r,rrr."., This is the
f,r,-t.,r.,*n,l_"a .n t he Bosn ian most
,tl

ir 'al 1

srnce silic u,rore l)rnif

cerpts from the manuscript were published in Russian translation in hr', .;;.r;;;;.,'ll,n .on,"*,. passagt,s Ch urch
variety .f different t-vJres fronr a
1859 by a Russian, V. Grigorovil, and immediately attracted notice, of .i.riu,n"n,.'preserved in Dubrovnik
u' u ai aiptun' ni'.-d,,.;;';",,,
since, if authentic, it is the only time the term "Bogomil" is used in a :i:i[iJ:::'Jht' and m in ures nr .ou n.ii
primary source for heretics anywhere in Bosnia.(8) The fact that the u r, is'inil t:,T.:
statement contains an obvious exaggeration
- the impossible claim that
r

"
C:rtholic
u
; :',ii: Jlill' i". ;.1?:,:l
could nor U" ,,nrluu"i
of these staves (excludi"F
Ti' ru ;,;;
:

", *,d ,, ,'r,rve: thus in theory mosr

;*;
all the inhabitants of a town with a large Ragusan colony and Franciscan ,l;;;'#';;,;;'".
bc herctics or nmpre
*ia'rr'i.*,.r?irj^b) hyMateriar
birth) should either
monastery were Bogomils
- need not disturb us too much. The
problem lies in the fact that only one of the several manuscripts contains
p,rrar'rs, c)
Ae ts,,i th* .ounlilr';;i;;;;; referring to
l;r"atarin.s. In thrse sect.ions
e Prcv io u'rv puilirr,"a
the phrase, and that this manuscript has subsequently disappeared. ,?il:i:t*l',i:,s?m mater iar. si"., l;1..
After Grigorovit's death, the great philologist Jagi( examined his
iibrary, and among other things sought for this particular manuscript of
un.r p.br;,ncs ;i
rt.larions berween uurr.ounlt i:! i*f,";t'il,:1,il:,:: : ;fljX,':.:,
ulJ ,i.'biri'r" patarins.
-1. M. Dini6. ,,N
the Life of Stefan Lazarevit.(9) The text was not to be found. Grigorovil
;
,.:,. ;k, ;: i, ;liliil
:;:i iii L,:Jff:;ili #,? :::: x,li;
Rr;;;'lii, will. More material: Ionll
had never published the original text or even the full text in translation vrmc .f the fortunt, rett hy. Gost
and no paleographer or skilled philologist had had the opportunity to rlrese cascs can be found
in'n;, il ilii'r)!tir
study the manuscript before it vanished. Thus we do not know whether 4. v. M,,!in. .,Serhsk,ia -iriiiii,! III.
"rn,*,Knj.
ja."(lg) Thoueh
_. .sinodrka v nedeliu
it was an early manuscript, whose copyist, for example, knew from lravoslavr
t)ctanski rexr wds prinred
,n"r" ,"_i, rrru,J n""., prinred before, rire
personai experience that Srebrnica was full of Bogomils and added the great rarity todav. .l.hese ""it;; i;;i;;:;;,"ry in a book that is a
phrase, or whether it was a late copy whose writer had no sound reason o." ih" editions
varue f;;; "r"r,'..i"i"rf, of the
;:H,::l;J:r:rnrse ,;;:;o7'1i.," Bo.ni.n h",.siesthree
to add the phrase.(lO) Of course I shall not be able to resolve the has
question here. However, it seems worthwhile to devote this space to it llcsides the South Slav
sources we arso have a large
since the passage is frequently cited in such a manner that a reader \rntt(,n by the Hungarian number of retters
would not suspect there were any difficulties about it at all. kingl",;;;;;"";:inutt,
stru rulers, or cterics
s.rking in South Srav Iands]Th;r;'r;i;l-,r.itt.n
A more useful chronicle for us is that of Thomas Archdeacon of *ho hoped to subject Bosnia, by foreign rurers
Split:(ll) Thomas died about 1260. His work, a useful source for trnt'cship with
d.;;;;;lrt u, intl.nate an acquain_
what transpired in Bosnia
l, ile Srauic sources, uuiho.r.
46 Medieval Bosnian Church
Examination of Sources 47
In addition, the Hungarian sources frequently are biased and reflect whar ways their opponents agfee
with orthodox belief. Thus if a group
couple of ,,er;;;;,; r.,
ulterior motives. However, they do contain interesting information on under attack.were ro haue oily a
entirely orthodox creed, we shatt ue giuen ori"r*,r.
occasions. All editions of Hungarian letters are listed and discussed by no hint of i,, uuri. o-r,toao*y
5iriC.(tg) In the Hungarian king's circle we also find the Catholic but shall be shown only the aeu;u'tions.
Moreover, both the con_
Bishop of Bosnia after ca. 1250 when that bishop moved to Djakovo in temporary inquisitor and the rater
scholar tend to *rt" trr"r. a.ur",ior*
Slavonia. The letters of this bishop concern affairs in Slavonia and at the into the bases of the heretics' ..".a luna-"ven to buird
whole systems) without stopping up from them
Hungarian court and have little bearing on Bosnia itself.(20) ro th;k that these deviations may well
be peripheral beliefs and pi*ti.-er, .rd;;;at a'centrar to their
creed. acual

Catholic Church Sources It also should be mentioned that these sources

frequently speak of
hc'retics rejecting certain practices;
thi; need not have meant total
Under this category will be discussed the papal correspondence about rejection but courd just as well
'. have meant rejection of the practice
Bosnia, the letters concerning missions of papal legates, the documents perlormed in a cathoric church. as
w" oa;;;;r" have no way of rearning
connected with the work of the inquisition in Italy insofar as the how slight a divergence might
inquisitors concemed themselves with matters
-
pertaining to Bosnia l-hus one must not.onclude t
be seen as a "rejection,, by
an inquisitor.
- o- ,..rru*ions
-io. in these sources that the
and the Franciscan mission in Bosnia. Each one of the three categories of heretics necessarily rejected ru.rr,n"n,r
given functions; instead
sources (papal chancellery, inquisition, and Franciscan) has sources of they may have had different
.on..pr, oi o, iiif..".,, pracrices and prayers
knowledge independent of the others, but at the same time, since their connected with them.
authors all corresponded with each other, they cannot be considered Finally we should note the tendency
cstablished heresies. This courd
to Iink deviations with
fully independent. iuu'. resulted in a Bosnian idea
These Catholic sources are particularly important, for without them extended or disrorted so as"u.;ry
'eing Such an identification
to.oin.ra" with a crassicar heretical
and the historical works of Pope Pius II to be discussed under crror' would t ru" not onry given the
-
little reason for the historian to suspect church more iustification to condemn-Bosnian ..errors,,, cathoric
Chronicles
- there would be
that there was any dualism in Bosnia. Almost all references to w.uld have made available for polemi., but arso
u"turit" una ar*ni-ng pJ,I.",i*
Manicheeism or to doctrines or practices that could be called dualist lahcls as well as the whole
."ir,i"f literature. And of
come from these Catholic documents. This fact has led many, who want course once having come up
with suc"h a^rii]f.r.ti.ut
labei (e.g. making ,fr. g"r;ir.,
to argue that the Bosnian Church was not dualist, to claim that since int. Manichees), the theologian *oUan*"
tended to bring into play a
only one category of sources, and these from a foreign land (and an whole series of other ideas aiociar"J*r,ir ilrlism whether or nor rhese
organization cleady hostile to the Bosnian Church) speaks of dualism, idras could be found in Bosnia.
we should reject the evidence of these writings.(2l)
However, this is too easy a way out and one that cannot really be
iustified. As noted above the Catholic sources include documents of Papal Sources
several different categories written over a period of several centuries
which renderc any a prion rejection of them as a whole impossible' Each papat sources seriousty.
.",th,i:l;n:.",i|.":n" Most are clearly
category of Catholic sources and frequently each specific document
-
must be analyzed individually. Only in this way can we arrive at any c,,rresponcren..*"noJ;E:;:,:rTt j.:1*:.il.ffiy"i,[T,r;:1
-valid conclusions about the reliability of these documents. 'rpparently lost whose authenticity
.we
must question. yet because the
Itshould be pointed out here, however, that even in a church (be it prpacy- is obviousry a foreign
anj hostile -,1..", we must be on our
Catholic or Orthodox) source, shown to be authentic, there is inevitable ruard in interpreting rhese sources.
The papal docum""ir-ri-"*f,l",
distortion resulting in an unbalanced picture of the heretics (or tht, nredieval period speak of heresy
i" B:r;ir.
schismatics). This distortion arises from the fact that these sources only ''\ mosr lmportant fact about, the papal sources is that armost
rlusively we have only the pupal ex-
mention how their opponents deviate from orthodoxy and never state in ,id.'oiir,""".o...rpondence. We very
48 Medieval Bosnian Church
Examination of Sources
49
rarely have the incoming letters to which the popes are replying. This rs problem of comrnunication
arising out of language differences (and
particularly distressing, since the letters to the popes would presumably hence difficurties) is that
have described the situation in Bosnia and the nature of religious differences'
of .;-;;;l;,ion arising out of curturar
An educated ttutian corta-'*'.lt huu. artin"ro,
deviations. In the replies, the popes usually did little more than inform frgan pradices which the Bosnian i.*ry ,t"
their agents of the means they may employ to wipe out heresy in Bosnia.
r

c h r is t a ni ty s
Letter after letter from the papal chancellery refers simply to heretics.
i u.y
cnrhusiasm and"iinterest ";j,ni, ),,,iii]#i,,T::T:, ftlt,::.,ilill _l;
in churches unJio.*ut religions,
One begins to wonder how much the popes actually knew, since they rhat.the legate, if he wandered it is cloubtful
about in
were never more specific. Even if the papal agents and correspondents
knew very well what the heresy's nature was, we would expect the
an y th i ng h lreticar at
al L rt i, .".tuin1r,l
harangLring throngs of th.,usands.
;.ilH, ::JiT.t J;::.:il
popes atsome time toreferto it by a name suggesting that nature (e.g., hcliefs and practice., h. ,'oui.l
ii"r"tii. .ii" abour
wanted information
',c,1 haue had ," ir;;;;;.
Cathar) instead of constantly saying only "heresy." We would expect "heresy", then, that he onty
was likery to r,."",","a would
thenr on occasions to give to their agents a specific suggestion about lound in the answers to questions have been that
he asked. we can be sure that
correcting a doctrinal error that might convey some specific information peasant would have been the
confused by any question of
about the heresy. They never did. Yet we know that on at least one nrrure nut to him. And if rhc a theological
peasant t.t;d no,. und.ersrand
occasion, in 1351, Pope Clement VI went into some detail to describe to ore cannot put too much value the question,
one of his legates the nature of the errors of schismatics in Albania,
in his reply. nnd ,in." tnrJ't.gr,.
presumabry had a preconceivecr
notion about what heresy existed
Hum, and Serbia. The deviations which he found it worthwhile to [].snia' we could cxpect.him in
to *.ru""s concerning
elaborate on were something as well known as the differences between nectecl wirh rhe heresy he ".t il;;
thoughi
beliefs con-
the Eastern and Western Churches.(22) Did he never feel it necessary to prasant complicated there. Thus, by asking a
theological questions about (e.g.)
inform a iegate who was headed for Bosnia what errors he might expect uright werl receive from thal dualism a legate
p..r;"i,-;;; ioutd not make anything
to find thereT of thc. question, affirmative but out
Thus we are left in a bit of a quandary. The popes clearly had several
,nirf"uing answers.(24) The ,egate
w.'uld rhcn be sarisfie<r that (e.g.)
sources of information about Bosnia and the sources were independent and make that report.to
dr;t;;;;; heresv did exisr in Bosnia
the pJpe, unait,"'i 'Christian,,peasant
of one another. lf the popes were in doubt they could, and we know on ,.1::l ,o his ploughing and domerti,. would
occasions they did, send legates. The popes certainly were not always 'l'is is pure pru.ti..r.
hypothesis, but ;n this i;;;iry
Hungarian dupes, as is seen from the fact that in I24B Pope Innocent IV " we have ro go one step
told the llungarians to cease and desist from actions against Bosnia, [;fji"'i T.: *'JT;:iil aon' *h'n o" "',0*,,,,uo u,,o i*"-,' ol n
after he had received a letter from the Bosnian Ban Ninoslav, assuring *. ; ;;, ";li :l"l', ::,il'" ll I J [:ilL: H"l;l l;l;
the pope of his Catholicism. The pope on this occasion decided to :l:,f :1,,,.
vrsrrrng a country does
not mean understanding i, T;"-;.;;.*,
in:
inquire into the matter and, clearly suspicious of Hungarian motives,
'isiror's report dcpcnds on what h;;;'ffi; he "r,
was in that .ount.y;
selected two Dalmatians to look into it.(23) The results of their inquiry nhcre he went, whom. he
have not survived, butpresumably the pope received a report. The popes
talked ;: ;;, he ralked about, what
also on occasion sent legates from ltaly. In some cases the legates may ;il:il:il ;;Jj*j,a, Jj,- h e pose d,r, ",i ;", ;i.,,. unfort unar;,;, ;. ;,".
not have grasped matters well because of language difficulties; it is
doubtful that many at the Bosnian court, prior to the arrival of the
Franciscans in the 1340's, knew Latin, and it is equally to be doubted
say f th cy ai a o.,ri a"n'li'
i

addirion. in some cases there

u'ho described llosnia ever
ffi _*:xJ:J ;i,,ff #t.;"Il
*
i* q;;;;i";'*',"rr,". cerrain of the *l"r
legates
visited th" .ouni.y; once the Franciscan
that the ltalians knew any Slavic language. However, on some occasions vrcariar of Bosnia' which
encomprrr.a
(such as Johannes de Casamaris'mission in 1203 to Kulin) the legates
r'^riii., Balkans, was established
were accompanied by clerics from the coast (in 1203 by Marinus, an ::B:||rj:':th",l',';J,*l"'sibre to ,,, ;h;;. a regare *r," *.",',"
archdeacon from Dubrovnik) who clearly knew both languages. ,r;;;, ; ;;'i#' l,;il,ili'ill ix.*.,r'h
o t .ou.t, r,"
";,'."a
I{owever, despite the fact that some legates did send reports, a t*s'rtcs. visitecr Bo-snia proper
in. p..ron u*j;/*fi:iil
problem does exist about the quality of their information. Beyond the 5rn(r the tcxts ol lht'sc rr'portr ffr:"JltJ"fx
have not survived. we cannot evaruate
t0 Medieval Bosnian Church
Examination of Sources
51
their quality. when he comes across the term . ,heretic, ,
Thus we have to conclude that the papacy had access to information of in a papal source.
A second very interesting fact about the papai
some sort from several independent sources (the Kings and high clergy .
it changes in character in the r440's. prior
correspondence is that
of Hungary, coastai clerics, papal legates and, from the 1340's, the to that crecade there are onry
a few references to_suggest that the popes
Franciscans) and thus should have been in a position to know something believed that there was
tlualismin Bosnia. Each of these referen.",
about what was going on. Then how can the vagueness of the letters be
unquestionable authenticity. r) Innocent
o..u* in a document of
explained2 The answer to this problem clearly lies in what happened at III in 1200 stated that he
suspected the Bosnian heretics
the Papal Chancellery. Where was the information received2 By whom2 were cathars. The term ,,cathar,, was
What was done with the information? What officials were informed of
never to be repeated Bosnia again.(27) 2) The Bilino polje
document of 1203 which .about
its contents? Where was it filed? Who wrote the papal replies about the rop" tu.?tf saw and the 1319 letter
Pope John XXII refer ,o p.r.ii.", of
lI that might be associared with
Bosnia, and did the writers have access to all the material receivedZ
dualism.(28) 3) Gregory Xl tn 1373
f'hese are questions which I cannot answer but which would make $:
mentioned the ,.adoration of
heretics"(29), which could, perhaps, be
worthwhile a full study on the procedure and functioning of the Papal {i
associated with the cathar
custom of adoring the perfecri,.as
Chancellery. Only on the completion of such a study would we be in a an isolated instance, ,f,.rgt, i,-'.""fa
also be attributed to_ some local practice. 4) Boniface IX wrote
position to pass a really qualilied judgment about the value of papal
lrigismund, King of Hungary, in December
sources.(2 5) 139I abour the d^ng".,
threatening the king's realm. The
In addition to the problem of information available to and utilized by Turks were singled out, Manichees
rnd other heretics were mentioned,
the papacy is that of the way the popes presented the material. The and finally schismatics were stressed
for Bosnia'(30) Exactry where in
papacy 's manner of writing reflects more than just hostile bias ; the tone sigirmunJ\ rearm the Manichees were
tho,ght to have lived is not ,tut.dl Tf,"
and style with which papal letters frequently speak of Bosnian heretics ..f"r"n.e to Bosnia, however,
specifically links that land with schismatics.
bear many similarities to what Professor Hofstadter calls "the paranoid
Basel, a "Terbipolensis" bishop,
))ln 1435 at the Council of
style."(26) The papacy in 1200, fighting strenuously against the large- rugg.r*ithat the Council irt. r,"p,
ro convert the Kingdom of Bosnia
scale heretical movement in southern France, projected upon Bosnia's *hi.h *u, infected with Manichee
crrors' l'le stated that when he visited
peasant society this evil it was fighting elsewhere and as a result tended Bosnia he had b""; ;; i"rpjlur,
irnd reverently received by the
to describe Bosnia in terms of this projection. The popes, hearing of inhabitants ttrat it was all he could
do to
frevenr them from kissing his feet.(3l) Of these five,
heretics going to, or being in, Bosnia, became alarmed that Bosnia only ,fr"."f"*.,."
to Bilino polje clearly describes ,i" norni.n Church (i.e., the
would be another southern France; the shortage of information in Rome
crganization that wourd become
about Bosnia surely did nothing to lessen this worry. Thus we must take that church). The other four courd
be describing other movements. we,
this into account when we note the hysterical tone of papal letters about 'I-hus prior
heresy in Bosnia; and we probably are justified in concluding that there
to 71+4o we have onry these few references
conciliar soufces to dualism in Bosnia. in papal and
is great exaggeration in the early papal letters about the size, earliest references wourd have been
A.rd on" may well ask if the
significance and speed of diffusion of heresy among the populace in remembered by i;ft.enth century
popes. Besides these references
Bosnia. there are ,l* u.u".ui i;q;;;;;""
drrcuments from the thirteenth and
It also should be pointed out that even though it is likely that there also from the late fourteenth and
carly fifteenth century which speak
were at least two different movements in Bosnia of dualist Bosnian heretics. We shall
and a small dualist heretical current
- the Bosnian Church
the papal correspondence
examine the inquisition sources shortly,
but in any analysis .iit"
-
through ignorance, design or lack of interest generally makes no
- references to dualism in the papal
do.u-"ntr, we must consider the
-
distinctions and lumps all deviants together as "heretics. " Thus usually
possibility that the popes took thls idea
from the inquisition documents.
A second possible source for the papal
it is impossible for the reader to determine whether a pope is referring to belief .ouid b" ;h"; ,l;;;;",
*ere deceived by the meaning of the term . .patarin.,,
onc'or more heretical groups when he says "heretics" and even the In Italy this term
hrd. by the thirteenth century, come to
:-anrc p()pc may use this term with varying degrees of breadth on dif- designate dualists. The
f)elmatian sources, for some unknown
l('r(.nt (,( (asirrrrs. Thus the readcr should not take anything for granted reason, refer to the Bosnian
Church as Patarin, even though, as we,hrfi
,.gu" later, there is little
t2 Medieval Bosnian Church
Examination of Sources
53
evidence that the Bosnian Church was a dualist church.(32) Yet it is It sh<ruld
l)c srressecl, h.wever, that, though
possible that the Dalmatians began to use the term "Patarinl' to refer to ,cgin to find the term "Manichee"
from the l1+40,s we
the Bosnian Church because that church had certain practices similar to in somc retters, the f'rmer general
tcrm inology of , .heretics, " . .schismatics,,
those of and occasionally ., patarins,,
- and possibly even acquired from - dualist heretics.
llowever, regardless of the origins of this Dalmatian label for the
continuc'd to be usetl exactly as it
ha. been before ancl in fact is rn.rre
frcq'ently used. evc'n_in the final y..;;;i;n.nia,
Ilosnians, once it came to be used regularly there, it would have been 'l'he papal than the aualist rabel.
letters which .ef". to Manrlr,eeism
natural for Italians (including the popes), upon finding the Bosnians in Bosnia fa, into two
categ.ries: a) those letters which we
callcd Patarins, to have assumed that the Bosnians were dualists. Since sti, have which have appeared in
schrlarly corlecti.n-s of d.cumen*
Dalmatian sources used the term "Patarin" frequently about the h.lf' -I'hese'
"ai
thc last cenrury and a
"J.iu.ing
Ilosnians only in the fifteenth century, and since the Church sources use
lettcrs arc .f r-rnqr:estionrbr" ,urh"nticity
and we shall
discuss thcrn as wc c()me to them
thc term "Manichee" in 1391, 1431 and then repeatedly after the in thc'narrative chapters of this study.
b) those lctter's w,r.rr,havt'
11140's, it is not farfetched to see a connection between the terminology
n.t r,""r *-pul,rishccr hut which appearecr
a variety of eightccnrh ccrrury in
historic,-s
which c.rtensi""i, qlrlrr" prprf
in the two groups of sources. For exanrple, we have a Ragusan letter lettcrs' scveral rcttcrs, two of
written in l,t+33 to the Council of Basel which calls the Bosnian Church, which have bcen frequently used
schcllars' havc appearecr .nly by
"Patarin."(33) This letter could well have been the source for the in such *urr..., It seem-s worthwhile
nrakc a scarch ofpapal archives to
'ferbipolensis Bishop's use of the word "Manichee" at the Council. to r.. *h.th"r
-r..q""n,ry
these letters can be
found.
L.tters of
q.estionabre--authenticiry
This foreign bishop, presumably not knowing Slavic, could not have appear either in
discussed theology with the Bosnians when he had visited Bosnia. And
Ilaynaldi's Eccrcsiastic,l tistory
o, po.trti i. Ir.vricrm.gacrum.Both
finally, if, as we have reason to believe, there were dualists in Bosnia as
these writers wcre clerics r,
*.ll o, fr;r,o.iun, and,oth believcd theof
IJ.snian church to bc the same
wcll as a separate group of non-dualists called Patarins, it is not sur- as,'. g,,.niun heresy ancr both to be
dualist in nature. Ilaynaldi regularly in r,i,
prising that confusion between the two groups ancl confusion over spi'cifying
narrative used terms
clualisnr, th.ugh trre letters.n
terminology might arise in the minds of foreigners. which he basecr his narrarive
said "hercsy." One.cannor n*fp
In any case, in the 14l10's references to dualism in Bosnia began to )i*pll
hisrorians at rinres ditl ,ot change
*.rra..ing whether these two
appear with some regularity; and these references continued until the u *,,.a;;.... therc from .,heretic,,
to "Manichcc"'in the rexrs rhcy
fall of the Elosnian state, after which the stories of dualism entcred the *".".ff-g to crarify things for
chronicles and soon became the accepted view of what the Bosnian
readers' Aftcr a,, since thcy
*.r" .onui'n'."i nr tn. equivalencc oftheir
the
two terms' such a ch,nge for
Church had been during the whole medieval period. Thus, the reason the bencfit of clarification, could
seemcd a sin' Farlati, as we not have
that peoplc came to believe, rightly or wrongly, that it was dualistic is sha, see, was arso <rcceivcci by at least
forge ry, arrd thus wt. h one
chicfly because of the contents of sources written in the finai two decade s ;;;;.j;;, ; ;:: : i::; : J' lr ; ;ilffi l,,.l,T l' ,l
ol Bosnia's indcpcndent cxistcnce .'I'he basic qucstion we must pose is:
il il: ;l;1i d: ::: J ::
What happened in the 1440's? Was there some change in the situation
l' A letrcr fronr l]cnetrct ovctarius, sccr(,tary
in llosniaT Did the dualist movement there, mentioned occasionally in t, thc King of Cvprus,
papal and inquisition sources and presumably up to then not significant
[]ishop of Padua tlatccl I oct.obcr
llq j.'r,',i"r.rifl"r; .f,. arri'al ar thc papal to the
trf thc Bishrp of Fcrrara with court
a legate l'run;';;; ii"r"tr" king. who
in size, suddenly grow and attract a large following? Or take over the .l the king. an.r rrrc'wh.le'u;t;ir;';,"gd.m in pubric and
,rn.rhc-n'rrrt:
r('r( h rng\ :rnd :rt.ccptcd
r(n.vs...d Manichee
organization of one wing of the Bosnian Church2 Or did some people at the Romirn_ faith.(3,i) Regardless of whethcr
rlrt rrrr)t,nl is aUrht,ntit ()r n()t
the papal court or connected with it, for motives of their own, decide to 'I . rh., ..Birh,,t, ,,t Fi.rr.rra.. is surely an crror the
Ilishop .f f Ivar (Firrcnsi.r ;" ir,.ri for
make a big issue or"rt of dualism, or make a small sect appear to be a large '.r.aslcatl mt'ro srspc(r.rhi\ (r()eunlt,n,,-ri",r
rcd\ors .5"^prprr rcgate to lJosnia. scveral
nlovement, or make it seem that a schismatic church was linked with lri,ch, p,rbric ctrnver.sion br:en
'rnn()rn(('d it seerns Lrnlikery_.that Ni.lr,,tu, v',roul,r ho.u.,
hcresyi'l'his problem will be discussed fully in Chapter VI. However, \'('ar\ liirrr.f ca'ing I'vrtk. iI's ,u.."rror,-,(,"fr;r"i.;-,,;x, madc the error five
hcre in the cliscussion of the sources I want to call attention to thc' fact I'r ;l(\(l)t (..rth,rirt.isnr.( i5) Orh(,r ih.:;;r,'il.;i""i ti,rg
( lt'r1'r1'r \'' rr:rkt'r ir ""i.k.n.a
,ir,,.',., lrc rJrscussed in tlt.tril jn
rhat at this time a shift in the message of some of the documents oc- ap1',1r,'n1 rh,rt Ir rv;rs arrt.adv .r cathorit.pri.r 1e
I i tl. Fur ('xxn)ll(,in I illi.rhr 'rrtkt,
curred. rn l'ill rht'prp. rercascd 'lt.ti,, 1n,1u,,,1,pr,,r.,,1-l.,ir'n,.rri,,g,,ro a Carhrrlit 4rrl and
r,n"i crr,,r.r, irr,, r,,. rcasons of heaith.(36)
54 Medieval Bosnian Church Examination of Sources
t5
2.Farlati, having told us that Ste{an Toma! had been a Manichee or Patarin These treatises all discuss primarily the cathar heretics
(showing that he considered the two words synonyms), cites a long letter which
in northern
Italy and presumably are,to a considerable extent,based upon
he claims was written by Pope Eugene IV, 3 November L44i, which states that testimony
before the inquisition by Italian cathars. In the care of Rayner,s
the Bosnian king complained that he could not take any action against the
Manichees in his kingdom since they were too power{ul, and in fact that he had
"Summa" we have the work of a former cathar who
convc"rted to
ro honor the leaders (primariis) of that sect owing to the strength of the sect; to catholicism and then became an inquisitor. All three documents
are of
do otherwise would endanger his kingdom. The letter then lists a variety of unquestionable authenticity. Thus, we have little reason
to doubt the
beliefs, which are clearly dualistic, supposedly held by the Bosnian heretics: information they provide about Italian catharism
they think that the Incarnation, Passion and Resurrection of Christ were ap- its doctrines and
- the
organization' The three documents are consistent in
story they teil
parerit, that the devil is equal to God, that they believe in two principles, that
and they link the northern Italian Cathars with various
they damn the Old Testament while mutiliating and corrupting the New, and Sravic dualists.
that they condemned marriage and certain foods.(37) Since this letter is the Nothing is said in them about the role of duarism in Slavic
lands. Either
only one which we have, in which a pope gives any details about heretical the inquisition did not know much about that subject
or had little in-
beliefs in Bosnia, this letter automatically separates itself from the rest of the terest in it' The documents make clear that besides Bulgaria and
papal correspondence. Then when we find it missing from all the standard I)ragovica, a dualist "church' ' existed in "scravonia.,,
collections of papal letters and collections ofpapal sources for the Slavic lands we In ciapter III
we shall argue that this church in the thirteenth
must wonder about it, for surely editors of such collections would have wanted century was centered in
to include this letter if a text existed. In addition, other papal letters of this Dalmatia, but also had some following in Bosnia. Unfortunately,
the
period do not utilize any of this significant information, nor even, except for one inquisition documents do not define the geographical boundaries
1447 letter of Nicholas V(38) which refers to King Stefan Tomat giving up of
Slavonia, or the size of this church. ou. only .uur.
Manichee errors, use the term "Manichee." In fact, the term "Manichee" to doubt the in-
formation these documents provide about Sravic dualism is
appears in no other letter by Eugene. Further examination shows that this letter owing to the
appears in the same general account in which Farlati presorts a description of the
likelihood that the inquisition would be ignorant about
condition! in the
bogus Council of Koniic. (I do not discuss this council's "edicts" here since slavic lands (we have no evidence that the inquisition prior
to 146r ever
Raiki has earlier clearly shown the document to be a forgery.(39) That this interviewed a slav), or owing to the fact that some of this
information
letter o{ Eugene's should be dated within a year of the fraudulent council and may well have been procured by torture, a device rikery
appear in Farlati together with the description of the council is sufficient reason to produce what
the inquisitor wanted to hear rather than what the victim knew
to be very sceptical of the authenticity of the letter, and to suggest that Farlati to be
may well have found the letter in the same place he found the other forgery. The true. The tracts discuss the beliefs of Italian churches bur say
nothing
fact that the letter seems to be non-extant now can only increase these specific about the doctrine of Sravic churches. However,
since these
suspicions. Might not such a letter have been forged in order to provide more Italian churches were derived from slavicones, we can
expect that they
verisimilitude for the Koniic councii forgery? A thorough study of Farlati and would have had various beliefs in common. However, a
the documents he used is called for, and such a study would have to include a variety of Italian
beliefs most probably did come from the Western (French,
search for the documents he supposely had, which we no longer possess.(4O) Lombard)
Cathar milieu.
These two documents, whose authenticity I doubt, will not be
utilized in the narrative chapters of this study. .Ilayner's "Summa," written by an ex-cathar with direct knowredge
,f the movement, is of course a source of greater reliability
than one
hasrd upon inquisitional testimony. For material about
tire Italians
therefore Rayner's work is unsurpassable. unfortunately
Inquisition Documents he gives us
little data on the Slavic churches; but what he does give is
irobabry
dccurate. He lists sixteen cathar churches and reports that
From the thirteenth century we have the following three texts, all of together the
iivc churches of Slavonia, philadelphia, Greece, Bullaria
them drawn up by inquisitors, which refer to heretical beliefs in con- and
"Dugmuthie" (Dragovica) total 500 finistred
nectioo with Sclavania, Sclavonia or Bosnia: christians (i.eI, initiated
.rdained clerics). He then states that all the cathar
churches were
1. "De Heresi Catharorum in Lombardia" (ca. l2l0).(41) dcrived from either the Burgarian or Dragovican
church. Bosnia is never
2. "Summa de Catharis et Leonistis" of Rayner Sacconi (ca.l25O).(42) mentioned though presumably it is included in
the church of Sravonia.
3. "f'ractatus de hereticis" probably of Anselm of Alexandria (ca. Ravner ncver tells us where the church of Slavonia
t270).(43) was centered, nor
tJtx'r he give us any notion as to how many
of the )00 perfectiu.rongea
t6 Medieval Bosnian Church Examination of Sources
57

tcl this Church. hcrerics in Bosnia itserf, leacrs me

to concrude that these documents
A hundred years or so latcr we lrave threc detailed docurncnts of an r'cre very rikery connected with
one another. This would th"r-rugg"rt
incluisitorial nature. The first is the testimony of Jacob Bech of Chieri that the trials stirrecr up interest in
bcfore the inqrrisition at Turin in 1387.(4!7 Second, we havc a list of Iir,ncisc'ans
th. h"r"ti.. of Bosnia, leading
in ltaly, whose.ordcr *r, ,"rp,,n.ible for religious
errors of the Bosnian Patarins (Isti sunt herrores, quos communiter in ['rsnia, to turn more seriousry to matters
the probrern of dualists in Bosnia.
patareni de l]osna credunt et tenent).(41) This list exists in two copies, And thus we could suggest that the
two tracts were compiled f.r the
rvith the title of the second referring to Bosnian "heretics" instead of I)rrrpose of educating I'-ranciscan.s about t. be sent
off to Bosnia. since
lJosnian Patarins.(4(r) Third, we have a dialogue between a Bo.snian rhe tracts seem to have been rvritten
in rtaly, ancJ their appearance in
Patarin ancl a Roman Catholic (Hic sunt omnia puncta principalia et Vcnice and their simirarity to other western
anti-cathar tracts bears out
auctoritatcs extracte de disputatione inter Christianum Romanum et this supp'sition, we nray sulrgest that
a Ieading sourc(, for their content.s
Patarcnum Ilosnensem).(1r7) Both these tracts are found in the library of rvas the cl.c'incs ancl practiccs
of the ',Ilosnian piedmont,
heretics,, in
St. Mark in Vcnice. na['kl, who published them, dated thern both from ;rlrrut.wh.rn investigations were being
thc latc fourtccnth ccntury. Thc second nranuscript clf "Isti sunt i sincc Jac.'and his friends wcrc ltarian.s,
conducted at this time.. An<J,
wc rnay wonder how many of
herrores. . ." is found in the Academy Library inT,agreb. Molin, on
:.'
thc views they hcld wcre identicar with
vie ws of duarists in Bosnia. since
the basis oi the paper and watermarks, concludes that the Academy r{i tht'rc werc many duarists in Itary, nrany
ii of Jacob's errors could easily
manuscript is from the 1370's.(48) The Academy list is found in a hlvc c.nrc lrom Western Catha*our."r. In
#, ad<iition ltui* unJ .ony
collection of manuscripts connected with the Franciscans. And Ratki, in jri tr lrolars who have writtcn after
him have notecr the simirarity of the two
i:
thc introduction to his edition of the documents found in Venicc, ii'' rracts in both content and form to western
anti cathar i.".l,r...rr-,i,
plausibly suggests that they were drawn up in Italy for the use of :i
f:
\rrrg('sts that one or more of these
tracts about ltalian or French dualists
Franciscans being sent to work in the Bosnian vicariat. His view is ii. t rr1lli fxv,' becn r.rst'd in
the creation .f our tracts. And if a major
supported by the fact that a marginal comment on one of them from t l{)r the tracts ab.ur "Bosnian heretics" *u.a"
was the beliefs of Italian
l1t 2 I rcft,rs tt, a Btrsniun vic.ar.
ii"
hj lrcrcrics. then wc cannot be sure that
'l'he tcstinrony of any bericf or practice attributed to
Jacob llech and the two tracts clearly state that the tltc hcrcrics was arso hclcr by any Bosnia'.
J'hus thclse two,.u..,, .ri tr"
"lJosnian Patarins" were dualists. These Patarins believed in two i, rttuch more accurate in cresc'ribing
the heresy of the ltalians known as
plinciples and docetism; they condemned the Old Testament, church ;r, "lJ.snian hererics"
in piedmoni-thon thut of crualists g.rrir.ii0r
buildings, baptism with water and various other "Christian" practices l'.nr this, it seems that we can'se these facts for rittrei,
more than to
normally relected by dualists. tlcnr'nstrarc that there stiil existecr
a crualist current in Bosnia with
When we note that Rat'ki dates these tracts late in the fourteenth *hirh ltalians had connection.s. whether it
was a significant or large
ccntury, it immediately strikes us that thcse two documents were issued rrr)\'(''rc.t. and wh.ther it had any connection
with the Bosnian church
at roughly the same time( I 387) that Jacob Bech and his cohorts were on i\ nr)t srarc(l in .Iarob's rcstimony.(l I
)
trial.(119) Jacob's sect was clearly dualist: and the inquisition, among ln lact,.the only reason to connect
the .,Bosnian heretics,, of our
other things, callecl Italian mcmbers of it from Chieri "Bosnian rracrr *'ith thc Bosnian church
hcrctics." Jacob described how he had learned his heresy from two
is the fact that the two Italian
ttt'tnttrcriltts call them "Bosnian
Patarins, " and ,,patarin', is
Italians arr<l a Slav, and how sevcral hcrctics, whom he names, had gone r**d by l)almatians and Hunqarians a term
lo lJosnra l()";tu(ly doctrinc. Ilc thrn procecdccl to give a list of his to de',..rib. -"rnb.., of the Bosnian
t hurch llowc'vcr, since the tracts crcscribel
'.tt(,r.,1rn(,,.t (,f v,,hir h w,r.rr: akin trt thc theology in the two tracts.
,ualists
Itrlians genera'y calrecr their auurirt, iipu'4"r,.,it and sincc the
Jacob
),./,;J.;;!',ti)at,,4(-rat\,'.l,,rtrt4itttt:i\lte'r r,f them. and thev include prtints rt'rtural krr the auth.rs r:f the wourcr be quite
:.' tracts to say :irJornion rratarins,, when
),.",'. '..a :.'.' i:,2{.t: ,krcrrhrnq []osnian dualistr. -l-hus
'',:"'. ",.:.'- -,,a-'.? ',:. I clo n<,t think ur*, r. l,:-r conclude irclm
'',tt-l t,;:'.?,-11. --f: :..2-t ,,:,, ?.,i:.::.r.:.-. e._ _ .i.( & rhr rerm " Pararin ' that [Jrrsnian
lZ"-'--: '.:.': -----.:'- --) ,:-'.::3i-- -,: -:.= Ca--:.:,-:l C:,U:C:: A-- --:.r --^- -- Church btiic-is ;,r:rj practrctr wt;rr:
.--..( -i- -:-
...: ix:rnt dc:trrhri.l in rhest dr,,curn,,r,r.
:..ta)', ::l P t!-i.i:i :.',. ili:Li:s,:, ;'' Bi.S:ia:i l:er<ll:S.'' ;:tC ln fart ih<, Ijr,sniirn Chrrrr i, rhar
r!r'rt'rlrs lrrlln (rrlr stuclr,of all sourccs
thrs was nor a rime oi panicular Fapai \or other \\'esrern r ln{ef6i ln ahotrt it is vi.rv <lilicrt.rtr frorn the
rtt ht'i.r1 tlcscribeil in the tracts.'r'rrus I <..ncrucr. ti r rh' Irosnians
 Medieval Bosnian Church Examination of Sources ,9
t8
Franciscan Sources
withwhomtheseltalian..Bosnianheretics',hadcontactwereBosnian (including all visitations)
from the Bosnian
dualists who belonged to a movement separate
-hurch.(52) And since much of the content of our tracts seems to have
As stated earlier, despite the fact that several of the Franciscan
comefromaWesternmilieu-theTurintrialandanti.Catharpam- monasteries in Bosnia existed before the Turkish conquest, no
the files of Italian Catholics we mav well wonder whether
;;;;;* - documents have been preserved in any of them from the period prior to
ourtractsareevenreliableSourcestodescribethebeliefsandpracticesof 1463. However, various documents (letters and reports) about Fran-
u.ry duulists in Bosnia, Thus I shall use them
in this study for little more
ciscans in the lJosnian uicariat have been preserved elsewhere. All of
the existence of some dualists somewhere in
Bosnia
inrn a"-on.trating these documents have to be used with great care since they concern the
in the late 14th century' Bosnian uicaiat and not the Bosnian banate-kingdom. The vicariat,
ln 1461 three Bosnian noblemen were sent to Rome where they founded in the middle of the fourteenth century, included not only
,"norrn.",l fifty "Manichee" errors before Cardinal Johannes
been in- Ilosnia and Hercegovina but also Slavonia, Serbia, Bulgaria, and parts of
prior to their arrival the three had
i-qu"*uau.(l3) Since Croatia, Hungary, Moldavia, Bohemia, and Transylvania. In other
terviewed by presumablybilingual Franciscans
in Bosnia as well as by
can conclude that these words, the Bosnian vicariat was a label for the whole area of South
it" p."ru,r,ubiy bilingual Bishop of Nin'
-beliefs
sort'
-we
However' since they spoke no Ilastern Europe in which the Catholics were striving ro convert
Bosnians held dualist of some
certainly knew no sthismatics and heretics.
Lutin o. Italian and since Torquemada -Slavic' Thus, the fascinating story, contained in two letters about Vicar
the two sides must have taken place through
communications between
and since they Jacob de Marchia's work, about pagan-like rites during which heretics
an interpreter. Since the three were not theologians poured "the blood of our Lord" over themselves from leather sacks
their wits by the inquisition procedure in a
;;;,;;;f *"re scared out of
willingly renounced cannot be ascribed to Bosnia proper for we do not know where in the
foreign land, we can suspect that they would have vicariat it occurred. In fact, if this story is related to the same area in
The
put before them, simply to return home more promptly'
^"yif,rtg two late fourteenth century which a subsequent event referred to in the first letter took place, it may
ffi points are similar in content to thewhen he learned dualists were concern Bohemia.(54) The second letter, written from the Ban
tracts; thus we suspect that Torquemada
' Monastery in Srem, also provides no reason to connect the story with
(possibly using the two
coming to abiure errors' turned to the archives Ilosnia.(5)) And that it was not about Bosnia is most probable, since
to their. arrival
,ru.,, ;*ong others) and drew up the fifty points prior
Jaccib de Marchia, about whose activities we have many documents,
onJ ,l*pty ir.r"nt"d this document to them
to be renounced' Thus the
t dcvoted the bulk of his time in the vicariat to fighting the Hussite
"Fifty ioin,r" also is not a document we can use with certainty to ii
d.*o.,rirrte the existence in Bosnia of any particular beliefs'
It can ia
11,
hcresy, which never appeared in Bosnia proper. Our sources also show
the three men had passed through the that he spent considerable time in Srem and Bohemia. The frequently
;i;pl, be used to show,
,.;'
since
cited letter of Pope Gregory XI to the Franciscans in I37 3 also has to be
;r";; of bilingual theologians, after which they had beenhadforced held
to ;1,
rl
used with care since it also concerns the vicariat. Thus, the interesting
that most probably they really at E
renounce dualist doctrines,
their specific information about "rustic" priests and some sort of adoration of
least certain dualist beliels' We can learn nothing about $?i

it hrretical leaders could concern any part of the vicariat.()6) And finally
belieis or Practices.
We do not know whether the three nobles were members
ol the i5.
we probably should not make use of the interesting letter of Pope Eugene
tir
comparison of the 50 points with what is known lV from 144(r which mentions many people of both sexes in many places
Bosnian Church; but a tl
shows that the 50 rn the territory of the vicariat who do not belong to any certified order
{rom Bosnian documents about the Bosnian Church .a,.

1,,,intr have little or nothing

in common q'ith Bosnian Church belieis' +' hut serve God with clean lives
- some of them in the houses of
\;crr a a(){,c'atty,r'. v''hrch iemonstrates the irrelevance o{ the
k.
4i noblemen and some in other places the bishop assigns.(57) This letter
Church' s rnade in Appardlx A ffi !rk)$ probably does not refer to Bosnia proper since the last place
'.:-.-,-tt'-'{,,., i{.{'iir.{t:.iior ''he Bt;sai'an
': ' : {,'a: . ' x $$tioned in the letter. prior to this description. was the confines of the
& Lrngdom oi Hungarv. Transvlvania and Ruthenia.
&
lhe nr,rst noted iigure in the histors oi the Bosnian vicariat prior to
stft
ffi
ffi
f;Hel
60 Mcdieval Bosnian Church :
t . Examination of Sources (rl
!
thc arrival of thc'Turks was Fra Jacob de Marchia (spccial visitor to the g NI an ichccs.
vicariat 1432 13 and vicar 1435 39). In the documcnt.s about his t ['ra'ciscan d.cunr.nts fronr the pcriod after
,
* the f'urkish conquest
nrission in the vicariat we hear of many different sorts of heretics: havc sor'c'relevanct'to the mecrieval rerigious
I situation. The two major
Bosnian heretics, Bohemian heretics, Hussites, schismatics, and cven
i .rllcctirns.f thesc cr.cuments were c.nrpiled by D. Mandic
pagans. Machichees, however, are never mentioned.()8) It is also ona f, 1
i l\larasovic{'(63) r'hcse d.cr-rments u, *.il
as the reports of episcopar
interesting that even in his "l-ife," written later in the fifteenth century
N

I visitations rf catholic rcgions of Bosnia

! and r{ercegovina which began
by Fra Venanz-io da Fabriano, who claims to have heard much of the g to take place in the crosing decade of the sixteenti
century anci-then
nraterial in itfrom Jacob himself, Manichees are never spokcn of.(59) It $ r'.ntinuc r'ore anci m.re frequcntly over the following
seems very strange, if dualism were a malor current in Bosnia, that
,t ..nru.i.,, suppty
fir
dara on rh. nunrbcrs and distribuiions
# of Catholics;, ;;ll ,., ,r,"
Jacob, an able theologian, did not notice it and make some sort of clear .f since the ""
\ bcations various Cathcilic churchcs and monasteries.
rcference to it in one of the documents about his mission in the 1430's. f4
had cdicts against the erection of new
Turks
churches (and since this rule wa.s
Fabriano's "Life of Jacob" gives us few details about Bosnia. It never r strictly applied tcr cathorics, though nr.re
ii laxly enforced toward or_
distinguishes between the different regions of the vicariat. It gives in- i th.rlox), rcfcrences to cathoric chuiches existing
t in any documcnt up ro
flatcd figures ()n c()nversions which vary from manuscript to manr.rscript thc end of the sixtecnth century strongly
suggests that a catholic church
(50.000 to 100,000 in one case). Twice heretics called "Patarins" are had stoocl in that location prior to 'trrAl
.''"
rc,ferrecl to; although it is not specified where they lived, we can 'l hc
lira'ciscan tlocurncnts tell us a grear dcal abo.t catholic-Turkish
presume it was Bosnia proper since heretics by that name were not 'rnd cathrlic-orth.<i.x rclations in iiir pcriocr. f-he ratter
known elsewhere in the vicariat. This is noteworthy for Jacob's own f rrcularly interesting since prior to the TLrrkish
u.. p".
lerters never called the Bosnian heretics "Patarins."
5,
E'
li.snia wr havc no evidence whatsoever .r
conqr-rcst, in most of
orthotrox churches .r
In addition to the material about Jacob, the bulk of which can be rlergy; thcre w.rc j.st lratarins (or Ilosnian church)
$ and cath.rics. But
found in Fermendiin and Fejer,((r0) a limiteci number of other Fran- tlrt'lr in th. last rlecaircs.f thc fifteenth and
$
thrclr,rghout thc sixteenth
ci.scan documents are important for the history of religion in Bosnia. (r'ntury wc fincl n.nrcro's referenccs
p- to the activities of orthodox
The "De Conformitate vitae Beati Francisci" of Fra Bartholomaeus of rlrrics a'd thcir relati'ns with cathoric berievers.
ii Since, as wc have
Pisa has a list of the monasteries of the Bosnian vicariat as of 1385 fri rtart'rl lrcf,re. after r1t(t5 references to heretics
and patarins cease, the
which shows that there werc already four monasteries (Sutjeska, # rrplaccnrcnt in the sources of patarins by
orthodox has been u molo.
Visoko, I-a\va, and Olovo) in Bosnia proper and several others in the rrg.tl('nr in favor.f the theory that rhe Irosnian church
hacr reaily been
adiacent regions.(61) A second valuable Franciscan source is the ()rth.d.x all along ancl that with
the fall of the kingdom, tf,"'^u_"
"Nccrologium Bosnae Argentinae" a manuscript kept in the "liosnian Church"
-. or patarin - died out ancl was ieplacecl with the
Monastery of Sutjeska and published by Jelenid.((;2) It contains one gerrt'ral term for its confession and ritual , Orthodoxy
important notation about the killing of five Franciscans of the rnonastery lhc visitati.ns,((r1r) though unfortunately later in
,in'., u." a much
of St. Mary at Visoko in 11t65 by Patarin heretics. Except for material tttt'rt'uscfulsorrrce than the docunrcnts for thc
history un,ro,rpoioLy
from llercegovina, particularly that concerning Gost Radin's will and .l (lrcar.a. First, thcy rcnd r'bc more crctaile<i rn.i giu"unarigu..r,'-iigu"...' il
relatives, this is the last documc,nt from Bosnia proper to speak about ,n tht'nurrbcrs of bclicvcrs in a town <lr'illage, figures t:l

on th,l nu*b".
activity by Patarins. After 71t65 ,; i riscan monastery has a single 'rl rrr.nks at rnonasteries and. what is pu.tic,,ln.ly interesting, ,i.,,gn
document (excluding chronicle nrlL.'' ial referring back to e arlier rrnfrrrtunately not for our stu<iy, .irta',rn
ther size of zadrifas;n ir,e
periods) that refers to Patarins rir ht rc'tics in Bosnia. The sudclen cighlccrrth ccntury. In adclition, the visitations
often .uppl_v clata on
disappearanceof the Patarins:rn': l t'rrtics from the sorlrces is one of the Ixrrrular rrcntality,custo's, ancl practices which arc useful'rbi a student
great mysteries surroundinll tlrt' wlrols hc1611cal movenrent. In the years tn'cslig.rting any aspect.f religi.n in thc
area. For example, a i(>12
that follorved. the Franciscans' trr,rilrlcs with other Christians were to be give.s a detailecr crcscription of the abysnral
'isitatirn ignorance, the
exclusively with the Orthorl,. ii is also interesting to point out that supt'rstiti.ns, and the gravesiclc practicc,s cif
the orthodox in srem. who
cven in l.'t(r), in spite ()t ' i,,r'terminol()gy being used in Italy, thc w('rc n()t cven aware that a schism existed
betwcen Orthodox and
Ilosnian Franciscans rt'f , rrr, Elosnian heretics as Patarins and not as catlrtrlic churches. A 1623 24 visitation for
Bosnia una H..."goJnu
62 Medieval Bosnian Church
stresses the incompetence of pfiests and the conversion of Catholics to
Islam. One of the most interesting of these visitations is the detailed
papal inquiry and correspondence connected with it in 1629 and the
following years concerning the Bishopric of St. Stephan, a bishopric
established on his own by a Catholic priest who had become disgusted by
the conditions within the church and by the fact that the responsible
bishop, the Bishop of Trebinje, resided in Dubrovnik and took no care of
his flock. These documents clearly show the connection between lack of
clergy (or the presence of a few indifferent and ignorant clerics) and
apostatizing from the faith. They also show large numbers of con-
versions from Catholicism to Orthodoxy and to Islam at the end of the
sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth centurv'
In fact, thevisitations are a fine source to Show that conversions took
place in every possible direction, and that any study of Islamization that
does not take all these other shifts of religious allegiance into con-
sideration must be regarded as an oversimplified one. These documents
and also one 1640 visitation refer to Moslems who are secretly
Catholics. A visitation in 1(155 speaks of the absence of parochial
churches in Bosnia, and the great distances people must walk to attend
mass. It also speaks of masses being served in cemeteries and private
houses, and states that, iust as in medieval times, there were no
Catholic clergy in Bosnia other than Franciscans'
And finally, in the eighteenth century we have in one visitation a final
reference to Patarins. In 1703 we hear of Greek Patarins in the region of
Trebinie, who are clearly simply orthodox believers, since their errors
as described are no more than those orthodox practices obiected to by
Catholics. ((r5 )
It is also worth noting that the history of the area often was a matter of
interest to the visitor, and he sometimes made references to it, usually
<lrawn from fairly standard Catholic sources. One of these historical
descriptions, since it quoted at considerable length the now lost
chronicle of Pietro Livio of Verona, will be discussed when we come to
speak of chronicles.
' Chronicles
Ncl narrative soLlrce from Bosnia has survived, thus all such sources
rhat we have are foreign (ltalian or Dalmatian) narratives. In addition,
with the exception of the works of Pius II and Thomas Archdeacon of
Split, our chronicles are not contemporary. Basically these later
chronicles when they discuss Bosnia draw on one or more of three
Examination of Sources 63
sources: a) Pope Pius II's works, particularly his f:u.ropa, published in
Ltt94 and again in l50l , a cnnsiderable time after his death in l46tt. He
bclievcd the Bosnian heresy was Manicheean. The basis for his view will
be discussed shortly. b) Pietro Livio of Verona's now lost chronicle of
lJosnia. I{is chronicle, we shall argue, was written about the third
dccade of the sixteenth century and was still extant and utilized up to the
first half of the seventeenth century. He does not seem to have utilized
Pius, and thus provides an independent source. He did not view the
hcresy as dualistic and tried to link it with the original non-dualist
Italian Patarini. c) The Dubrovnik archives. As far as we can tell, these
wcre not utilized prior to the second half of the sixteenth century. In the
scventeenth century they were still used only limitedly. More extensive
work trased on them appeared only in eighteenth century works, many
of which used the older chronicle form. If these early historians copied
accurately, wecan be grateful to them, since some of this material is no
longer to be found in the archives. Chronicles whose information is
clrawn chiefly from these archives are discussed, as their data becomes
rclevant, in the narrative chapters.
Pius II
Pius' l:uropa has a brief discussion on Bosnia.((;(r) Ilere I plan sirnply
to list thc'items about Bosnia in f:uropa so that when they reappear in
othcr chronicles we shall know where they came from. a) He reports
that the King of Bosnia, Stefan Tomal (I4t+3 61) was baptized bv
!
il
Gioanni Cardinal di S. Angelo.'I'he Cardinal had been a legate in the
fr, llungarian "Slavonian" region in the late l4J0's and we know he
tr; visitcd thc Bosnian court in 1457. (Thc Cardinal was thus another
wurce of information for the papal court on the situation in Bosnia,
though none of his letters about Bosnia have been preserved.) This
tiljl
t:
:.
\):
it:
rcfercnce in Pius was a source of cor.rfusion for later writers, sincc it
f,l
;l;,,
(ame to conflict with the letter of Eugenc lY of 744(t which stated that
'r:fi
Stefan I'omaX hacl rccently been convcrted to Catholicism by Thonras of
i;
til llvar in the 1440's, and with Nicholas V's letter of 1447 saying that
';. Stefan J-oma! had adopted Catholicism. However, the cause for the
ton{usiorr was that only part of Pius' account was takcn. ln liuropaPius
stat('d that the king, although he had adhcrecl to Christianity, had
.rbstainecl from baptism until he accepted it from the Cardinal. Thus, it
is clear that the two sources do not contradict each other and it was
simply a case of the king being baptized some time subsequent to his
.r(c('Jrtan( r' of Christianity.
b) "ln llosnia were many heretics called Manichees, who bclieved in
64 Medieval Bosnian Church
Hxamination of Sources
65
two principles, theone evil the other good, they rejected the primacy of ti'rt urrrnrs aborrt ,osnia
Rome and denied that Christ was equal to and of the same substance as that rvc,re written in the pcriocr immecriatery
'rltt'r its fal l' is that ne'ither hc'n.r an)'()n(,
the Father. r,lse sc.ms
to have qrrestioncd
trr drawn any information fronr
c) He then says that the heretics lived in monasteries in distant Bosnians *in n.a to Rome and othcr
l)iu'ts r)f ltrl_v. Otht,r rhan possibl,y a runtour
mountain valleys, in which women, who served the holy men, also or two (e.g., thc onc about
tlrt.bt'travrrlof llrlrovirr.bl Ilarlak),((,ly,rnir'ringle
lived. This story is repeated in several later works. starement in letters,
t:hr.nicles and histrrri.s u'r'ittc'
Pius also left some state papers and diaries which unfortunately were irt thc Vatican
or clsewhcre in Italy
({)'rrrn\ infornrati.. thal wc
later worked over by a papal secretary named Campanus (d. 12t77) who might havc ,.nron to think shourd
rr,rr t,tl lrack to a IJosnian be
was Bishop of Teramo. Later these papers were printed under the title of cmigrd.'
(,onrmentarll, under the authorship of Gobellinus. These were first
published in 1184.(67 ) Gobellinus was simply a copyist.((rf3)
Since all the stories in Cornmcnturii will be discussed in detail in Orbini ancl pietro Livio of Vcrona
Chapter VI, weshall not discuss them here. All that need be mentionecl ()ne.f .Lrr'asic chr.niclc
is tirat in l4(rl three Bosnian noblemen had been sent ro Rome where so.rces.ught to'c thc n.w l.st chronicle
thcy renounced fifty "Manichee" errors. Whether they were really "l lJ.snia rl I)ietr. I.i vio.{ V.rona. tilr-,turing ancr rriscussi.n .r its
r().(ent\ nrrrst (o'r('cntirery f*rnr
dualists or not, does not concem us here; but what is important is that i *ri(crs r'r'hr c.r'ricrr {ro*r it. rt
thc r)assagcs fr.nr it ur".i'rr'iu,,,,.
is fort.rratc that orbini (irr;l;"lrot",r
Pius clearly believed that the three men were dualists; and the fact that i:1
{'\rel)siverv rronr it'(7()) peter
i, Masarechi:s rcp<,rt arrrrut rris apostoric
the three renounced the fifty articles, seemingly with no protest, surely ii' vtsitationtoIlosrriaancl l{erceg<lvinain
confirmed the pope in this opinion. Pius II in Commentarii and his ;it:: lf.rZ3:/+alsomadeuse9f it.(71)
ll'rsirrt'<hi's account c.ncrcnses
Iiurofa speaks without hesitation of the Bosnians as Manichecs. Sincc
l.!
a' rn.ch.f t-he mrterirl and omits many
!: .l.,t,rils rvhit.h ()rlrini gives:
Pius'letters prior to l4(rl do not use the term "Manichce" and his tw<r
:li u,ith .,n., ,,*.",
r. r i ri. i,, l;;,J::l'Bl;l:l],,:.:Jlff i;li;
books as well as his 1461 letter about the three nobles do, it seems I ','t
,rlr. trsccl
",*iLivio'ut
Pietro ^il,;;:i
n;"
",;,
probable that the abjuration had a large role in leading him to this
ii hc ,1r,,* nro,ru fewcr item.s from him,
r:rr,.tt l\' (i)nll)rt,ssetl rh;tt nl ill(.rill and so
t hirt it tirn,,, scr.ms somr.what
opinion or at least incausing him to examine Bosnian affairs with more i' 4,r b lt,d. ( 72 ) "t
interest or through different eyes. Of course it is possible that this {i.
Near thc beginning
opinion of Pius may also have been derivecl frorn clther source.s
iq of Orbini,.s narrarive on hcresy in lJosni:r,
dl
I \r.rrcs, 'as l)ietro l_ivio Vt:ront,se hc
unknown to us, or that his humanistic interests may have influcnced his wrrite,.ancl ncar the cnci of hi.s
rr'rrrlrive.n thc su[r jec't hc c ites
outlook on the heretics by making him seek in them a classical heresy. $ V.raterran. arrcr sabclliccl. i-r,"'q".,r,i"n
llr,rt conc.crns us first rnust
IJLrt whatevcr the reason, it is clear that Pius by 1461 hacl come to thc
i; br,, how ntuch of Orbini,.s material
i lrrnr l)jg111; ['ivio. An t'xzr mination.f carnt:
conclusion that the Bosnian heretics were Manichces and dcscribed i"l thc rerevant parts of orbini,.s text
\r(r.t('sts a s.luti.n. ()r'ini.s
ar.kn'wlcrlgrncnt of his tlc,t ," p"*..
them as such in his lutropu, where he itemized some of their supposed ii':.
I', {rn\ with
lritrirgrilph twp lrt.Irw.
i.i"l.
errors and beg,an by noting a belief in two principles, one good and the I lrr 11,11 '
other evil. Pius'description of the dualist heretics in Bosnia was then
repeated in the chronicles and history writing of the centuries that
I "Ar that tinre thcre were in B.snia many
heretic.s an<i especiary
lh,'I)rtarins. I.{cncc thc R.man
followed and laid the foundations for the still prevalent view that the frop", *f,.r"*as Clcment yl.
llosnian Church was a dualist organization. [''c 1.3.39J,rdcrcd r. thc realm ,,f'lr;r;;;'r,rnr" l.on.;scans, in lJtl)
men.f
f-he material about Bosnia in two other early and widely read histories '.,intcd Iifc, among wh.nr were Brother lr.,lkgrin., f,sic peregrin<f
11r.1ft11 Gi.anni of r\rag.n to extirpate anci
came entirely from Pius. These two works are Raphaelo Volaterrano's frnm ih"i. nridst the disease of
vI rruch heresy' T'hose by wh.m
(.ommentariorum urbanorum (Paris, 1t10) and Marc Antonio
grrrrltl
it *.r iirrr'i",."<iucecr into the rearm,
rt l)1r1 bt, inaplrrt,priatc to spr,ak
Sabellico's Rhalt,sodioe bistoriarum ab orbe condito Enneades (2 ,,ir,,,._.
;. l ne heresy then of the patarins
volumes, Vcnice, 1494 1504). sr
ur.tt'I)ictro l-ivioof Verona) of Bosnia had its origin (as
Onc strange fact about Pius'writings, as well as other papal . in thc 'paterno Ronrano,, who
was ex
,$i

#
s
*l

tr
66 Medieval Bosnian Church
Examination of Sources
67
pelled from Rome with all his {ollowers and subsequently from all of ran$ in his king<iorn ancl in that
of Bosnia if they served him in
Italy. And thr.rs, having been driven out and not finding any place frf rnatter. But Domagna immediately this
refused alloffers, ,uying;;;;;.
refug{f, nor being received, they passed on through Friuli to those hound to srick by his lord
Uy tt.io* fr;;." for his country "or,
regions of Bosnia where some of them settled and others penetrated splendor of the Bobali family, and the
further on to Thrace and settled along the Danube not far from
i"r" rt iitr t" was born, and that forbade
Nicopolis.
3. "And they lived without sacraments, without the sacrifice ft,f tne
[fi, i lr i: "l::l f ;,;,i"I,*,::,m :* ; Iff
taken with great affection for
*i*nl,;t lx* :
him una grr.r,",r him many privileges,
Massl and without a priesthood, though they called themselves still are to be found in the house g"u;iil; Ragusa. The ban neverthat
Christians. They fasted on Fridays, observed the days of Our Lord and Ilobali depart from him cruring "r ret
all Christian celebrations fFeastsJ, especially the Ascension of Our in thc presence of his uuronrli Eh. ..q;ilis life, frequentry affirming
Lord; they were not baptized,(73) abhorred the cross and were called rwcd
ir.;;; ;n',t,. said privileges) that he
his realm, nay even
his liie to him. Thi. *un was (as
'Paulichiani.' rn great part the reason has been said)
/t. "Thcy persisted in these errors to the beginning of the last war that the before-mentioned Franciscans
acccss into the realm of obtained
Bosnia.
bctween the Empire fAustrians], the rulers of Transylvania@apolyS 7' "who with great fc'rvor and spirit
disputed with the heretics
and the Turk fSuleima{1. But perceiving themselves attacked by the
Christians and led into capitivity as if they were Turks, they therefore
thoroughly convincetl t.hem.,
*d';;;;;;tracted all of Bosniaand to
themselves' rn Bosnia, with the h.rp;i;i.; who embraced
resolved to embrace the true cult of Christianity. There were in these laith' they raised many monasteries the Roman
and convents. They worked
places fourteen villages inhabited by these Paulichiani. Some Greeks Llsora, [-lum ancl Ston with also in
the p".rnirrion and will
believed that these had been followers of Paul of Samosata, fihe Greeks Ragu.sans who (as is said) trod be.or" @oo{J of the
beinfl deceived by the name. But the Greeks are in error. These they convcrted and baptized
o;;;;;, of that place $tor!. And
Paulichiani are far from the errors o{ Samosata. And I believe that, as
many of itrese-neretlcs.
f'l' ' 'whence everywhere
and by ir," rr-" their goodness and of the
those of Bosnia are called Patarini [Peterini?]] in allusion to the name of u'.rk's that they did, many peopre "r
of saintecr life flocked to the vicariat of
St. Peter, so those are called @aulichianJ in allusion to St. Paul, the two ll.snia, as was called the main place,
where they have stayed up
apostles and patrons of Rome. timc' rhe above'menrioned Fra p"tt"g.iro-"ou, to this
1. "Then to turn to our region of Bosnia, when the above-mentioned .rfter having convefted the. patarin -rd" Bishop of Bosnia
irranciscans came to this realm. The affair succeeded contrary to their virt in
h;;:;;;,, oi *r,o* rhere was another
fJosnia called Manichees
(as v"l";;;;;" and Sabellico
relate
expectations. ber-ause thel' had suspected that Ban Stjepan. who held the
Greek rire and therefore did not give obedience to the pope *'ould oppose
nhich had nronasteries, placed
i,,"rlb;.;;;a-ln o,f,.. remote places, it)
*hich the matrons having been cured to
ihenr. bur he drd the exao opposite, Having receired them rrith great (r)r)e and according
f.o,' illo"rr"s were accustomed
to their vows to r"."-u certain predeterminedto
kindness. he ga,-e them prrmission ro teach publiclv against the l'criod of tinre J'hr'rs they stayed with the
-t,,:z''z:i r-rererics arid inrroduce the Roman {aith. ior it seemed to him monks, o. n'o."
hcretics''l-his lasted,n,h. y.u.
r;z'. ii,.'rirot -r"ri"t,
':.-:- :: t::<'.'-.:,-,:,2,i. i:::.is real,r:: r:--er cf '.he Rcilan Catholic iar'.h. *r.rs calletl tlt'd. and the or these monasteries
prior stroinik.
i - . - -'..-a:'- ---i
='.-'.
-:.' T::=::t :'.'.a. -:-t:-:':g :-:::::;: i:., a:i: ') "l'hc priest' *hen he entered the church holding in
; - ., : ':'=:f
-
d. :' .r--'-t '-:, ----: -:-- --:i:-.: .-i:-, z=1-- l1=)-' : I'rtrJ' *'"pll tum to the people and his hand
--, - L:.-.r a -:i: .i <--:::. i:.: sar. ;r, , loud voice. I shall
-. - . :.' :.,:;-. ..: : :-J:-_; '\nJ lhc *ould respon<J- ble;s ii. ,nd,h"n bless it.
,l AnJ *".r he sa1,s. I shall break
'.-*'rple
Fer,ple replt. bre:rk i,, rna'ojn*'-,n,, o.u,
:rr( 1\c t.,:nnrr.rnion. .. (l:i j done rhe people

i\larrrr. hi'-s one dcpanur"

(r. ".r\nd the ban being at war (as is said) rrith Emperor Sret.in ,krrrt'ad.r s;rving at
?::urc the place marked by footnote 73.
that the paulichiani *"." no, uuptized as orbini does,
Ncmagna $ic Stefan DuYan-! and Nemagna, wanting ro have the ban in
fihe palm oll tris hands rreated secretly with Domagna and with some
,\llrarechi clescribes a baptismal rite. ..On,h..r".ond
day of Epiphany
rltt priest, elected by the people without
other Bosnian barons, to whom he promised money and position for uny o.,linutio"[.rlq]";;h;;.,
Errnkles rhem with water going round about
fgmong themJ and by this
(i8 ,\ledielai Bosnian Church
rct they think rhel'are baptized. as the Pauliani of rodav who are nor
yct convcrted still do."(75)
Ol Orbini 's text, how much comes from Pietro Livio2 The first
pararraph (n.b. all paragraph divisions are mine) could be from him or
lronr any numlrer of Franciscan sources. Its information is not new.
Paragraph two attributes itself to Pietro Livio. Since paragraphs three
ancl four are a direct and natural continr.ration of two and since they
contain completely original data, there is little doubt that Orbini drew
them also fronr Pietro l-ivio.
Paragraph six, and most probably all of paragraph five (since it
contains material not found elsewhcre) come from the documents found
in the []obali archive in Dubrovnik. Unfortunately this material is no
longcr cxtant. Wc have no way of knowing whether Pietro Livio or
Orbini himself had read the Bobali documents. Thus we cannot say
whether thc Livio material ends after paragraph four, or whether it
continues through paragraph six. Unless the Bobali family had forged
tlrcse documents to glorify its ancestor (who except for a last will dated
1148(76) is unknown in other sources), we can treat the material in
thcsc two paragraphs as evidence coming from a contemporary primary
v) u rce.
I)aragraph seven contains nothing not found in any number of dif-
ferent lirancisc-an chronicles. Since there is nothing original here it does
not rnakc much difference to us whether it came from Pietro Livio or
n()t.
Paragraph cight finds Orbini referring to the Pir.rs tradition of
Nlanichce nronasteries, which he attributed to Volaterrano and
Sabcllico. l{owcverr, since Masarechi gives paragraph eight in the same
words as Orbini, either Orbini clrew the material from these two
hunranists through l-ivio as a middle-man, or else Masarechi besidcs
using Livio also had Orbini before him and copied this paragraph from
Orbini.
I hat Masarechi did have Livio in his hands and did not take
everything from Orbini is shown by the story he tells about the
Pauliani's riteof baptism which Orbini does not give. This dcscription
probably appcarecl in the original but was dropped by Orbini in thc
intcrestsof consistency sincc a description of a baptismal rite bv a priest
contradicts the statement at thc beginning of the paragraph about the
Paulichiani having neither priests nor sacraments. Orbini, also, may
havc hcard elsewhere that the Patarini did not baptize themselves.
Paragraph nine in Orbini probably also came from Livio, since thc
nratcrialcontainecl in it is original and since in manner o{ presentation
thc dcscription of the communion rite resembles the l-ivio story given by
Examination of Sources 69
)
i\lasarechi about baptism.
d
a
N.w t'date I-ivi,. l-i vio in paragraph four says that the paurichiani
i
&t
ft
pc'rsisted in thcir crrors until thc lleginning of this last war betwccn the
I Iinrpcror (Austria), Transylvania ancl the Turks. since Transylvania
f was involved it seenrs probable to assunrc that l-ivio was thinking of the
carnpaigns of the ,t520's which came to a close with the truce of I )-J2.
'l'lris
clating is c.nfirr-ned by the fact that orbini larer say.s rhe heresy
(which of the two c.rrents is not rnadc clcar) pcrsistcd until 1520. If we
conncct this datc, which hzr-s pr,rz-zled historians for some timc, with
l.ivio's description .f evcnrs surrounding rhis war, it would explain how
orbini coulcl come.p with such a specific date for s.mcthing as im
p.ssible to bc concrete abour as the end of a heresy. And by the phrase
"untilthe bcginning of this last war" it is suggestcci that the war had
.ccurred not too long ago. Thcrefore, we have some, granted not
..nclusive, cvidcnce that Pietro Livio of Verona was writing at some
rinre nor long after the l l20's.
llaving praised Pellegrin.'s work in c.nvc-rting patarin heretics,
orbini gocs on, "of whonr there were another sort in Bosnia called
l\lanichces, " who according to volaterrano ancl Sabellico livecl in
ur.nasteries (and orbini gives an abridged account of the item in pius'
I'.untltt ab.ur thcse r'ixed monasteries in rermote places). Then hc states
rhat this lasted until thc year 1i20. Either orbini or Livio clearly had
n.ticcd the differences between the material presented up to this point
.rnd thc I)ius tradition I this led whichevcr aurhor it was to tiy to
tlistinguish a seconcl sort of Pararin, thc Manichce. Following Ijius'
\tory which was taken seconrl hand from volatcrrano and Sabellico,
orbini dates the ending .f thc Manichees (at least such is the context) in
11J0, prcsur'ably the clatc of the wars he spoke of earlier. [J't if the
d.rti.g is based on the war.s. as I think it is, then orbini had alreadv
rnixcd up material pcnaining to the second heretical current with that
n'hich pertains to the first. It is also n.table that orbini or l-ivio,
uhichever onc was the first to cite the two humanists, omits the
l)rssagcs from Pius and volaterrano which speak of the two principles
;rrrl actual dualisnr, and takcs only the word "Manichec" and the siory
rkrut thc monasteric.s whiclr nray have originaily been draw' from the
l'.rtarin(non-dualist) hi},as and which has nothing clualist about it. This
srl{gcsts that the auth.r of this passage, dcspite the pius-Volaterrano
\tirtcmcnt, did not bclievc the Patarins were dualists. orbini then
trrntinrres with an interesting hoclgcpodge from which it is hard both to
yl).rrate the two currents of hcresy and also to dctermine his sourccs.
llcforc cvaluating the material we have presentecl , it would be worth-
*'hilc to look at the other clara orbini's history givcs about religious
70 Medieval Bosnian Church Examination of Sources 7I

source is unknown, and may have been based on something that made
conditions in Bosnia, and the sources from which he obtained his data.
Rirdin appear more Orthodox than heretical. There is no other evidence
a) Ban Stjepan died in 1357 (actually l'313) and was buried in the
ro nrakc Radin Orthodox) ; e) that Radin was confessor to Herceg Stefan.
Franciscan church of St. Nicholas of "Milescevo." (p. 354) (Source
unknown, the matter will be discussed in Chapter IV.) b) He later tp.38fl) f'he source {or this is unknown, but from statements "c" and
speaks about Stefan Toma"s, the king, and after a few biographical
"d" it isapparentthat Orbini thought that both the herceg and Radin
s'cre Orthoclox. We may suggest that Orbini found in the Dubrovnik
details, uses Pius' material , though crediting it to Volaterrano, about
archive a copy of the herceg's will , which states that Radin played an
the king having been a Christian a long time, who abstained from
inrportantpart in its composition. This fact may well have led Orbini to
baptism until finally he was baptized by Gioanni Cardinal di S. Angelo.
He then adds that the king had previously been infected with the lsrribe to Radin the role of "confessor" and since the Orthodox
I\letropolitan David from Mile{evo was also a witness, Orbini may have
Manichee heresy. He then uses a Franciscan source to the effect that
infcrred from his presence that the two were of the same faith and Radin
Jacob de Marchia had converted the king. (p. 368) This last item came
wasa Basilian monk. In fact, points "c," "d," and "e" could all have
from a legend recorded by Wadding about the conversion in the 1430's
bccn inferred from Herceg Stefan's will.
of Tvrtko II, and is only important to show that Orbini clearly did use
With the possible exception of some of the material about the
Franciscan chronicles as well. Thus much of the material about the
$rancisran nrision (which is not original and could have been drawn
Franciscan mission given by Orbini could have come from Franciscan
lrom any number of sources), and the few remarks about Gost Radin, all
sources rather than from Livio. c) Orbini then repeats the story from
(.ommentaril that in 7459 (date accurate, confirmed by Pius' letter) o{ Orbini's information comes either from the Pius tradition (Europa,
thrcrugh the medium of Volaterrano and Sabellico, and Commentarii),
King Stefan TomaK, to show his loyalty to the pope, gave the
hom Pietro Livio of Verona, or from the Bobali tradition. The account
Manichees, of whom there were many in Bosnia, the choice of baptism
ul the Onhodoxy of Ban Stjepan Kotromanid, Bobali's role in the ban's
or exile. Two thousand were baptized and forty, remaining persistent in
conversion, and the ban's motives for aliowing the Franciscans to come
their errors, went to Stefan, the Herceg of St. Sava, and a partisan (as
some would want) of that sect. (p. 369) Orbini, thus, was not fully
to lJosnia most probably are from the Bobali archives (possibly with
Livio as intermediary). Unless the Bobali material was fabricated later to
convinced about the question of the herceg's religious loyalties. He then
glorify Domagna for family interests, we should regard the Bobali
speaks of the three leaders of the heresy (although he should have said
material as a contemporary source. I-lowever, since we do not have
three leading nobles who were also heretics, for there is no reason to
lu{licient evidence to reject the Bobali tradition we shall make use of it,
look upon them as religious figures) who renounced their errors in 1461
rlrough keeping in mind its reliability is not proven.
and gives that story in the form that it appears in Commentarii. (p. 369) "l'he
story of the origin of the Patarini seems farfetched and probably is
He also tells of the mission of TomaXeviC's legate to the pope in 1461 (p.
little ntore than a scholarly attempt to explain the name Patarin. What is
372) and of the betrayal by Radak Manichee, (p.375) both of which
rmportrnt here though is that Pietro Livio did not link the term with the
were taken from Commentarii.
*r.ll-known Italian dualists called Patarini but traced the term back to its
Finally, he concludes with some interesting data on the Bosnian
k':s wcll'known earlier non'dualist roots, which were actually in Milan
Church leader Radin Gost (d. 1467) (since we can assume that it is
rather than Rome as he states. Pietro Livio's avoidance of the more
really Radin whom Orbini is speaking of when he refers to Radivoj Gost
*bvious solution suggests that he had some reason to believe that the
and Rasi Gost). a) that Gost Radin built Mostar (p. 384) (possibly a
llosnian Patarins were not dualist, and for that reason made a particular
popular tradition; the source is unknown); b) that he was major domo
etlon to find an explanation for the name Patarin that was not associated
for Herceg Stefan. (p. 384) (This remark which reflects the important
*ith dualism. In addition, in his description, he mentions little, and
role that Radin occupied at the herceg's court could have come from a
nrost r:f that he contradicts later, that might be considered dualistic
variety of sources); c) that the herceg was schismatic (p. 385) (which is
rlNrut them, and when he used the material from the Pius tradition he
true if we do not insist that this has to mean the herceg was Orthodox.
tnrk thc rnaterial about monasteries and left aside the material about two
Dubrovnik documents frequently refer to Herceg Stefan as schismatic);
principlcs. Thusit seems as if l.ivio, writing (ca. 1530) at a time when
d) that Radin was a monk of the order of St. Basil. (p. 388) (This
l'rus'I\lanichee view was generally accepted, did not believe that the
statemento if true, would have made Radin an Orthodox monk. The
 72 Medieval Bosnian Church
Elosnian Patarins were dualists and went out of his way to avoid saying
that they were. We only wish we knew what the reasons were that led
Livio to this conclusion. We can guess that he came to this conclusion
because his Paulichiani were not dualists
- but unfortunately we do not
knon' q hv he linked them n'ith the Bosnian Patarins.
Whar Livio sal,s abour the baptismal and bread-breaking rites is in
teresting. though tr'e cannot confirm it and do not know what his source
abc,ut these rites was. We mav suspect that Livio obsen'ed the baptismal
(and possibl-v a.lso the bread-breaking) rite firsthand among the
"Paulichiani" about q'hcrm he speak-s as if he actually had some
acguaintance n'ith them. One mar'suspect that he had actualll'traveled
amon1 them. pr:ssibly as one o{ the Catholic clerics involved in effecting
rheir conversion. and for that reason knew of the fourteen villages that
he mentr'ons (and hence could give such a specific figure) and knew
rorrcthing o{ their ritct. However, since he links their conversion with a
war involvir) g7''ransylvania we must suppose that the Paulichiani lived
some:where in or near Transylvania, or possibly still around Nicopolis'
which is near. Since the only links between the Paulichiani and Bosnian
Patarins given by Livio is their alleged common origin, we must
qucsrion the relevance of Livio's material on the Paulichiani for Bosnia.
What evidence did Livio have that the two groups were of common
<trig,in/ And even if they were, their alleged split had occurred two or
rhrcc hundred years before Livig observed the Paulichiani early in the
sixteenth century. It is quite likely that during those centuries the
Paulichiani's practices and customs had changed considerably fronr
what they once had been. These drawbacks combined with the fact that
Orhcr sources show that thc Bosnian Patarins had a priesthood and
ccrtainly by the fifteenth century did not abhor the cross, show that we
cannot rely too heavily on l-ivio's material here'
l_ivio (oi Orbini) claims thar the Greeks (presumably the Orth.dox)
tricd to associate these Paulicians with Paul of Samosata' This agirin
(some of whom
sm acks of schcllarshiP; the noted Paulicians of Tephrice
ninth
wcrc transplantecl bythe llyz-antines to Bulgaria and Thrace in the
Paul of
century) were also at times linked in tracts by their enemies with
Samosata. we clo know that small communities of non dualists
called
(generally thought to be
Paulicians continued to exist in Bulgaria,
Paulicians) who accepted
dcscencicnts of the Armenian an{ Byzantine
Could there have been
Catholicism in the seventeenth century'(77)
As interesting as the material that Livitl
more of thcnt on the Danube/
is' make use of it in our
;;;.; rt about this deviant group we cannot
and the Bosnian Patarins'
,tu.Jy since if a link existed between them
what his source for that link is'(78)
Livio (or Orbini) fails to tell us
llxarnination of Sourccs 7)
{khrrrr lrnost probably not [.ivio) presents the view that the titles of
tM hrcr.irchy o{ thc Bosnian Church wcre derivcd from moniistic offices.
Ibough he misuses the titlcs in tht: example he gives, his gencral theory
ffir.rnsvalid and is corroborated hy other sources that speak of the churr..h
l*m*rrhl. lt is probable that Orbini founcl this material in the
flulnovrrik archives.
l.uccari and Resti
!_ucc;rri compiled a liistory of Dubrovnik rhat was published four years
*fterOrbini's in 1(r05.Iie made use of thrc'e no longer extant chronicles
#uur lJosnia. In adclition to Pietro Livio, he rnade use of the Chronicle
o*{ l.lrvojc Vuki.ii by Emanuel rhe Greek and a chronicle of Bosnia by
Milich Vclimiseglich.(79) It is only through l-uccari that we know that
lhr* lart rwo works existed. The citations Luccari gives from these two
r*ll ul nothing ahout religious matters. His extracts from Pietro Livio,
tlr brieflr than Orbini's, are highly conclensed, often garbled, and at
tiner conrraclict the longer straightforward versions presented by Orbini
.r*tl i\.lasarechi. l-uccari claims that Ban Stjepan's land was infected with
rhr llararin heresy ancl that the Patarins wcre disciples of Paul of
fumcsirta (which is jr.rst rvhat Orbini says the Patarini were not) and
hrlieved in two principlc's (which is not in Orbini, but is in agreement
;rrth l)ius' tradition) n.rixercl with nruch from ancient philosophy and
F'{.'rry (\ourcei) believing that divine providence at the time of the
rrertion of mankind ordaincd once and for all for everything' and a{ter
rh.rr nothing could bc altered.(tt0) Luccari's source for attaching these
ol strict pre(icstination to anyone is unkn<lwn'
vit'w,;
tVt' know he examined the archives of Dubrovnik. for he cites,
thc11g[ inaccurately, from tht l1+33 letter Dubrovnik sent to the
Ctuniil of l]ascl about the Patarin hierarchy' But in speaking of the
l*tcr nlrich callecl the Btlsnians "Patarins," he calls them Nestorians
.rrrtl clairrrs crroncously that some of the Rosnian Church hierarchv tried
(o attenrl the Cguncil of Basel . Whether Lr.rccari misreacl the original
drx.'unrt'tt or hacl in his hands an inaccurate copy. we cannot say.
lh,sidss this material , Luccari alsocalls Gost Radin the Maior Domo of
!lerccg Stefap. fl6rveyer, Ltrccari accurately calls him a Patarin, but
,rdrls th:rt hc was an enc'nty crf the Rgman Church. This iudgment is not
i:rrnlirm(,(l by thc good relations Radin hacl rvith Catholic Dubrovnik.
l.urcari rrlso hirs material lrom the liranciscan tradition: the murder by
'l'omu! ancl his br,rrial at the Fran-
tus rrin ;rncl brothcr 9f King Stefan
frq4'.rn i\l()nasrerv at Srrtjcska in l4(rl, an{ thc legend that the llosnian
hrih,ips in thc twelfth ccnturv rcsidt:<l at KleXevo -- a clairn seen
 74 Medieval Bosnian Church
frequently in Franciscan writings of the seventeenth through the
nineteenth century but which has no basis in the sources. Finally,
Luccari provides an interesting description of the hair-cutting kumstuo
(godfathership) when the town of Dubrovnik, to seal a peace treary,
stood as godfather for the Bosnian nobelman Radoslav Pavlovid's son
Ivani5. This information presumably was drawn from the Dubrovnik
archive. Since much of Luccari 's data contains inaccuracies, it seems
that he did not use his sources carefully. The modern scholar must use
him with care.
An early eighteenth century history which contains much valuable
data is the chronicle of Dubrovnik, by Junius Resti (1669 1735).(81)
Most of his material seems to have come from the Dubrovnik archives.
l'he majority of the documenrs that he relied on for the late fourteenth
and fifteenth century still exist and we can see that he copied them with
accuracy and did not invent facts or names. For Bosnian religious
history Resti is most useful for the thirteenth century since some of his
material (particularly about Bosnian bishops at the beginning of that
century and their relations with Dubrovnik) can be found nowhere else.
These descriptions, since they usually reflect ties between Bosnia and
the Archbishops o{ Dubronik almost certainly also came from original
Dubrovnik documents that existed in Resti's day but that have disap-
peared since then. Of course, we have no way of knowing what rcrt of
documents he used for the thirteenth century, and whether they were
reliable sources. But judging by his use of later documents, we can at
least conclude Resti copied them accurately.
Resti's chronicle, which ends in 1457, was continued by the
"Croniche ulteriori di Ragusa" which most probably was the work of
Giovanni di Marino Gondola (which Nodiio includes in the same
volume with Resti's text.) This chronicle, like Resti's, is based on
material from the Dubrovnik archive.
Western 13th Century Chronicles
- two English
Three thirteenth century chronicles (Roger of
Wendover and Michael of Paris), giving one text, and one French
(Theobald of Rouen) with a variant version preserve a no'longer
-
extant letter written in 1223 by Conrad, Papal legate to France.(82)
This letter describes a Cathar anti-pope. In one chronicle the anti-pope
appeared in France himself and in the other he sent a deputy. In either
case, the man who came to France was called Bartholomaeus. He was
received with great honor by the Western Cathars, and was allowed to
Examination of Sources 75
scttle their disputes and to install bishops. Whether the anti-pope came
in person or dispatched a deputy, and what he did in France, is of little
importance to our study. Yet the letter says that he came from "in
tinibus Bulgarorum, Croatiae ct Dalmatiae, juxta Hungarorum
nttionem." Just where does this rncan? Two theories have been ad-
vanced: a) Bulgaria since it is the first place named and was also the
homeof the Bogomils, and b) Bosnia, since Bosnia seems to lie in the
midst of all the regions listed.
I"or sevcral reasons I am sceptical that Bosnia could have been the
honre of a dualist anti,pope in 1223. We have no evidence in either
{oreign or Slavic sources that the Bosnian dualist movement had by
1223 grown to significant size or reached a level of real importance. In
rddition, Bosnia does not border on Bulgaria. Serbia and Maceclonia
(an.ther dLralist center) do, but then neither of those places bordc'rs on
I)almatia.'lhus we rnust conclude that either our source had in mind a
wandering heresiarch who had no permanent see and who had a
iollowing in this whole region, or else our source was conflrsed about
B,lkan geography. If the second explanation is correct, we cannot find a
basis in its confusion to come to any conclusion about what it may have
illc.lnt.
Franciscan Chronicles
'l'here
are a large number of Franciscan chronicles, most of which
lxirrow from other chronicles, and contain ncl original material of their
own. Many of them were kept by particular monasteries, which began to
ktep records only in the seventeenth or eighteenth century; hence all
information in them about earlier centuries is simply copied from other
Frunciscan histories. Besides the Franciscans' own material. we can find
in their chronicles some letters and documents connected with their
missions and papal letters to their order. The bulk of these letters we
have elsewhere. And if we do not have the text elsewhere, we have
r(';rqon towonder whether the letter is authentic, and thus cannot freely
nr*kc use of it. While some of their chronicles utilized works such as q
Prus' (.ommentarii or later histories, whose original texts have been
pr*served, none of them has material from the lost chronciles and 'iJ
'fr
histories. The only original materials to be found pertain to the order
"lnd its work; quite often, such material needs to be treated with reserve.
,'fi
i{
'['here :t!
are three general categories of Franciscan chronicles: a)
,lii
Chronicles of particular Bosnian monasteries, such as Fojnica and ,.iii
jl
Sutieska.(83) f'hese chronicies being later compilarions are almost
*'lrthless as sources for the medieval period. They repeat the story of
..!l{
ffi
ffi
76 Meclieval Bosnian Church
Examination of Sources
77
rht'rlr:rdcr of King Stefan Torna! and his burial at Sutjcska. Fojnica's compilation,.appearing only here
and there in scattered referEnces.
rhronicle reprints a {orged chartcr to Knez Radivoj and contains some few letters whose texts haue not A
b."n p..r"*.d which must
intormation about thc dcstruction of monasteries in the sixteenth bc used with care, are found in
it. "lr"*h..",
(('ntur)' lry tht' l urks.
r\ Bosnian chroniclc of interest is that of Fra Nikola Lalvanin.
anothcr cightecnth ccntury work.(8zl) Lalvanin takes oldcr material and Defters and Turkish Laws
nrrrkcs a rcatlahlt' yarn out of it. Undcr I 319 he utiliz"es the lctter of Popc
John to Mladt'n SLrfiilSf; and claborates; he makes thc "heretics" A very valuable series of sou-rces, though
of course written after the
rt:lerred to in the letter into Manichces and Patarins, and claims that fall of Bosnia are the Turkish
,* ,".-o?, called defterr,' ,"."r,r,
thcv livecl in the n'rountains ancl that sonre Dalmatians revolted against discovered and mostly still unpublished-
itre earliest covers ottoman-
tht'nr (sourcc of this remark unknown). Then the popc wrote tht. ban to trccupied parts of Bosnia in r455.
rn* ,ri.. the main conquest, follow
takt.action, and l-a!vanin proceeds to describc the action against thcrn dcfters of regions of B:rlT^1nd
H.r.;;";, fro_ 1468, 147 j, tr+8j ,
lry sorrc (lcrman crusadcr knights to force baptism upon them (p. 37). 1,489, lit(,, I528_30,.ri2g,
7SqZ, iiCl', 1575. The originals
I.atcr l-aXavanin takcs a story from a rcnaissance history of Split by an bc found in Ankara and Istanbul. are to
rrr" ori"",al Institute in Sarajevo has
;trlonynrous author which describes hugh fires in Bosnia which mclted microfilms of them all..A zummu.y
,r,iJ" of the type of material to be
the rocks ancl lt:veled mountains, after which in those regions it bccame found in them about the Bosnian
Ci"..i, ,lrh a great many specific
possible for se ttlernent and Bosnian Patarins, called Manichees, settled i1 rcferences (though unfortunately
no, uf-uny means a complete com-
thcre and said that God burncd thc mountains for our ttse bccause he ii pilation of the rerevant materiar)
has been putrirh"d r, otiiibJl
likcd our faith. I-aYvanin repcats the story leaving out the pro Patarin ;; all the material is avairable, .on.t.r*ionJ u",'
l.
lased on them should be
rrroral.(8(r) La\vanin also records thc tale from Pius' Oommenlarii of thc ii dclayed.
'l'he
choicc givcn the hcretics by the king of conversion or exilc, Finally. he Turkish defters have numerous references
ii
''kristian" villages, etc. to ..kristian', land,
nrcntions old belicvcrs (starouir 'cl) in the Vrbas region in 1737 and ,1.
Since tn. a"rt..r-.all the cathorics
1739. (pp. 76,l8) Unfortunatelv nothing is said about what sort of i', tht-rdox. "gebr,'or ',kafir, ',una and or-
t':
sn." i;;;;rr""" et gosts arcreferred
bcliefs thcy hcld. tr:
ro in connection with "kristian"
i,|. lands, we take the designation
b) I'hc Chronicles of the Bo.snian order: Thc most important text was &l
"kristian" in the defters to
mean members of the Bosnian church.
publishc.d by Fermendiin,(87) whose valuable introduction shows what drfrers were drawn up later in The
*i tt,. riri"";; even in the sixteenth
lettcrs, chronicles, and documents were utilized to make this itr:l century; so most of the kristians ". previous
referred to were
cighteenth-century compilati<ln. The chronicle describes the foundation &ir nil longer owned the lands when owners who
the r,rru"yJ*".. *ua..
of the permanent Franciscan mission in Bosnia in 1339, and the $fr
f;i
11 is a. marter of dispute
whether tt,. tri.tu ured the term ,.kristian,,
for"rnding clf the vicariat, shortly thereafter; it names the various vicars Ii in rhe defters to designate ordained
.t".il, o, simply believers in the
and givcs as accr.rrately as possible their dates. It does not tell us about *) church Since the Turks were
interested onry in drawing up
fi, a tax census
rclations between the Franciscans and the Bosnian court ancl nobles or to iacilitate tax co'ection.
6j, they nr.;;;it'did not care wherher
givc detaiLs on whcre the Franciscans worked or on their relations with ,*i runcr (or past owner whose nameiad an
been giu.r, ,o a piece of land)
thc populacc. In this chronicle too the term "Bosnia" usually re{ers t<r a lay follower of the church
or an ordaine;;;;,., so
was
we have no reason
thc whole vicariat. It contains only one reference to Manichees, under r0('xpect any precision or consistency
in their use of the term kristian.
l,il l, where it refers to the thirty years of work against them in Bosnia It is apparent that when the
clefter iirt, at. .ru_ber of households
by a Fra Ambrosius. It givcs limited data on specific churches, but onc unmarried males in a .,kristian', and
village, ,f,. i"f,". i, d";;ibi;;;;,
rnust inqLrire at every turn whether the dates are based on solid h.useholds (married couples
u.,a ,n.u..l"J*", adult age) and thus
docunrcntation or on the traditions of a given chr.rrch. rr using the term for lay members "f
O"rl"u".riin the Bosnian church. In
c) Ciencral lrranciscan chronicles: The best collection is the multi- rttrne cases the defters may
have said "kristian" villages because the
volumc work [.. Wadding, Annules Minorum, which began to be issued ftr\ants lived on and worked land belonging to
in the eighteenth century. Bosnia plays a very minor role in this large I
tt. Bosnian Church.
that in most cases wh"n ur--rn is namecr
'clieve with the term
 Examination of Sources 81
Medieval Bosnian Church
.1.
i{

ff:
$.
The Gospel Manuscripts
houses' we cannot be sure that
and then in 1516 twenty-five Moslem #
converted' lt is possible that
F-

the twenty-one Christian families had all #

s Sevcral Gospel texts from medieval Bosnia have survived. Three of
in an equal number of Moslem
they had fled, and that the Turks moved ffi: tk"nr . on thc basis of their dedications, can clearly be tied to the Bosnian
one must be careful, since in one $:
families to farm the land. In additiorr' iFj
Church: a) 'l'he fragment of a Gospel made on the order of Teptija
and in the next be separated or
defter two villages *ifiU. loined together #
llatalo in I 393 for Starac (elder) Radin. This clearly is a Bosnian Church
But overall we do get an idea o{
put into other combinations of villages' clder, since on a second sheet is a very important list of the hierarchy of
Moslem' even though we
the rate with which ^n areawas becoming tht l}osnian Church up to that time.(97) b) The Hval Gospel, written by
conversion' The defters do not
cannot always say that it was a result of lirstianin Hval for Flrvoje Vukfii in the days of the episcopacy of the
Christian group to a second' The
show changing of .o"f""ion' ftorn one $osnian Church of Died Radomer in 1404.(98) c) The surviving parts of
on migrations' However, for this
<iefters will also be a valuable source the Gospel of Krstjanin Radosav from the reign of Stefan TomaY Q443-
they will have to utilized with great care' irl ) which includes the Apocalypse and a ritual.(99) In addition, several
remaining constant
Si.,." p".ro.ral names are rarely given' figures or a total +ther similar Gospel manuscripts have been preserved and may well also
mean a stable popttlation
between two defters can either be tied to the Bosnian Church.
between' However ' when in 1468
changeover of population or anything illuch has been made of these Gospels by scholars, some of it con-
*" f*a -uny'obandoned villages' and in 1485 we find these same
rrncing, but much that is, to say the least, farfetched. What is included
a migration of-population'
villages populated, *. .'n safe*ly postulate in thenr was clearly the "canon" of the heretical church, but we do not
the new arrivals came from' In the defter
though we rarely learn where lrurw what the texts meant to the Bosnian Churchmen and how they
thus 9:ftt:t give no
;;; ;t. "house" means "married couple"; the time. The Turks were mtrrpreted them. The Gospels included the whole New Testament
information about the size of the zad.rugasat {generally with slight changes in order, the most common change being
interested in collecting a basic tax
from each married couple and that
the phcing of the Apocalypse immediately after the Gospels.) This
was all they recorded. They were
not concerned with how many people
thorr that the Bosnian Church attributed great importance to this
lived under one roof' hrnl. but so did the Catholic West. In addition, the Gospel texts often
law codes : Kanuni'(9|)
ln addition to the defters we have the Turkish mcluded from the Old Testament, Moses' Ten Commandments; in
that Christians are not allowed to
Here we have the f^*t *iiti'p"tify l{vrl's Gospel they were placed in the middle of the New Testament.
buildchurch"r*t'"'""tn"t"fttab""nttochurchespreviously'andifa
in kanuniol T'lre absence of the rest of the Old Testamc'nt probably had little
new one is built, i, destroyed' This law is repeated
'h;;;; though the laws do not rrgni{icance. It was a common practice in the Middle Ages in the West,
151(r, r3O, ttlg )"i'1iii.fg5)in addition,
l *lr*r. to prepare New Testaments and Gospels without the Old
we know that the or-
distinguish u.,*""tt'Cuth"i;';tl Orthodox' built several churches "lcrtrmcnt, which played a very small role in services.
thodox, presumably *itn i"ttith
permission' 'l'he Bosnian Gospels were so close to the texts of the Orthodox
in il;;i; a*lt'g the period of the laws' That the laws
and monasteries {hsrch that in several cases they were actually used later in Orthodox
were generalty t*irfi"a to by th" Austrian envoy Kuripe1id'
thurches. The fragment of Batalo's Gospel has a later notation from
,f
"trot-c"J'it
who, referring i" 15;; t;the
-ciutJt" plighiof Christians' savs that they not
'ad I iil rcferring to its presence in the Orthodox monastery ' 'Skr'batno.' '
only could tot Uuita Utt tf,ey could not ever repair them '(96) t
i:

certain Franciscan monasteries in {l{it}) ln thr. margin of the Hval text the words "z.atelo" (beginning)
However, from charters given to *nd "hon'c" (end) appear beside passages at places corresponding to the
was glven at times on request to
repair
Bosnia we know that permission did rrudings of the Gospel throughout the year in the Orthodox Chur-
provided that its dirnensions
or even to rebuirt an existing church, can use these laws chtl0l) Presumably this signifies either that it was later used in an
church'^From this we
not exceed those of irtt {krhodox church, or that the Bosnian Church used the Gospel text in
"trti"?
every Catholic church we find in visitations and
to show that almost rlr urnc manner as the Orthodox did in their church services.
the conquest, must necessarily
other sources for tteiirr,'.*,".t after 'fherr Gospel texts refute much that has been written about the
have existed prio' to iaOl' fnit
the" is useful to show where Catholic
some believers' had existed in the S*mirn Patarir"rs in the inquisition sources. First, the New Testaments
churches, presumably having at least rlr .$nrplcte; thus there is no sign of mutilation of the New Testament.
medieval Period'
 Examination of Sources 83
gZ Medieval Bosnian Church
Orthodox. therer is no reason to take this Gospel as anything but Or-
Bosnian Christians
them which shows the
We find religious pictures in ' Baptist and thodox.(l0z+) l'he conclusion from this, then, is that all the faiths (at
were not iconoclastic'
iV" fita fhttering pictures John the
of
lcast whcn we are clealing with Slavic rite Catholics) read and used the
were supposedly
Moses. both of whom ltt"tat"t to ihe i"quisition the Ten Com- sarne books of the Bible in the vernacular language.
condemned bv the ";";;i;;a?arins'" Bv including
Finally, the Iladosav fragments include a ritual in Slavic, which has
the Bosnian Church did not
condemn
mandments, tt''" t"*t' 'io*ihat Patriarchs' None of this rrtany sinrilarities to the Latin Cathar ritual from l-yons. Solovlev
Old Testament
all the Old Testamtnt-ot the these llrescnts the two rituals as parallel texts.(10))'fhe Cathar ritual is in
other heretics in Bosnia holding
oroves that there *;t;'; it show that the or- lour parts. 1) A litany composed of five invocations and responses. 2)
views' But does 'l-hc l-ord's Praycr.
iconoclastic anti'Oldll'it-tnt texts 3) A seconcl litany of five invocations and responses
go';i^t' Cn"tttt connected with these three rimilar to thc first. 1+) A reading of the Cospel of John, I, l-i7. The
dained members of ti't the art work in
has been pointed out that
were not of this opinion' It Radosav ritual is in threc parts. It lacks the initial litany and begins with
these texts is closelv;;i";f;;
w":l:n catholic stvles' but this does l)the l.ord's Praycr. 2) A litany, which, excluding repetitions in the
would blindly copy without
thinking of
not mean that the ft"*it"i*ist Cathar ritual , is a Slavic translation of the Latin recitation, with one
what the subiect of the picture was' . 1'hrase acldcd in the Slavic ("he is worthy and just") not found in the
Solo.viev have tried to use the l, I
Various scholars, p."ai,t."1^tr, ' oi i-atin. 3) 1'he reading from John, 17.
certain Gospels. to demonstrate the existence "l"he Radosav ritual thus seerns to be an abbreviated version of the
vocabulary ol . Soloviev
it is impossible to do this'(103)
dualism.(102)Sidak iu' 't'o*n I.vons ritr.ral. IJut as Siduk hu:; pointecl our there is nothing in the
had pointed out tttui'i"
Nitof'ti tlospel (a fourteenth or fifteenth R;rdosav text (or in the l.yons text either for that matter) which is
'it nut" o{ w,rro,1 copieris unknown) it is said
century Bosnian G";;i Jt (was born)' Siaot'
hrrrtical.( I 0(r) I lowever, the likelihoocl that the Radosav rite was
that Jcsus "iz'ide.' lcame
out) instead of "toii '"" rlerivcd from a ritual similar to that recorded in the Lyons manuscript is
words are synonyms and in
fact "rodi
however, showed td;;ilt two the {rrirt. lt is even possible that this ritual had been brought to Bosnia by
o{ Bosnian iospels' including
se" does occur in'tn"^-*ti"ttty the rluulisrs, and later Radosav, a member of the Bosnian Chruch, recordcd
Soiouieu tried to argue that
most
Bosnian church H;;i,;;i. which rt. Sincc there is nothing heterodox in its contents, the recording of this
to Jesus' sonship was "inotedni"'
frequently u'"tl t"t-;; ;;ftt i'ini" (oth"r) and would connect withthe rire tlocs not makc Radosav a dualist. In addition. we do not know
he linked to the ;";; j"'u' u"d So*t' *"'"'f'"tft *"t of God' Siaut'as
llhrther Radosav's church ever pcrformecl this ritual. f{owever, since
Bogomil belief that the scrvicc is clearly a simple one, ancl since Bosnia was a land with a
however, a.-o""'u""a-if'ut
"ini" can mean "only" as well
in the Nikolski text the more common 'hortlge of churches which required services at times to be held in
"other," una poittlJout'nut
::"i*t"att" is usecl' Thus' there is no consistent Srrivatt'hcimes ancl ccmetcries, it would not be strange if an abbreviated
orthodox form of r"rvicc should becon.re popular. 'I'hus, it is clr,rite possible that the
in the.Bosnian Gospels and it
cannot be
r"rse of the variant t;i;;i;;t jev wished to lkxnian L-hurch -- whethcr regularly, only on certain occasions, tir
demonstratea *"ti' nuu" the sense thai Solov
on the ,rnlv in sorneplaces-'clid nsc a ritual which hadoriginally been brought
'r''^t'ii"- argue about theological subtleties
attribute to them' i;t;;t; w.rds, when wc
tr lkrsnia hy dualist hcretics.
basis of transrarions Jf
p"'.,i.rr"i'(and usually difficult) at thc
consirler th. g"n.*l leuel
of learning u.ra ouitity in translating
The Apocryphal Tales
to do',
;t;;;t a very tlangerous thing .

copied for him by Krstlanin

Hval in I404'
ln acldition to the-Gospel
*u
Butko "ac- l\luch has lreen made of ties between the Bulgarian Bogomils and
iilustrated missal by Pop
Hrvoje *u, giu"n Ueautlfuffy Peter and Paul in
sfr|{iryphal talcs about biblical figures. However, recently scholars have
Divin'e Church of Sts'
cording,o'n" nn-ltJi;;;itil" made as well as a rhnwl thlt nrost all of these tales are far older than the Bogomils and
Catholic missal
Rome." Thus, ;;";';;"'n'a ^ Gospel' also a ilsru back to the first centuries of Christianity.(107) Thus, to try to
also mention the Miroslav
IJosnian Gospel' We can in the end of the .Jrxovcr llogornil doctrine from them is very difficult, for we have no
p'it"" Miroslav of Hum
beauti{ul text' mie- toi is cvidence {rom
deu qhich parts the lSogomils found vital nor do we know how they
in {orm' and since there
twelfth ccntury' It is Orthociox r{ltrrlretc(l thcm, which is very important since we have been told that
well as his church builclin'q that
he wits
as
Miroslav's f^*lfy lutftg'ror.Lncl
84 Medieval Bosnian Church
Examination of Sources
8t
they tended to interpret the scriptures allegorically to suit their doc- A source that has been utilized from
trines. That these tales reappeared in great numbers in the years the time to rime has been the popular
nineteenth century, traditions
Bogomil Church was active in Bulgaria is true, and very likely there is ,u"ri p""pr"
parts of Bosnia and Flercegovina.(11'1) 'These ;ril; il;;.il
:; lr.;ou,
some connection between the revival of the tales and the hersey. families in more remote praces -iiir'i.ri,]"Jiil,n.
stories usually concern
However, it should be pointed out that in medieval Europe from the who',,i" ,"...,
Bogomil rites or wfo h-aye ;".";ly .;;"erted
twelfth century on these tales were popular among all groups including other confession' Fra Manii from Bogomilism ro some
the Jews. They certainly were no monopoly of the dualists. there were still families
i" ,l;-id;b's reported that in Drelnica
Only one work, a hodgepodge of several other apocryphal works, yn",
secret Bogomil rites in their
,f,o"sf,"ruppor.ary Moslem, preserved
entitled ' 'Interogatio Sanctis Johannis' ' is definitely associated with the homes ,ian*
dualists.(108) Both copies of it were found in the West in Latin trans-
rbrahim e"e B,u;ic,"n,.
what Islam was about and
u ioat, il;, l:lT:,j?,ji:.ffiH;tT;
were'p".r-n,,rng marriages by
lation. In one is the notation that it had been brought (in the twelfth These reported deviations themselves.
century) from Bulgaria by Nazarius, Bishop of the Cathar Church of rather than Bogomil
orJ.uit'r"n.., ,uno.un.e and local custom
su.uiuals.
Concorrezo, a prominent figure about whom we have considerable Fra Martii arso reported
material in the inquisition files. The other manuscript, now in Vienna, that somewhere on the upper
were still sixteen Bogomil Neretva there
refers to Bosnia in a marginal note stating, "Hell fire is neither spirit families, *ho *.r" christians but refused
nor anything living but a place just like Bosnia (Bossina), Lombardy,
accept Franciscans
The Franciscan' however,
iu, udministered to themselves.to
or orthodox p.i"*u
and Tuscany."(109) We cannot connect the manuscript itself with was unable to find out which
families these
Bosnia, but at least it seems to suggest that at sometime, probably in the il'Xii; ll i?.ff;P:o*t
t<,p"t, noui d i; uu ur* .il;;,#i.o u nd
thirteenth century (although we cannot date the marginal comment), theirram'y;il;,#ffi
"l
there were dualists in the three localities.
This study will not discuss the Apocryphal Tales since we have no
by heart' The
;"T1i"Tg"dXl,fi
orthodox Metropolitrn su#rcorunovic
;i""iTfiT'ff :,H*
medieval manuscript of any of them from Bosnia. It is true that we find iil?"J,,?:",,.,;ilfl,harr
or ,il;;;;;h reports thai ;n h;s
."n,u.r, th"," ,"," .,",,
certain elements of their content in Bosnian folk tales (such as the Tale
of John the Baptist and the Devil)(l10) but we have no way of telling
when and how these possibly dualist elements appeared. These themes
chu rch,
"
famiries these
d

near Konjic the famity

; ;;'; ;i,[i"J]f"'::::: T:":'J, :l *::,
n.tri, ir'rs6Z .tut"d that in DuboEani
were' riSi'tty.,, ::.ll:*;
all remained popular throughout the Middle Ages, and long after, when
uetly naa ;;;;h;r,
(^rL ro Bogomils, u", ir,r, ,t,.y
had accepted Islam a t"*
there were no longer any dualist Christians left in the Balkans at all. y"r.r-ig;r
Truhelka and various oth.. ,.h'orurs visited these areas,
Since most of their content does not contradict orthodox beliefs, the unable to turn up anvthing and were
tales were popular with the Orthodox as well. Most of the stories told ,r,r, .ouiJf. .onn..r.a with dualist
beriefs.
tales of other events in the lives of biblical figures and thus supplemented
r)rofessor Andjerii tota
*I
i" it;t-ilr; r"i""rt, he had ,,ied to track
d,wn the Helel fam'v in
rather than contradicted canonical texts. As such the tales were the Konjic."gl"". FI"had found
that name but discovered no family by
probably told and repeated by any group of people having any amount of there rr.a r".i r'recond family ;
name, Elez, who had been with a similar
contact with them. Thus, the thematic material from these apocryphal promin"* i" ,fr. area in the .l
century because they had eighteenth
tales found in Bosnia in the eighteenth century and later could have been maintained un-"*.*ou, extended
.ver a hundred members. famirv of
brought to Bosnia just as well by Orthodox believers who migrated Then at ,rr" eighteenth centurv an
epi dem ic of plague
h ad wiped,rr. ,"i ""a-"r",i,e
there, either during or after the Middle Ages. catastrophe to an important ;;;:'
"r""i; ti;enrered
family rh"rfu;;;;
il;.:;;,'J
y..r,
Since we cannot date the appearance of apocryphal motifs in Bosnia, r$ not strange, and that popurar tradition
or even prove by whom they were brought and what use was made of it should mingle with a r".";i;;;.".r,,r*
within a period of over sixtv
thern in the past, it seems best to ignore them altogether in this study. y"".r ir ;;;; j..rt"r,auut".
Yet what should be pointed
out at once il ,t rr, whether or not there
nogo'ii, i" ig;"i1.una H....gouin,,
Traditions ffi:ffffi*.|,I| |i',"'un
ce f", ; ;' ;ili;:ffif .,
, y in, on
f il::H : i:T lt; ft iliJl ,; rux*
 86 Medieval Bosnian Church
town of Srebrnica in a Serbian source (Konstantin Filoz-of's life of
Despot Stefan l.az-arevii written in 1431); and the reference appears in
only one of several manuscripts. This manuscript has been discussed
unclcr "Native South Slav sources" and is clearly a questionable one.
Evc'n if accurate it only shows that Serbs called the heretics in Srebrnica
by that namc. and not that the Bosnians there or elsewhere ever used it.
Clerics of the Bosnian Church called themselves "Krstjani, " and
their nc.ighbors and local opponents called them "Patarini." It is
notable that neither the word ' 'Krst jani' ' nor " Patarin " appears in any
traditions, for if a tradition truly went back to medieval times we would
expect it to retain one of these two terms. We conclude that the sources
for all thc popular traditions which use the term "Bogomil" are either
thc history books using the term from at least the late eighteenth
ccntury or the spoken word of priests and of the literate few who we[c'
able to read them. fhe villages considered to have Bogomil believers
were usually off the beaten track and may well have had customs that in
some way differed from the general customs of the area (such as villagers
performing their own marriages). This may have given them an air of
unorthodoxy and caused others to link their behavior to the evil heresy
of the Bogomils the priests spoke about. Thus, we must conclude that
any tradition bearing the term "Bogomil" in Bosnia is suspect and is
probably derived at least indirectly from books.
To this must be added the seventeenrh century poem of a Bosnian
Moslem on the Evils of Tobacco. There is much dispute as to whether
the poern actually uses the word Bogonril or "dear to God" since from
the manuscript it is not clear if it is one or two words.(112) In addition,
it is not clear if there is a period before the expression. Thus, we do not
know if itsays "we were in stench like the Bogomils," or "Like those
dear to God, abandoning the pipe." However, even if the poem should
be interpreted as saying Bogomils it is also certainly derived from
schooling, for the Turkish sources also never used the term Bogomil for
Bosnia and Llercegovina.
Foiktales that seem to embody dualist ideas are known in Bosnia but
since they are found in an area much wider than Bosnia, I shall not use
thc'm for the same reason that I am not using the Apocryphal tales.
From time to time, however, I shall touch upon practices which seem to
go back to the Middle Ages. Many of them such as the slaua and
humstao (God-fathership) are attested in medieval sources. Certain
magic rites that seem to be old. and that appear in certain manuscripts
from the Turkish period will also prove useful to us. In addition, certain
specific stories of behavior or traditions remembered that are not ried to
schooling may hold valuable information. Thus, much more valuable
Flxamination of Sources
87
than a rumor that there were sixteen secret Bogomil families in
l)rt'Ynica would be the following story recorcled in 1928:(113)
In Krupa on rhe vrbas an old-timer reported that he remembered the
last "died" (here, an elder) in that area. Near the old church was a
grove of .aks, and the largest was called the Djed's oak. In the old days
(h. is referring to a nineteenth cenrury tradition and how iar it reached
back into the pa.st we do not know) one man from each of the better
{amilies, when he reached the age of sixty,would let his hair and beard
grow and would put on long black dress and carry a ..T" staff. These
mrn were called djeds. Evervone respected them and showed them
sp.cial honor. women and youths when they met them would greet
thrnr by kissing their hand. At church all the djeds sat together uncler
thc l)jed's oak ancl all the householdcrs honored them by having their
vi)rng wom('n or girls bring them bread and raki. J'hen the old men
w.uld blcss cach wonran louclly saying: " I'hank you householcler N-
lor vr hon.ring us. I)o this honor always and God wilr reward you."
'I'hc last
of these djeds died in the first years of the Au.strian occupation
{r.t"., just after 1878).
;\t lr' jani, i'ar.r old abandoned church a ('T" staff was founcl which
.rn old rimcr also referred to as a "djedovski xtap " and told of a
rrrtirtion of a hundrecl years be{orc (from l92g) when there had been an
,,iil rrran callecl a "died" with a long beard and such a staff, who headed
5,.1
,,,!, r :dJril,(d of sixty-fivc members. I{e was very rich and had a large herd
$-' r,llnimals, and according to the tale he nroved the church to thelmjani
tr
l'tlti'n. N.w therc is a ne'w church and the old.nc is r.rsed only on st.
lhla's [)ay.h is frequent, that when a'ew church is lr'ilt ancl con-
to a new saint, the olcl church, or even its ruins, will remain
'.'(ratc(l
thc ritc lt which are celebrated se rvices on the cray clf the saint to whom
tlrr olcl church had bcen dedicated.
\\'c shriuld not iunlp ro any hasty concrusions from these traditions
rb'rut djeds, since in acldition to the former Bishop of the Bosnian
(lrurch, the rcrm refers ro the hcad (or erder) <tI a zadru.ga,
and it was
rrri!our;rr_y for the eldcr to carry a..T" staff. T'hus when a staff is
th'|11.1q1l on a medieval gravestone, regardless of what this
motif
rrvrrriied whe'the srone was carved, peasants frequently call it
" J it'd.vsk i !tap " (d jed's staff)
because they associate th is motif with the
:t,iru.qt rlder's staff. Ancl in the same way the terms "djedov kamen"
irllcd's sront') and "djedov krst" (djed's cross) as popular names for
rtr(ain spec'ific medieval stones probably are derived from traditions
,nhrut such t'lders.
"l'he
cljed irt Imjani was a zadrugaelder, and at Krupa the djeds were
*hJ.rr rf important housetrolds. The elders were tracJitionally respected:
88 Medieval Bosnian Church
the blessing they offered is similar to that which a typical householder
may bestow on a guest who on particular holidays brings cakes, sweets,
or iaki to his home. The exchange of such items on specific holidays is a
widespread custom. Thus, I do not think the story reflects any con-
tinuity from djeds of the Bosnian Church, but rather it illustrates the
ritual practices and enormous fespect that center around the most
important elders in this patriarchal society. That the leader of the
Bosnian church was also called a djed, however, reflects the honored
position he had as one of the society's most impoftant elders. It would
not be at all strange if his contemporaries had shown him the same sort
of ritual honor as the people of Krupa were later to bestow upon their
family leaders.
Gravestones
to be found a large number of
In Bosnia and Hercegovina are
gravestones, about which a vast literature has grown up. The peasants
call the stones by a variety of names, the most common of which is
"Greek graves!'; while popular books and schooled laymen refer to
them as "Bogomil gravestones, " and the scholarly literature calls them
by the term sfe/ci.Numbering in the thousands, these stones vary from
being fairly large to massive; they come in three basic shapes - slabs,
bo*ei, and sarcophagi. In addition, we find a number of crosses and a
{ew obelisks, and as we get into the Turkish period we find the form iii
transforming itself into the Turkish nilon style of gravestones, i.e., a ijii.
column with a turban on top. The maiority of stones though carefully Y:!r.
shaped are uncarved; and thus appear today as totally unmarked' !l:
,i:;
However, in the Middle Ages they may have been painted with motifs,
which have washed away over the years. Today in parts of Serbia'
I
i.,
particularly around ta;ak, we find painted stones, and families of the trt
,f
d"."rr"d plriodically renew the colors as they wash away' This would fl
explain why we find expensive, beautifully shaped, massive but un-
decorated sarcophagi.
l Not only can we show no connection between the motifs and dualist
Of course what has interested scholars has been the surviving motifs *.
Y/
and inscriptions on those stones that are carved. over the years
F!
Y'
descriptions of sites and readings of inscriptions have regularly appeared $l
:l
in the publication of the Zemaljski museum in saraievo.(114) In recent i;'
y"rr, . corpus of inscriptions (not yet completed) is being edited by s1
il4^.ko Vego, of which four volumes have appeared.(115) On the motifs tu
I shall only mention the monograph series of particular graveyards that
ff
has begun to be edited after the war, of which nine volumes have ap- b
ffi
peu.ed.ltt{r; Other major sites have been written up in the various &
s
s
s
ffi:
Examination of Sources
89
journals.(ll7)In addition, an invaluable book
that can be described as a
catalogue of motifs, with maps showing the geographical
distribution of
each motif, has been compiled by Marian W*r.t.(ttS)
Besides this, there is an enormous literature about the meaning
of the
motifs. The theory that was popular with scholars, from the iime of
Arthur Evans through the Austrian period, was that these stones were
Bog.mil tombs, and this theory is still the one generally believed and
the one to be found in Jugoslav tourist folders. In general, however,
scholars have by now abandoned this view. There
doing this. ".. -"ny reasons for
First there are the motifs themserves. only a few of them can be
associated with dualist beliefs and often this is only by a stretch of the
imagination and insistence on symbolic interpretations that cannot
be
proved. Secondly, crosses are common. This reason in itself is
not
conclusive since: a) If the Bosnian dualists were identical with the
- which, o{ course, is a doubtful assumption _ we
B.snian Church
can find evidence such as the cross on Gost Radin's will lhat at leasr
some members of the Church had nothing against crosses, b) In a
superstitious society the cross could be put up for all sorts of magic
reasons having nothing to do with the faith of the people
for reasons
of protecting the deceased, imposing a cufse to scafe away -gf ave robbers
(a definite fear, since several inscriptions offer a
curse to those touching
their bones), or placing a charm to keep the corpse in his grave. The
use
of crosses as charms by people who were not christian, such as Bosnian
Moslems, has already been noted in the Introduction. Thirdly, from
inscriptions we see that members of the catholic, orthodox and bosnian
churches all erected ste/ci. lndeed some of the eraborate stones
including many at Radimlja the most famous of sites -
belonged to
-
Vlach families, known to be orthodox in faith. Thus it is clear
that the
crection of tombstones was not limited to a particular confession. About
dualists we just do not know, for not one inscription
or motif crearry
rt,fcrs to a deceased with such beliefs.
beliefs but the view that the stones are dualist is belied by place
and time.
The stones are found in regions beyond the borders oidosnia,
such as
crcatia, Montenegro, parts of the Dalmatian coast and western Serbia,
particularly around valjevo.(rl9) In addition, the majority of
stones
that can be dated seem to fall into the period from the mid to second
half
ol the fourteenth century and continue into the sixteenth century.
Thus
th.e y were erected in regions outside
of Bosnia and Hercegovina ai a time
ufen tfere is no sign of any heresy in these regions, and began
con_
riderably later than the appearance of Bosnia's heresy.
 90 l\ledieval Bosnian Church
h'xanrination of Sources 91
The srones. hon'er,er. dc-; appear in Bosnia in rhe fourteenth century rh'r' 111'111i5p of the rrcccased, rvhich is in kceping with the
rrhen that land u'as at rhe heighr of its economic prosperity. when irs htli.rvi'r worrdly
rht'sc noblcs cxhibited in rife. It i.s also possibre
rnines s'ere active and its merchants $:ere having livelv trade n'ith the that many of the
rliorils n,t,re nreant to bc simply <jccorative;(t
\\'cst. At this time the Vlachs, rvho erected in the following century rhe Zj) in this
category'pioinfy
l*:!.ng th. bt'rdcrs (often imitating plantsj
most elaborate stones o{ all, began to take over the direction o{ caravans carvecr aroun, ,i,"
frr'rrv !r.,n('s. r'he crec.rative motive is "ag;,r,r.
"r
from the coast into and through llosnia. By rhe next century the Vlachs also the logical
thr R.r';rn srcle placccl on a nre.ieval grave "*ptunrii,in
had a monopoly on the caravans and had begun to amass large fortunes. near'ViXegra;ii;r;j'T.h"
urc rf rhr'li.man stone suggests that
The Bosnian nobles also profited from the trade and,with increased the deceasec|s family found it,
{}r'ughr it attractive ancr for iho, ,"oron
contacts with the West, they began to imitate the lives of the Western used it to .l".u.ut" ,r,"-g.r""
hi'rc rn.tifs mav havc bcen c<lnnccted with ancient
nclbility. Lr-rxurious and elaborate courts with actors and musicians burial rites; ancr
errrn. though the original mc'anings
appeared in Bosnia and Hercegovina in the fifteenth century. The ste/ci
may have been long forgotten,
pt''ple continrerd to use thrm sincc
i.h. p.*ti." of having ,r,.'g;u"i-r,gn...,
began to appear at the time the mines began to open and as wealth in- r'rn xravestoncs had cstablished. Arnong these more ancient
creased rhe ste(cil>ecame more elaborate. Those who had wanted to live nrtrrifs connt:cted with, 'cc.mc
creath ritual may weil be certain scenes
n'ell when alive wanted elaborate monuments to mark their last resting irrtlur:ntly a'pc'ared on f-Iercegovinian that
places. Thus we may conclude that the stey'ciwere set up by everyone
Vlach stones that Marian wenzer
ltar spccula*d may bc taken from Vlach
rich enough to afford them. And since thousands of steici were erected, rituals which nray be derived
lr.rrr cl.assical mystery cults.(r2I)
often motifs of this type wcluta t,ou.
it is clear that people of classes other than the nobility al.so erected them rnr.rc(l into the stock of motifs belonging
to the carvers themselves.
- clerics clearly did, and we may assume traders did, as well as artisans \\'r sh.uld avoid b.ing categ.ricar about thc meaning.f
and well-to-do peasants and shepherds. Under these stones are to be motifs and
*'rrl 11u1n* to fit motifs into rigid systems. It is likcry that a given
found rich Catholics, rich Orthodox, and rich members of the Bosnian t;n h.ivt'rnore than one meaning, ancl mcanings may *"ll uo.ymotif
Church, both lay and ordained. And though here and there a motif may rrrrllqt,* to l.cation, ciate, religion, social class,
ua_

have a religious meaning, the custom of erccting a stetak itself is not etc. Fo. exampie, a
vr;k.
ricd to any religion and most of the motifs secm to be secular in nature. 'rr on(' toml)stone may have conncctiorr with a snake curt or
l'rr\\r\\ s.nrr symb.lic mcaning; at the same time it mav signify that the
It is unfortunate that we do not have more inscriptions but we are dut'.*t'rl killed rrv snakebite. It is interesting to note-that
dcaling wittr a society in which the vast majority of the people wcre .w:rs the
sra'rv,ird ar [].ljuni which has a relatively large number of
iiliterate. Thus, there was no point in writing; motifs had to serve the {,fl rt\ \t.n('s is also infestcd wrth snakes
.snake mcltifs
purpose. We must look for a variety of different reasons to explain what to the pre.sent day, some of
t!trt h arc p.isonou.s. 'r'hr:refore, we shourd use
is to be found on the stones; no single theory can explain the stetci care before we try to find
*',rrrqlr thcorv to covcr all .,snake motifs.',
motifs. In sonte cases the motifs may represent customary juridical signs lirr' .rrlv rrrotif thar I want to singre out and discuss
-- and show the family sign, or the occupation or role in society of the is that of the
r'\a!r{,'dl stall- since it has becn found on severar stones which
deceased.(120) In Dalmatia and recent Serbia we frequently find on ${,*r'\' in:KriPtions are clcarly monuments of mcmbers
from the
gravestones occupational signs guns for soldiers, tools for a car- ( lrrrrch hicrarchy, it is oftcn of the Bclsnian
-
penter, ctc. The swords, shields, bow and arrows, etc., which assumed that wherevcr this motif is found
m rrrarhs rhe grave of a nrcrnbcr of
frequently appear on the medieval stones may well have becn placed that hierarchy. Il,ven this is nor a
{f,rrilrn fnarr('f. Frorn Krcrevrjani in Nevcsinjc
thcre for a similar reason. The deceased, we are perhaps being told, was wc have a carvecr slab
rhrt h. presunr:rbly originaily had becn plat:ecl
a warrior, or of a noble family, or of a certain rank of nobility.(l21) over the door of a medieval
qh*rrh rin wlrich is crcpictcd the parr.n
NIany of the stones depict hunts, while others show two warriors on knecling before the Virgin (to
rtr'irn rht' r'hrrrch was probabry decricatecr), behind
horseback facing one another as in a tournament. We know that the whc,m stancrs' o
fvrrtit..l, r.'ed figure with a paitoral staff.(126) presumably
Bosnian nobility did participate in tournaments, for their prowess at a rhe
man
*rlh rhc srall wa.s a' orth.dox bishop. Thus,
Flungarian court tournament at the beginning of the fifteenth century staffs wcre not limited t<l
txrrilrlh'rs.f thc lJosnian church. An<i such staffs
was noted in a Polish source.(122) Thus, it seems that scenes from daily were usecr bv both
(,hlhixl,ix arrd Cath.lic clergv
in Scrbia anci Dalmatia. Ti;r,; _;,
life were frequently used, probably for the purpose of calling attention to i!'$€Arlt rhar the staff courd also nrark the graves
of catholic and/or
q) Medieval Bosnian Church
Orthodox clerics, and can therefore be taken as a general sign for a cleric
regardless of his denomination. And finally staffs on some stones (clearly
not all, since we know in some cases staffs did mean Bosnian Chur-
chmen) may denote zadruga or family elders, for the staff over at least
the past two or three centuries is the standard symbol to denote this
elder. It could well have had this meaning in the Middle Ages as well.
We have seen this connection between the elder and the "djedovltap"
in the story we recounted about the djedovi of Krupa.
One iast item that ought to be mentioned about moti{s is that it is
probable that in a large number of cases the carver, and not the
deceased or his family, chose the motifs. This is frequently the case
today and this fact would explain why we find similar motifs on various
examples of work which, we know by the inscription, were by the same
carver. It is interesting to note the cases where the entire inscription
simply states the carver's name and says nothing about the deceased.
Since the carver at times signed his name by an inscription, we must
keep in mind that on certain stones, the carver may have signed his
name with a picture or a motif. Thus motifs could be symbolic,
religious, magical, or convey information about the deceased or the
carver.
Much more needs to be done about sletci. For example, it is necessary
to excavate cemeteries. The few thorough excavations that have been
carried out (such as those done in the summer of. 1967 in the region of
BileCa) show that many more bodies lay there than there were stones.
This is not surprising, {or in a village cemetery, many peasants who
could not afford stones were probably buried under wooden markers that
have since rotted away. Excavations have turned up few objects buried
with the dead. None of these have had religious significance. Ex-
cavations, if extensively carried out, might well show us ties between
particular motifs (or size and shape of stone) and the age and sex of the
deceased. In the region around Tavan,for example, in the present day,
the appearance of a half -circle at the end of the arms of a cross signifies
that a woman is buried there.(127) If one were to excavate a large
number of graves it is possible that one would find certain motifs were
only found on the graves of females or of children. (It has often been
speculated that tiny stones mark graves of children.) In addition, on
occasions two people are buried under one stone. Possibly certain signs
denote this.
V. Palavestra and M. PetriC recently excavated a grave at Lepe and
found the skeleton of a man, who had obviously died as a result of r
skull-smashing blow. On his stone were depicted a sword and shield, r
bow and arrow, a man standing holding a bow and arrow, and an arm
Examination of Sources 93
bt"ekoning to a horse followed by a dog.(128) Possibly one of the motifs
riSnified the cause of death. If we excavated enough graves, we might
find certain links between particular motifs and skeletons that show
rigns of violent death.
Finally, it is the custom the European world over to bury bodies with
tbe htad to the west; however, the Catholic Church has the custom of
drstinguishing priests by placing their heads to the east. we know that at
Snffnt in Bosnia this burial procedure is not strictly followed among the
firrnciscans, and it is probable that it had not been in the Middle Ages
*rther. But it would be worth investigating. If in Catholic areas, in
*hurch cemeteries, a certain number of skeletons did lie with heads to
tlaeast, we might be able to link cerrain motifs on stones above these
Brrves to the priesthood. However, all of this is impossible until a
rignificant number of graves have been dug up. We can hope that funds
hr such a project can be found soon.
In this study, I shall chiefly use the stones for the data that can be
*lrrwn from their inscriptions. These inscriptions provide much im-
F{irt$nt material about major figures from the Bosnian church as well as
kom the nobility; Bosnian Church inscriptions will be analyzed in-
*vidunlly in Section XI of Chapter Five. The inscriptions are also
trlueble in that they provide data about which faiths iived where; for it
i* *vidcnt that Bosnia and Hercegovina in the Middle Ages was not
**iJorm in religion. Each confession had followings in only certain
*rers. and no faith could be found throughout the land. The data from
inxriptions can aid one in compiling a map of where the different faiths
duJ hevc adherents.
Churches
It is important for the history of religion in medieval Bosnia to find
{*'nrrete evidence on where particular confessions lived. A basic source
&x this ls data on the location of medieval churches.(129) A limited
numbrr are referred to in the sources.Besides these,archaeology and folk
ttlditir:ns provide evidence of many more. In fact contrary to general
rqNnion it is evident that in medieval Bosnia there were a large number
q;fehurches. In various issues, particularly since the War, of the Glasnik
*tthe Ttmaljsh.i muzej reports have appeared about the excavation of a
tuirty of these churches. In addition to these many other foundations,
*"rfu*n un plots of lands called ''crkvica " or some other form of the word
"thurch", have been found. In fact locaiities of this name, or places
fuut which popular tradition retains tales of a former church, very
&*qu*ntly yield ruins of foundations when they are investigated. Many
 Medieval Bosnian Church
9tt
problems exist about these churches. Since inscriptions are rare, it is
almost impossible to date them. Some foom their shape, or from
fragments of carving, are clearly prior to the end <lf the twelfth century'
Othcrs, particularly Orthodox churches, often (when documentary
evidencc can be found) turn out to date from the sixteenth century. But
this can not explain the maiority of these ruins, many of which must
date frorn the Middle Ages. Since the ruins have no inscriptions, often
we cannot iearn the basic facts about them : When were they built? How
long did they exist (though if medieval cemeteries are beside the church
we can make rcme fairly accurate guesses about these matters)? What
denornination was the church? (Again cemeteries are a help, as are datg
about the religious con{ession of the population fiom visitation reports,
continuity between the location and or cemetery and a later church.
and topographical data.) On the question of denomination we rnust keep
an opcn mind to the possibility that the Bosnian Church also had church
buildings and that many of these church ruins may have once been
churchcs of that local denomination.
FOOTNOT!,S 1'O CFIAP'|ER II
l. Luccari, p. lc)7 . Not to be confused with "Manoilo Grk " who r:opied twc
gospcls in the first half of the fourteenth century. On the latter see Z'
Kaimakovic{, Zidno slikarstao u Bosni i Ilercegoaini, Saraievo, 1971, pp. )0"
52.
2. I-uccari, p. 30; Orbini, p. 353.
3. Luccari, p.42.
zr. l\1. Dinii, Iz dubrouatkog arltiaa, kni. III, (SAN), Beograd, 1967.
-'. St-'e Appendix A for Chapter ll for a discussion about specific charters
qucst ionable authenticity.
(r. V. MoYin, ''serbskaja redakcija sinodika v nedel ju pravoslaviia'''
l/izontiiskii uremennik, XVII, 19(r0, pP.278'1t3. See bclow Chapter V.
7. On this source see A. Soloviev, "Svedotanstva pravoslavnih iz-vora tt
bogomilstvu na Balkanu, " GID, V, 1913, pp. 81-tt2.
[. V. Grigorovil, O Serbii u eja otni\enijab k sosednim derYautn
preimr\lestutnno u XIV-XV "rtoletiiah, Kazan, 1819. p" 12.
9. V. JagiC, "Ein neu entdeckter urkundlicher Beitrag zur Erkl'a'rung dtr
Bosnischen Patarenentum s," Archiu fiir slaaische Pbilolagie, XXXIII' 1912'
pp. 581 87. .v
10. Most scholars who have tackled the problem agree that the Grigorovii
rext is drawn from a later manuscript. see M. Dim(, Za isloriju rudarstaa v
srednietlekounpj Srbiji i Bosni,l deo, Beograd, 19tt, p.94' antl his lootlgte I
on that pagc for further referenccs.
1 1. Thomas Archdeacon o{ Split, Historia Salonitana, ert F. Raiki , MSl-lSM
2(r, Scriptores, 3, Zagreb, 1894.
[rxamination of Sources os
;-' t \r{:i. "lz.vori bosanskc povijcsti, " published in a collectivc work,
&''qritl lrrt,,tttlrlt zt nuljt IJo-tne i Ilerc,egouintt, Siirajevo, 1942. pp. 1 38. This
ka,h l*e' puhlirhed at an unfortunatc time ancl has a nlost unpleasant Fascist
**drar; h()qrrrr, on thc book's behalf it rntrst bt said that nrost of the con-
{t:f1r,trd{l\ harl lrr'en prt'part:d lrr:fore thc rvar brokc otlt. As ar('lllilny collectivt:
ta.;..*lr. thrs tirlrtrttt'is urtcvcn antl at timt's is ttrltrred lly a Crolrtiart lrilts
*.fo,**,ur.,, \irit 'r (hll)t('r is l'rlfcctly straightl<irwar.d. lrr atlditiorr .inc"ii(i.i.li",l
*s4i, r$ 19.1i) lit can lrear tto rt'sponsibiJity for tl-rc unpleasltltt format in whir:ll
&;ui **.1r apprared. Unfortunately, however, dt:spite thc chaptcr's title, it
&&qr.*r iiilly !l()( unr('nts and ignores all other types of sources.
t ! iil Aa,l,,r'1, (NDBI l) lll, l95t, pp. I 16.
:4 tAN, Iltlgraci, l9(r7.
* i1 1h"'ugh 1'rrblishttl prior to 1940, thc firllorving voluntc was not cited by
*tl rnJ (i)nr;rns ir glt'at dcal of nratcrial on t[e salc of slaves in Dubrovnik,
xanrr r:l qhich is pert'inent to thc l)atanns: (]. [rcntti\nlk, Islttrishi sportenici
*',*ir**-lit,tr, ,trltit.,d. ser. III, sveska 1 . (Kancclarski i notarski spisi 1 278-l j01)
$&,t" llwrgra,l , 1932. A scconcl volume with less material on slavcs was
6s1,nsqu.ntiy published by fremo(nik under thc title, .Splrl tlubrouathe httn-
-1.av*ssv.lini. I 17-apisi notara'l'onra7-ina de Savere, l27tJ ft2)' JA|ZV, Tagteb.
$"3{ }
tr* N ltirg.r, Noles e! hlraits pour Seruir a l'Ltistoire tles (roisades ail XVe
*,n**,i1,I serit's, Paris, lfi99.
ii Lr lirul,r;r, XXIV, sv. I'2, 1918, pp.94 lI()
l* Analyrir of thc texts, in l/iz.antijskij t,remennile, XVI, 1959' pp. 317-
r $S,i Thr t*xt\ themselvcs arr: printed in XVII, l9(r0, pp. 278 3t3.lior the
o*o*hrrr.;lrrrrl Il,tnl(s s('('Ip. 1tt/. \45. ''/t8.
lt [ 3,{,{. ttf ttt,lp I ]t{.
.l$ *r*nr ia. l2)0, whcn the fJosnian bishop rnovtd to l)jakovo in Slavonia'
Md th* Lll ,'i rhe Ilosnian state, the Bosnian bishop had no rcile in lJosnia
sllS{q, *xr:*pt {or Pt'rcgrin Saxorr (bishop ca. 131i9-1t) who had been close tcr
S*nl-kppxn N()tronlanit'trefore he hecame bishop and rvho was able to contin
i!* rhr* rel,rtxltship aftr:r hc assunred thc post. Thc case crf Percgrin will bc
'&*xrsJ rn ( haptt'r IV. Otherwise thc llosnian hishop kept court outside of
&*:arr** lllr rri.rin role (as far as \!'c can tell from sLrrviving documents) was
o{
&1$*r$itl,{ rh,irrers for thc Ilungarian king or nobles living north of the Sava,
*,*.,J ircrr{ r {)irrtv to ,,r jtrclging disputes over lantl in Slirvonia. A stuclv oi thc
&u;ritrl*rtr iii rhis brshoyrric gives no tiata atrotrt flosnia at all l-hc main rm
I gn{rfi.r*e.asoi tlrt bishtlp:n I)jakgvo was that,by his absence anci latk 9f connectit'lr
' *,.*..& Si \nrdn ("vrints! lrc lt'ft a vacuLlnr in llosnia that had to bc fillecl by somcone
*&ur Art fit$r\ting ljhcliomcnon which dcntonstrates the merely {ormal (and
utrt,rspltt*nti role of the llishop of llosnia in Djakovo is the fact that on oc'
*s*4wt rhr &irnian hishop for.rnd witnessing Ilungarian charters is already dead.
I $:es *xs*rpl*, llt May, 13(r4 we find Peregrino Bosnensis witncssing a royal
,gf#h{ h, lhr Croatian {anrily of the BaboniCi. Thc glant confirnrs an carlier one
is$$dr sx l lJl). Pcrcgrirr had been Ilishop of Bosnia from l3ltll or ll49 until
t111.la:lrrxt'nt VI in I l)(r nanrtd Pctcr to sttccced him as lrishop. Peregrin also
*"e*&iqsffl Er a n itncss to the confirmation of a 1292 gtant to Stiepan Frankopan
dls* $ i"1(r"1.
.l'his
shows that the royal chancerllcry on occasions simply
e*qhsi$.riiyri)l)itldrlillrcsof witnessesoff sonrcearltercharter''I'husingentral
tq lwr tre ls,prfious as to whether witnesses ol Ilungarian charters actually
*irsf $.ir{rflr r,r n'itrrcss the proceedings they were said to have witnessed.
 96 Medieval Bosnian Chlrch
Examination of Sources 97
Secondly, we see that the Bosnian bishop was of so little importance that the
Hungarian clerk copying a list of names was not aware of who the bishop was in
case,if we were to rely on papal documents for information regarding the
particular teachings of the different popular heresies, our knowledge would be
I 3(r4, when Peregrin had been dead almost a decade. For these two charters see
extremely sketchy and unsatisfactory." He notes the tendency ro call local sects
CD, XIII, pp. 371-72, and pp. 414-15.
try the names of major heresies without establishing either the identity of
21. This point of view can be found in fra L. P. (etrovid), Krllani bosanske
doctrine or their affiliation with one another. He stresles the fact that none of
crkue, Sarajevo, 1953, as well as in the works of V. Glusa[, (see bibliography).
the pontiffs of the thirteenth century, though they continually condemned and
22. CD, XII, p. 33.
excommunicated heretics ever presented the tenets of any particular group or
23. CD, IV, pp. 24r'42.
revealed in their correspondence a precise acquaintanceship with the ienefs of
24. Malinowski provides an interesting description of some of the problems a
the dissident sects. shannon concludes that Innocent III was more concerned
legate would be faced with in trying to draw conclusions about Bosnian beliefs
with the anti-religious aspects of heretical teaching and the consequent con-
on the basis of questions he might have posed. ". . . no 'natives' (in the plural)
trmination of the innocent than with carefully distinguishing individual groups
have ever any belief or any idea. Each one has his own ideas and his own beliefs.
rnd their peculiar teachings. He concludes, ' 'A careful examination of thi papal
Moreover, the beliefs and ideas exist not only in the conscious and formulated
correspondence would seem to warrant the conclusion that the papacy was
opinions of the members of the community. They are embodied in social in-
primarily concerned with the div:overy and suppression of heresy in general
stitutions and expressed by native behavior, from both of which they must be, so
with only subordinate interest in the intracacies of the exact errors involved."
tospeak extricated
Shannon, of course, is writing about Western Europe, France in particular;
"Howdo the natives imagine the return of the baloma(a type of ghost)? I
but. all that he says above is even more relevant for Bosnia, a region on the
have actually put this question, adequately formulated, to a series of informants.
pcriphery o{ Catholicism about which the popes had less interesr and fewer
The answers were, in the first place, always fragmentary a native will just tell
you one aspect, very often an irrelevant one, according -to what your question
rources of information.

has suggested in his mind at the momeot. Nor would an untrained 'civilized
2(r. R. Hofstadter, "The Paranoid Style in American Politics, " pp.3-40, in
rcollectionof essaysunderthesame title, New York, 1967 (Yintage paperback
' man'do anything else- Besides being fragmentary, which could be partially
edition). Though Hofstadter srresses American examples, this "paranoia" is
remedied by repeating the question and using each informant to fill up the gaps,
not at all a uniquely American or even modern malady.
the answers were at times hopelessly inadequate and contradictory. Inadequate
27 . CD, III, pp. l4-1 ). The content of this and the following documents will
because some informants were unable even to grasp the question, at any rare
be discussed in the narrative chapters.
unable to describe such a complex fact as their own mental attitude, though
others were astonishingly clever, and almost able to understand what the
2li. See Chapter lll:CD, VIII, p. 131 for the 1319 letter.
ethnological inquirer was driving at. J9 D. Kniewald, "Vjerodostgl_1_r! . . Rad(JAZU), 270, 1949, p. 162.
"What was I to do? To concoct a kind of 'average opinion?' The degree of l{t, B-ullae IX, pt. 96), Monumen t'a yattcana Hurlgariu",
arbitrariness seemed much too great. Moreover it was obvious that the -5s_. I, Vol. 3,
-Bonifacii
Budapest, 1SSA, -t,(tl'9
pp. 178'-79
opinions were only a small part of the inlormation available. All the people, even Jl' Monumenta conciliorum-Generalium XV, concilium Basileense, II,
those who were unable to state what they thought about the returning baloma Vindobona,_1873, Joannis de Segovia, Ilisroia gestorum
Generalis Sj,nodi
and how they felt towards them, none the less behaved in a certain manner Birk ed-), tib, IX, C*nrp. !, p.750. T=here is question or,o--ooiu,
llasil1en1yst\
)ft.the l€rbrpolensis bishop represented. If it were Herbipolensis,
towards those baloma, conforming to certain customary rules and obeying he would be
certain canons of emotional reactions. " (Malinowski, op. cit., pp. 24O-42). The Sish<rp of Wurzburg, i{ Tervipolensis, Treviso.
problems he raises clearly pertain to any illiterate society.
. ll M. Yego, Pouijest Humshe zemlje, Samobor, 1937,I, p. 145, suggests
2t. A. C. Shannon, Tbe Papes and Heresl in tbe Tbirteenth Centurt, thrt the term Pararin was used for members of the Bosnian chuich
b..uurEih.u
Villanova, Pa., 1949, pp. 3, 8-10 has called artention to the same problem. nruggled against the authority of the Catholic church and refused
ro
Having noted the common assumption among scholars that medieval popes had rylorms (rather than for any doctrinar error). He concludes that "...pi
the terrn rrad
comprehensive knowledge of heresy and the individual renets o{ particular sects, {'$$r to be.used {or any rebel against Rome. We cannot demonstrate
the ac-
he states, "Such an assumption is based on the anachronism of attributing to iur;rr'y of Vego's assertion, we shc2uld keep it in mind tf'.oult,oui if,.
the popes of the thirteenth century the same rapid and accurate facilities o{ e*rrative chapters. The use of.but
the term "patarin"' on occasions to deicribe the
communication and information that are taken for granted in the twentieth" KeTi{ pirates of omiYgives weight to Vego's view; and
we might add
Perhaps the inference is justified, but if the official correspondence of the popes *rll the term's use in the sources suggest anything more spJcific that rarery
than Vego,s
is a fair criterion of their knowledge of the peculiarities of the various heretical l{ryIe$rion.
groups, then onlyone of two conclusions is possible. Either the popes assume lj. DiniC, Iz dubrouatkog arbiua, lII, p. 193.
that the heretical doctrines were too well known to bear repetition l,i Martene-Durand, Vetirum scriptorum. . . I, paris, 1724, col. 1j92.
- a sup-
position disallowed by the repeated requests of popes for additional information, 11. Theiner, MH, yol. Il, p. 23i.
or they possessed only a general knowledge of the prevalent heresies and con- ir' St'e hlow, Chapter V.
tented themselves with combatting doctrinal dissidence as a whole. In either l' farlari, /.1, vol. IV, np. 2l6 17.
!S Thciner, MH, vol. II', p. 237.
98 Medieval Bosnian Church
Examinaion of Sources
99
39. Rafki, llo,1omili i Patareni, pp. 462.-6. st't'ond, since his doctrine had been
.10. Ihe manner ra'ith which the enormous multi-volume work Illlricum linked to B.snia (be it.through his testimony
or through fact), it is a reasonable
hypntrr..;, thrt r," lied about trips thither
Sucrum was compiled may lead us to have great admiration for the energy and draw atrention awav from a hcresiai& to
labors of Riccputi, Farlati and Coleti *,.,_,.*h... in north Italy; third, Jacob
- the three collectors and compilers who
carried r>n the workone after the other between the 1730's and 1819
hinrsclf stated that according,o,t"..,l"Joiit,"
*ct, it was no sin to lie beforc:
- but
hardly for their critical acumen or ability to distinguish the a-uthentic from the
hish.ps and thc inqrisition,'and in
rhrur the heresy. Thus. if
ir.iir,-,,,'i,-*os a mortar sin to reveal facts
Jacob still rr,,rJnil'i-r*ical errors ar rhe time of
bogus. On the cornpilation of lllyicum Sacrum, see F. SiliC, "Hrvatska trial,,which is likely, since at the time the
historiografija od XVI do XX stolieda," Jugoslouenski istoriski tasopis, ll, fr1 *^r'."f."^ay r;i.p.r";^;.r"il, i, i.
ryrssiblethat he believed it his cruty to li.,;;;; up certain facts and to prorect
193(r, pp. 39'1+2, and M. Faber. "Zur Entstehung von Farlati's 'Illyricum ccrtain individuals. In fa.r, the whole
Sacrum ,' " Wissen-rcbaftliche Mitteilungen aus B-H, vol. 3, 1891, pp. 388-
i,ea.,ilroiiu'city dwc'ers gornf,i'.u.rt
uncducated Bosnia ro lcarn religious
cbctrint] i, u".y hard
to imagine. What
9J. Sevcral scholars should iointly unclertake a thorough study, region by language did they comnrunicare';nZ
W" -oi'.r,,gg"r, thar prior to rhe 1340,s,
rcgion. of Farlati's data ancl their sources. Such a stucly I am sure will show that whcn the first Italian mcnti.ncd
by Jacob uirit"d tornir, an ltalian heresiarch
rnany coffrnronplaces in the historical literature will turn out to have no solid harl flcd from ltalv and sought rryiu*
sotrr<:c llase at all. in no.n;o
ancr th.t tht, Itarians going to
B.snia w.nr to viiit that hcrt'siarci
1+1. A Donduinc,"La }{ierarchie Cathare en Italie," Archiuum l-ratrum
,"a trr. rr.:i"rsors. wc sh.,rcr arso note the
matter of the intent lying behind,t",t.,.u_,,'i.
I)ruadicatrtrttm, XIX, 19t+9, pp. 280 313. Charles l_ca. n.r;r,,n*.,",f,"
tempration to rarsifv records. when
42. A. Dondaine , Iln'l-raity' ndo-manicltlen du XIIIe sibcle, Le Liber de the b" struck down l. .ir"ri*,'.i,*
"n".'y,,,
Friar Bernard l)clicieus who, speaking
r", ir," whore
,lruhus l,rincipii.r, Rome. 1939, pp. 64-78; and Kniewald, op. cit., pp. 190 langucdoc in a formal riocument, Franciscan order of
declared that not only were the inquisition's
r 38. r('L.rdsnor worthy of rrust Lyl
4J. A. Dondaine, "La Ilierarchie Cathare Archiaum Fratrum
,.;;;.;;;;li believcd ro be so. (H. C. Lea,
lli'torv t'I trte Inauirition ( r stri),
:f."_u
N";t"r;,'i
l)rat'licalorunt, XX, l9)0, pp. 234'324. "l
Itl()) l.ea goes on to noint 922 prinrins'.i"i. vi. r. p
out that *itn.r.", *"r"
4.1. G. Arnati, "Processu-s contra Waldenses in l-ombardia Superiori a th.it to say cverything
',(currcd to rhem: great weighr wasgivr.nio pputar "n.nu.rged
hclief; no tjistinction
1.187," Arcltiuio Storico ltaliano, Firenze, 1861, ser.lll, Vol.ll, pt. 1, pp. t0- s'as maclc between hcarsay
cvidcncc, ur5iu. ,unro.r, general impressions.
(i I . g.ssip andsolid informarion.. idle
Ivervthinr.l lgrir";" accusecl was taken down.
45. F. RaIki, "Prilozi za Jroviest bosanskih Pararcna, " Starine, I, Zagreb, (rt('s a casc in Niort lrom
i240 whcre lbg witncsses, most .f whom [{e
1 8(r9, pp. I 38-14 0. pt'rsonllly know the accused, gave did not
/t6. Ibil., p. 138, note l; ancl Kniewald, op. cit.,pp. 1(r3 (i9. testimon y.1"tiia ,p. zl3il }te p.i"i. r.'."r",
"l l('\lim,'ny given by yotrng^thiltlrcn (p. zrioi on.t ,h* resrim.nv of false
i7. RaIki, op. cit., pp. 109-138. nr'\\cs (('.9., a case from 1323
u pamiers, whcre six.fals. *i,rr.rr"r, o,.LrA;"g wir
4fl. Knicwald. olt. t'it., p. 146, note (r3. rwi) priesr:;, were sentenced, p. 441).
/r9. l\'1o(in's rlating the Z:rgreb manuscript slightly earlier than the 1387 trial reav'ns givs11 alrove for t;ut'stioning.
Thr;, ; addition ,. ,ii-ri."ro".;fi.
particurar inluisition doc.umenrs ,"t!..ing
of -!acob should not worry us too much. First he bases his dating on the papcr on tn " fJosnians, " we also have to fr. ,urpi..u.
rvhich the tracts rycre written. Fkrr,ever, papcr could always have been used a rnqrrisition rctords.
of the general charactc"r of
dccaclc. or so after it was manufacturcd. Secondly, cven if the paper had been used ll lt should bc stresst'd hcre that even if I have exaggeratea
imnrediately after itsmanufacture, interrest in these Italian heretics was not new I'tlwren these rracls and the inquisirionl; thc connection
in i3tl7. Investigations had been going on about thenr for some time and Jacob ;";;h; rtaly
rh,rr a tnnsiderabre part uf th.n-'rteiiJ;;';;;"j"k,rrian and it shruld rurn our
rvas already in 1387 a relapsed heretic. lr(,r'r nr) lonper (,xtant rel)orts trom htretics,, was .rawn
Franciic.ans working rn Bosnia.
10. If it were not for the facts that the inquisition in Turin was carried out by 1"'rrr here is n()r rcfured. i'irr there it t,ili ml,basic
Donrinicans ancl the two tracts seem to have been written by Franciscans, wc ;;;;;;A in th.. trr.t, t., crinn,,ci them
thus we *"'rJ''iil r'e rert with
nright well conclude that the heretics being described in the tracts were not ,Ll"'l[il::Til "'i" J.,*ii,'ne
intended to be Bosnians at all, but these Italian dualists in Piedmont who were
callcd "Bosnian hcretics." For this was not an ephemeral label for Italian 1'l l) Kamher''?::;i"Jld
"Kardinar rorquemada i tri rxrsanska ,
( tttntid .\tlc/a, bogornila
ht,retics simply used during Jacob's trial. Ovcr 20 y€,215 later in 11r12 wc have Ill, 1932, pp. 27 r)i, una n. nr[ti, in ,.f)va
llzr(rr ),,
nova priloga z_a
tkrcumcnts {rom Chieri referring to Chieri heretics by the name of "Bosnian 6r'ir:sr hrsanskih patarena,"" stdrinc, irv,lniiu,
rtlr"rr)(('(l 'rrc givcn as Appcndix A {nr pp. r,21. Thc 1() arricrcs
ht.retics." 'I'hose called "Bosnian heretics" are named and are clearlv ltalians. chulri"r'vr. rni. renu.<.iation is thc
nr'tr11 1111 1;11'd .r rhcse (ro(
rS,,,.. M. Esposito. "Un 'auto da fl') Chieri t,n 1412," Reuue d'llistoire qrth
um('nts; thus I have, ch.s<n to usc it
comparison
l:cclt,sittstiquc, XLll, l9tt7, pp. 423.27.It is only the Franciscan connccrion 'trrhcr sources.n the lrosnia" at;;;-i" i"nrun.r,ru," rhe 'or
irrerevance for
thrt, lr rrrch of t h is ancl the orhcr Itrliun
that leads us to conclude that the docurlents were intended to describe Bosnians tralts.
1rlt'icr, Ct)tl.X, .7, Btrdaf,t,rr. iAll, pp.xl2
rathcr than thcse ltalians.
) I . Three things ought to be suggested about Jacob's testimony: first that he
\\ thil , X. I,,. 7.I,rnp 83J gzr.
13.

tcstified after being tortured which makes much oi his testimony suspecti Krr;cw,rtcl,...l1crotl.,sroinosl .,.. p.
1,,
' I lr(.rn('r. II.\,14. Vrrl. I. pp. 392 94' 117
100 Medieval Bosnian Church
58. See Feier, ap. cit.,X,pr.7; and, AB, pp. 139'177.
59. La Vita di S. Giacomo della Marca (1393-1476)of fra Venanzio da
Fabriano, edited by P. M. Sgattoni, Zadar,1940. See Appendix B, Chapter II
for a source on which is based a bogus claim that Jacob referred to dualists in
Bosnia.
60. See two volumes noted above in note 58.
61 . De Conformitate Vitae Beati Francisci ad Vitam Domini lesu, of fra
Bartholomaeus of Pisa, Analecla Franciscana,IV, 1906, pp' ))5-)6.
62. J. Jelenid, "Necrologium Bosnae Argentinae," GZMS, XXVII, 1916,
pp. 337 17.
63. D. MandiC, I!ercegouoVk.i spomenici /ranjeuathog reda iz turskog doba,
Mostar, 1934; and J. Matasovid, Fojnilha Regesta,in SpomenikSKA Vol. 67,
Beograd, 1930, pp. 61 4)2. Mandit's coliection despite its title has material on
Bosnia as well.
(r4. Much visitation material can be found in the appendix of documents
collected by B. PandiiC , De Diocesi Tribuniensi et Mercanensi, Rome, 1959.
This work and its documents cover these dioceses during the Turkish period.
Since the visitations have not generally been utilized by non-churchmen and
since they are scattered throughout a variety of iournals, I will list here all the
ones that I have utilized from the earliest that I know of in the 1590's up to
1615. Since this date is roughly 200 years after the fall of Bosnia and since by
that date the Turkish administration no longer effectively blocked Catholic
church building, 16)5 seems a good cut-off point:
a) K. Horvat, "Monumenta historica nova historiam Bosnae et Provin-
ciarum Vicinarum Illustrantia," G2M5,1909, pp. l-I04,3I3 424 (index pp'
tOt t 18). Contains visitations from the end of the sixteenth century' from 1600
and 1601.
b) Ambrosii GuEetii (Gozze), a report of 1610, taken from Farlati, see
Pandiii, p. 109.
c) Dr. F. M. "Dva savremena izve$taia o Bosni iz prve polovine XVII
stcrljeia," GZMS,XVl, DA4, contains 1) reports of the Jesuit Bartholomaeus
KaEiiof 1612 and 1618 which chiefly discuss Srem and Slavonia, pp.256'65'
and 2) the repon of Mariian Maravii from 1655.
;'St.pt fiom 1622, see P pp' 1 09-
d) Reports on the diocese-
t f 2 ; frim 1624, see PandYi(, pp. """nt.s"
ttZ-ttO; and especially see
^!dV:(,
K' Dra-ganoviC'
'stepanska biskupiia; u Hercegovini," Croatia Sacra, Yll, L9i4,
''i"U";i"
pp. 2958. Draganovi6 includes a valuable introduction which explains the
..i.,.otic situation the Catholic Church in Hercegovina was in at the time.
e) Visitation of A. Georgicea (Athanasius Georgijevi6) from 1626, rn M'
Batinid, "Njekoliko priloga k bosanskoj crkvenoi poviest"' Starine,lT' 188r'
pp.116'36.
l) K. DraganoviC, "IzvjeSCe fra Tome lvkoviCa, biskupa skradinskog iz godine
1(r30," Croatia Sacra, Yll, 1934, pp. 65-78.
g) K. DraganoviC, "Izvie5{e apostolskog vizitatora Petra Masarechija o
prilikama katoli[kih naroda u Bugarskoj, Srbiji, Srijemu, Slavoniji i Bosni g.
1623, 1624," Starine, 39, 1938, pp' l-48.
h) Michael Restii in 16J9, see Pand/id, pp. 116-119.
i) S. ZlatoviC, "lzvie5tai o Bosni god 1640 od Pavla iz Rovinia, " Starine,21,
1890, pp. l-38.
i) A final visitation in this period, to the best of my knowledge still un-
Examination of Sources 101
publishcd, was that of Marijan Pavlovif in 1623 whose contents are sum-
marized by K. DraganoviC, "Katalog karolitkih Yupa: XVII vieka u Bosni i
llmccgovini," Croatia Saua, years 13-14, numbers 22-23, 1944, pp. 93-96,
Draganovi6's article also contains summaries
of several of the visitations noted
rhrve and contains much interesting material on the state of the Catholic
Church in Bosnia and Hercegovina in the seventeenth century.
65. Report of Antonius Righus in I 703, in PandY-id, pp. 129-17, reference to
Irtrrins, p. 132.
66. Pius ll, Europa Pii Pontifcis Maximi nostrorum temporum uarias
tontinens bistorias, Basel, 1501.
{i7. Pius lI, Commentarii renrm memorabilium, qude tempoibus suis
tontingerunt, Rome, I 184.
6tl. J. MatasoviC, "Tri humanista o Pararenima ," GodiYnjak skopskog
nlttnfskog .fakulteta, I, 1930, pp. 245 46.
69. See below Chapter VI.
70. Orbini, Il regno de gli Slaui, Pesaro, 1601 , pp. 312-54.
71. K. Draganovii, "lzvje!6e apostolskog vizitatora Petra Masarechija o
grilikama katolickih naroda u Bugarskoj, Srbiii, Sriiemu, Slavoniji i Bosni g.
1613 i 1624," Starine,39,1938, pp.43-44.
72. G. l.uccari, Copioso ristretto deglianali de Ragusa, first edition, Venice,
1605; citations in this study are from the Ragusa, 1790 edition, pp. 30, 9l-92.
71. This note marks the place where Masarechi's one departure occurs. For
$$ trxt s(r below , imm ediately following our translation from Orbini.
71. Orhini, pp. 312 14.
71. K. Draganovi(, olt. cit., p..43.
76.'festament referred to in CirkoviC's notes ro the recent Serbo-Croatian
rrrnrlation of Orbini. M. Orbini, Kraljeostuo Slouena, Beograd, 1968, p.341.
77. D. Obolensky , The Bogomils, Cambridge (England), 1948, p. 266. For
lurther references to these latter day Paulicians see Obolensky's footnote 2 on p.
lf)6
78. The only other connection which I have been able to find between Bosnia
slrlcrrtainlatter-dayPaulicians concernedsome in Bulgaria and is drawn {rom a
te:'.1{) visitation there by BakYiC. Having made use of Orbini's account, BakYiC
r,vr thr Paulicians (he calls them Paulianisti) had come from Bosnia which
*rpkins why their books had all been writren in Bosnia on parchment. He then
br*lly notes their conversion from error and then returning to their books,
frt*r that they were all in Slavic in Cyrillic. He had found certain book
mrnurcripts written under King Tvrtko from which the Paulianisti knew that
thrv had c,:me from Bosnia and had brought with them this heresy of theirs. (8.
fttrntrrd!.in (ed.), Acta Bulgariae Ecciesiastica, MSHSM, XVill, Zagreb,
lNi$7, pp 79 80.) Unfortunately, he tells us nothing about the books' contents.
! urr;xrt that they were mainly, if not entirely, Gospel manuscripts. This in-
&:rrmrtion provides some confirmation for Orbini (or Pietro Livio)
- thoughwere
we
nnurt allow for the possibility that Bak3ii's inquiries and interpretations
rul,*rred by Orbini's account. Unfortunately, just as with the Orbini-Livio
mrtsial , the passage of considerable time makes it impossible to connect any
pillices of thc 1640 Paulianixi with the Bosnian Patarins. There is con-
r&!*rble material about these seventeenth century Paulicians-Paulianisti in
Ait;t !)ulgitriae Ecclesiaslica, though unfortunately nothing further about
p.r*ible cnnnections with Bosnia. However, this interesting sect calls for a
 to2 Medieval Bosnian Church [:xarnination of Srrurct.s 103

rhorough scholarly study. Then we'would be in a far better position to discuss 9(r. l). Kuripe"si(, Pntopi.; hroz IJo.rntt,.\rhiju, Ilu,garskt i Rumeliju, 1530,
this group's relationship (if any really exists) with groups in Bosnia. And we tr.rrrs. l)i. Pt, jan,rr it1. Sirrlicrr,. l95t). 1'. 21.
rllav a( leasr be able to tcll whetht'r the Paulianisti should trace their ancestry
')7. I)i. Sp. R,r.lt'iiiii. "()rllonrak hrgrrnrilsk<'g jt.vandjt'lja l\'sanskog tcp,,Ii;.'
birck t. the Armenian Byz-antinc Paulicians or whether they came to the eastern
B.rtal.r iz. 1393 godine ," B'lgursfu Ahddeniia n,t Nuuhite, izuesti.ia na Instituta
l]alkans considerably later from the West *
--be it Italy or Bosnia as Orbini :t Istttriju, l4-15, 1964, pp. /l9t-509. 1'he hicrarchy list is a vt'ry imJrrrtant
ll.ivio) and f]akXi{ believ(,. vrurct'. lt u'as without clucstion u'rittcn in I l9l. It will be discussed in dctail in
79. I-uccari, pp. .30, 42, 197. Ch;rptt,r V.
tl(). l-uccari. p. 91. 9ll. (1. t)ani[ii. "Hvukrv rukopis," Starint,lll. 1871, pp. l-llt(r. gives thc
til..lunius Resti, (ltntnica Ragusina, cd. t.\odilo, Tagreb,1893. MSIISM, tt'xt of thc gospcl ancl c()rnl)arcs it rvith two other gospcl texts. Sce also V.
.lA|1LI , 25 Scriptores. 2. t)irrrri. "Minijaturc ll,,'akrvog rukopisa." I.rtrtrtski trllttsnih (l-2), 1957, pp.
llJ. Rrrgcr dc Wcnclovcr (d. 123(r), (./tronica sit,e.lktres bistoriarum,IV, ed. l,) 5 l.
ll. Coxe , Lonclon, 181r2, p. tl7 ff. Marrhacus Parisiensis, Cltronica Majora, ed. 99. li. Ri[]ki , "[)va nova priloga z-a poviest bosanskih Patarena," Sldrine,
ll. I-uard. Rer. Brit. Mrdiiaeviscriptores,IIl , lfl76, p. 7B ff. conrain:i the same XlV, ItlU2. pp 2l 29: V. agi{, "Analrcta Ronranir. " Arcbit' li)r Slauiscbe
tcxt. 'l'he Eishop of Roucn Thcobaldus provides a variant text in Martenc- -f
l'ltihtht,qie 2t, l9()1, pp. 20-.3(r.
I)urartrf . I'/.tt,sttttt'tts not'tts ant,cdolrtrunt,l, Paris, 1717, pl. 901 903. ]'he l{)t) Radoji['ii, olt. tit., p. t(X)
y.lcr'.rnt pa\saAr's:rlrt'ut rhe.anti-popc from the East are cited and discussed by J. Ittl. t)aniiii-, ttf . ci! , p. 6.
S'd,,k. "Cl prtanju hcrerifkog 'pape' u Ilosni 1223 i I24t," Ruzprat,e V. l()l A. Solovjev, "l"a l)octrinc dc l'69lise dc Ilosnic," Attd. dt Belgique,
llaulttmunnr, zbornih Slot'ensha ahademija znltnosti i umjetnosti, lazred za llullcrins ,lettrt's, 1t'scr., 34. 19,18, pp./t()/t, 496 97.
:,gttlttt'in.tkt' in JrrYltent r,r,r/r',, Lirrhljan.r, l9(r(r, pp. l/t1 )9. lttl J Sid.rk, "KrrPirarovo btisansko evandjelje rr skkr|u pitanja'crkve
Hl. "Fi'inilka kronika" lcd. C.'l'ruhclka). C7-MS, XXI. 19o9, pp.447.57 | lrrsarrskc.' " .\lortt,.1 5. 195t. pp. ,/t7 (rl. antl his "i\larginllija uz jcdan
"l.jct<rpis franjevalkog saniosrana u Kr. Sutjesci" (ed.
J. Jelenii), GZMS, rrrkrrlrl5'11kvc l)()sansk(" u nrletafkoj l\larciani ," .\lot,o,6 u, 1957, pp. 13,'{'
XXXV, 1923; XXXVI, 1922+. I 5.1.
81. lttofis ./ru Niholt, L,tIuanina, ed. J. Jelenid, Sarajcvo, l9l(r. Un- l0,i l-i. Stojan,,r'il. ,\Iiro.tlttt,ljeurt .itt'unlielje , facsimilt cdition, Bcograd,
krrturrirtcly, JeleniCpublished this chroniclc in a ncvcr utilizcd, idealiz-ed vorsion 1897. S. Kulialrakin I)Ltlt:o,{,dlshd i fuif hu ispitit,tn ju o Mirosldulieuom
of t'ishteenth century Slavic script rvhich makes it in{uriatingly difficult to read. i,'r'anJitlir, Srt'rrr. Karlovci. 1915. t)j. Striicvic{. "M:ristori minijatura
tl1. For rhc rexr of Pope John XXII's lerrer ol lJlg to Mladcn 5uhiC, CD, Nlirosl,rvljevog icvandlclja. " /,Rl'1, I. 19t2, pp. litl 203. R I-jubirrkovit',
Vlll, pp. 13) ff; it is discussed belorv in Chapter IV. "llrrnrsko cparhisko vlastelrnstvo i r'rkva Svctog l)ctra u Biielorn poliu."
ll(r. r\n.nynri Spalatensis, in ,Scrilttores rerum Ilungaricum, Dulmaticarum, .\t,irnt,n,lX X. 1959, |p. 97 l2j,
(.rr,tlit'urum t,l ,\tfut'rtnic'trum rteleres uc Ot,nt,ini,III. Vindobonensis, 171tfl,
105 A. $111111,jt'v. "t.:r i\lrssc Cirtharu'," (,tlticrs d'ltulLs Cttlhtrcs,lll. No.
r'd. I. Schn'andrncr, p. (r59. According to rhc Split anonyrnous writcr this l-'. l')51 51. r'r'. l()9 lttr'.
w.ndr.us {irc.ccurred in l3)(r; LaXvanin clatcs ir I376 (p.39). Perhaps the lor, J 5rtlak. "l'rohlcrn'l)()sansk('trkvr" tr n:r\oi hrstoriografiji od
story of tht'hugc firt'nrclting rocks ancl levcling nr<iunrains rvas based on a maior l)ctr,ur()ti(':r tkr (ilu\ta," ll,n/,219. 19.17, pp. I l(r 122.
nrinc lirt'. l1)7. Sct't,spt'ciirllv Ir. l'urc['anu, "Al,otrvphcs lrogoniiles tt apocrypfi3s
tl7. E. Fcrmendlin (ed.) "chronicon observantis provinciae Bosnae lrotrrtttik's," /?.'r ttt',/t I'lti.rtoire Jt's Rtligiott.r, CXXXVIII, 1950, pp
I'rt'rrtLr
Argcntinae Ordinis S. Francisci Seraphici ," Starine, XXII, 1890, pp. l-67. ,ll 51. l7() 2lli, .rntl A. \/rrrllant, "LIn Al,,rt ryphr' Pscurlo lrogonrilt': l-l
. lltl.. l\l 1'ayyih okig, ','Lcs Kristians lBogomiles parfairs) de Bosnie tl'aprls
(l('\ l)()cum(,.rs -l urcs'inr,'dirs," .Sii,lost.Forschungen,lg,
Visirrnd'lsaic,"/i'r,//r,,/t.rl:tttlts.\/rilc.r,X[.ll.tl-'i), l9f,J.nn. 109 121.
l{t8. _1. tu.,n,rt. , I}p,qt,nt i/.tli l.nigi i lL,qtn,h, I}r\N. Sofiir, l9l5. pp. 73 87.
1960. pp. l0S 1.13.
.€9 For cxar.nplc okig cites rwenry rwo cases of baitinas of namcd krstjani l0() I l)iillinr r , llt itrit'gt zrtt .\t,l'1sn,qv5c/ticbte det Mitttltlters, II, p. tl(r.
(Okig, ap. cit., p1't. 123 2/1. 'I
his rrrrte tclls us nothinA ah,ut thc historv ol the nranrrscript rvherc this
()o. lbid., pp. 122-23. rrholitutt appcar:it nor is it clear rvht,thcr ht'retics or latrr inquisitors wrote it,
9l. -l'cxt
ll,id., p. 121. l l{r\\'('vcr, since tlris rrlrr.rustripr was |tipular rr'ith thc tltltlists antl since clualists
92. ol Radin's Tcstamenr given in l-j. Stojanovii, srare srpske pouetje i serc attivt' in l.ornblrclr' ;rnrl 'l uscant'. \\'( nl.tv takc this gloss as :r sugg('stion
2, Bergrad (SKA), 1931t, pp. lt3 t6. On the krstjani kmeti, sce
fi'rnt,l. pt.'l'he th,rr thcre irlvr rttre tlrrirlists in IJttsnia.
pp I1-1 5u+. wh.le testament is analyzed bclo-w in detail in chapter VII. ll(1. A. Sar,ic llt'b.ir'. "O rrurorln,rj Pcsrrri 'r'ar I)uklrjan iKrstitcli .fttviut.' "
9l.,F.r an cxanrpleofthis sort of data, sec F{.Sabanovii, ,,Lepenic-a u prvom 5AN, /.h,mih tdLlot,t, X^ lrrstrttrt ra proul'avanje kn ji7-cvrrosti. l, Ilurgratl.
stolfec{u t urske vladavi ne" in Lep e nic a, Sar ajevo, I 9(r3, pp. n3 : 2O7 . l')51. pp. 2t3 -171,
-l'hc
94. rnost ifirportant oi which wcre p'blished as tliel first volume of a new II L ilrcsc r',trious runr()rs hitvt' l,t't'n trrllt'ttt'rl anrl 1-rrirlisht'd by Nl . Had
scrics - t\lrnrtntntt 'l-lrcica bistoriam Slauorum Meridionalium
illustrantia- Yrl.rlrii, "O islarrrizarilr lrosarrskih krstiarrt." ()/t211v. ll [)r'ct'ntbcr 19.]7.
Kanuni i kanun nanrc z-a Bosanski. etc., .. . SandYak, Saralevo, 1957. ll.l. i\I . lld,liiiahia, "K..rrnrij,r rr lJoq.rrrilirrr.r." lit't,t, 195J. No. 5. pp.
91. lltitl., pp. .3 l. 43. 56, 66. ll5 l(r. I)j. Pu1rtr,,i(, "Rt.{'l},,gonril'rr lI'snr" /,it,rtt, 1951. No.7. pp.27.3'
rcA Medieval Bosnian Church Examination of Sources 105

75. Di. PopoviC, "Da li su Bosanci u XVII veku znali z1 p9-g9m.!1q," Li1ot, stone the meaning of the markings. The girl replied, "We are poor and can't
lg)2, No. 3, pp. r87-89, M. Traliic, "Da li su Bosanci u XVIII vijeku znali za write. We put it up to remember Mother. The sun and moon are there to look
Bogomile," ITistorijshi zbornih, V. (3 4), 1952' pp.409-10' pretty." (M. E. I)urham, Some Tribul Origins, Laus and Customs of the
l l3. M. Karanovid, "Jedan zanimliiv mramor kod Skender-Vakufa," Bdlhan.r, London, 1928, p. 123).
GZMS, XL, 1928, pp. 137-38. 1211. I. Boianovski, "ZaXtita spomenika kulture i prirode u podrutiu budu6e
l14. Gtasnik Zemaljshog muzeja, Saraievo, (GZMS). akumulacij na PeruEcu na Drini, " unpublished manuscript, p. 4 of typescript.
115. M. Yego, Zbornih srednjoujekot'nih natpisa Bosne iHercegouine, l2). See M. Wenzel , "A Medieval Mystery Cult in Bosnia and Her-
Sarajevo, vol. I, 1962, vols. II, III, 1964, IV, 1970. Various corrections (or cegrrvina," JournaloltbeWarburgandCourtauldlnstitutes,2lt,lg6l,pp.Sg-
other readings) can be found in E. Hamp "Notes on Medieval Inscriptions of I07;andher ''Bosnian andHercegovinian Tombstones- who made them and
Bcrsnia and Hercegovina, " zbornik za f lologiiu i linguistiku (Novi Sad), XII, why?," Sidost-Frtrscbungen,XXl,1962. pp. 102 43; and her "The Dioscuri
1969, pp.83-91. in the Balkans," Slauic Reuieut,XXVI, no. 3, 1.9(>7,pp. 363 81.
l16. Srednieujekouni nadgrobni I i H, published by the Zemallski
spomenici 126. D. Sergejevski , "Putne biljeXke sa Nevesinjskog pol!a," GZMS,nslll,
rnuz,ei in Sarajevo. 1, A. Benac. Radimlja' 1910; 2, A. Benac, Olouo, l9,1lt, p. )3.
(Beorrad. I.951); I. A. Benac, Siroki hrijeg,l952'.4' l). Sergeievski , Ludmer.
...1-i7 "y DragiC, "Oboljenje, smrt, i pogrebni obifaji u okolini Tavne,,,
isrz; :. 5. ne(tagii. Kufres) 1914'. 6. M. Vego. Liubuiki, 1954: 7. S. 5AN, Zbornik ratloua, XIV, EtnoFralski institut, 2, Beograd, 191I , p. 134.
Be!lagi6. Kalinouik,lg62r 8. 5. Be(tagi(. Popouo.l966'.9. S. BeIlagi6. Slelri ,. l2l;
7.cpii' Y. frl.u.-tll-u-Y M_ PetriC. "Sredn jovjekovni nadgrobni spomenici u
RaJotl, (NDBH), XXIV, Sarajevo,1964, pp. t3O 79, especially pp.
t enlralnc lhtsne, 1967.
I17. See especially GZMS, Nu"se starine /N.S/ and Starinar. The number of 17 4-7 6.
sites listed in these journals runs into the hundreds, thus-here I shall just list a 129. Sources on churches: I) Archaeologicar: of particular value are the
handfutof the most important sites. All are announced by 5. Beltagiil "Stec{ci u issues of czMS from its first issue in r889 to the present, ,starinar, and the
Oplil'i6ima," NS, VII, 19(r0, pp. l4t 14; Steici na Blidinju, published as a ntanuscript of Arbeolo"sh.i lehsihon,gonlpiled at the end of the last
century by V.
monograph by JAZU, Zagreb, 1959 " steici u Ziemlfu," Starinar, n.s. 1)- Radimsky which exists in a German handwritten edition and a typed s".tion
16, 1964 65, pp.279 92; " Boliuni - sredn joviekovni nadgrobni spomenici,' ' translation at the Zavod za T.ausritu spomenika kulture in Sarajevo. I'am indebted
Starinrtr,n.s. XIl, l9(r1, pp. 175'205; "Liubinje sredniovjekovni nadgrobni to Professor Bojanovski who was kind enough to lend me tiis manuscript. II)
-
spomenici," NS, X, 1965, pp. 113'161; "Ste€ci na Nekuku kod Stoca"' Ethnographical: the traditions about churcaes and legends concerning them
Etasnik Etnografshogmuzeja u Beogradu, XXl, 1958, pp. 11) 71. have been preserved in ethnographic w.rks. Again the best sources ure
the
I18. M. Wenzel, I-Jkrasni rvotiui na stetcima, Sarajevo, 19(r)' rthnt'gralrhic arricles in cZAIS. Also see the voiumes of l-.tnografshi zbornih,
I19. For example, see M. CorouiC-LjubinkoviC, "Nekropole igrobni belezi" n.rcklo sranuvni(va. SAN, Beograd, rJ. Cviiil. generar edito4 which pcrtain
in GradialX, Aiheololki institut, knj. II, Arheololki spomenici inalazi{ta u to Bo-snia and Hercegovina; these vorumes contain many traditions about
Srbiji ,1. ZapadnaSrbiia, Beograd, 1913, pp. 169 98; A' Horvat "O stetcima ch urches.
na podrui-iu Flrvatske,'' Histo/iiski zbornih, IV, 19t1 , 1-4, pp. I17'62; A-
Benac, "Srednievekovni stedci od Slivna do eepikuia," Anali Histoiiskog
instituta u Dubrouniku, Il, 1953, pp- 59-82.
120. On this subject see the interesting article of R. Vulcanescy. "Les Signes
Juridiques dans la region Carpato Balkanique." Reuue Jes Etudes Sud Est
fiuropfunnes (Bucharest), II, I 2, 1964, pp. I7-69'
121. Since the stones with coats of arms are almost entirely found far away
from the maior medieval castles and since none of the known coats of arms of
leading {amilies are found on ste/ci, Marian Wenzel - who has shown the
connection between various of these stones and the Vlachs - has suggested that
some of these military motifs may have a tribal basis and reflect the family, clan
<>r htttrtnto which the deceased telong. M. Wenzel, "Stitovi igrbovi ,,u *t"d-
cima." Vcsnik -Vojnimuzej(Beograd), ll-12, 1966, pp.89 109.
122. J. Dlugosz, Ilistoriae Polonicae, XI, in his Opera Omnia, XIll,
Cracow. 1877. p 141. The Polish chronicler who describes the games
erronc.ously refers to Flrvoje VukXid as the King o{ Bosnia. The games took
place in 1412. The chronicler died in 1480.
123. Thar decorative reasons could be important is illustrated by the story o{
an Aibanian stone. decorated qith a sun and moon. erected at the beginning o{
this centuri'. Nliss Durham asked the daughter o{ the woman buried beneath the
106 Medieval Bosnian Church
API)l'.NI)lX A IrOR CtlAPl'tr.R II: ON FORGi'.D DOCUMENTS
A typical forgcrf is thc documcnt which connccts August and
-l'homas Knez.ovil (allcged predecessors o{ a prominent eightecnth
ccntury lrranciscan fanrily) with the foundation in about 1398 of thc
l;ranciscan monastery at Krelevo.(1) 1'he KnezoviCi, not known from
any for.rrtecnth or fifteenth century document, are credited with
rcstoring a chr,rrch of St. Catharine there and building a chapel of St.
Mary's. In 13f15, no Franciscan chr.rrch existed at KreXev<l , as we know
fronr thc list of monasteries in the Bosnian vicariat written by the vicar
at thc time, Bartholomaeus of Pisa.(2) It is hard to believe that a church
u'ould havr, bccn built therc ancl ruined within thirteen ycars subseque nt
ro 138). In acklition, since thc wife of King Stefan Tomris (1443 6l)
was nanred Katarina, and since hoth king ancl queen did build churchcs
ilclucling a St. Catharine's at Jaice. it set'ms pr6bable to attribtlte the
building of the Kre(evo church to that royal pair.
A second questionable charter which refers to the hierarchy of the
lirrsnian Church is an trntlatcd ortt' isstrt'd. according to Surmin. its
cdirtrr, around l37Oby Tvrtko l(1353 91) to Stjepan Rafkovic{.(3) Wc
ckr not have the original; all that exists is an eighteenth ccntury copy in
which the Cyrillic letters have been transliterated into Latin ones. The
grirnt('('. Rajkt'vii, ts not known lrom otht'r ch:irters, and considcring
thc siz-c of the grant (Lalva, Brod ancl Klople near Zenica, Cukle (2)'
ancl two villagcs in Usora) and the important role the grantee had
played, allegeclly saving the key fortress of Bobovac from a l{ungarian
attack (presumably in lxt3 - the only known Hungarian attack in this
lrcriod), his anonymity is odd. Furthcrmore, we have no evidcnce that
thc Ilungarians pcnetratccl that far into Bosnia in 11631 other evidence
suggests that thcy attacked in two wavcs, each of which was stopped to
in Plivskai'upa of the Donii
thc north of Bobovac
- once at Soko the
kraji and thc second timc at Srebrnik in Usora. The doctrmcnt has
'l'vrtko calling himself "Lord IJan'I-vrtko, by the Grace of God, t.ord of
nrany llosnian lands, Bosnia and Serbia, Sol, the Podrina and manv
[]osnian lands."(1r) In no othcr charter in rvhich Tvrtko is entitlcd han
dot,s Scrbia appcar in his title. J'vrtko only added Serbia to his title aftcr
hrs 1377 coronation as king at Mile(evo, after which he almost alwavs
placc'd Scrbia before Bosnia in the title.(5) The rePetition of "many
I}osnian lands" in the title also is odd. The grant was issued bv Tvrtko
and his younger brother Vuk. Vuk revolted against Tvrtko in 13(r(r and
we know that in l3(r9 Vuk was in exile, still in revolt, against his
brother. ln 131/t on the occasion of Tvrtko's wedding we find Vuk back
in favor. It is unknown when between 1369 and I37 4 this reconciliation
Ilxamination of Sor-rrces 107
'i
$
$
had occurred, but the occasion of the wedding does seem a likely time.
$ Since thc action o{ defending Bobovac against the Hungarians would
havc had to have takcn placc in 13(r3, we would expect the charter, if
authentic, to have been issued not long after that date. Wc know that
l vrtko awarded Vukac Hrvatinif , defender of the key Soko fortress in
thr Plivska Yupa, with a large land grant in 1366.(6) The presence of
Vuk with Tvrtko means that the Rajkovii charter would have to have
I'ecn issucd between i 363 and 136(r, or sometime after 1370 (at
whatevcr time 'l'vrtko and Vuk were reconciled). If the charter sup-
poscdly dates from before I 3(r(r, then the reference to Serbia in the title
islnachronistic.lf the charter was supposedly issued after 1370, then it
is odd that I'vrtko should have waited 7 or mclre years to reward this
vcry loyal scrvitor.
-l
hc wording of the Rosnian Church's guarantee is also unlike that on
trthrr charters. 'l'he charter is valicl as long as "thc church of God has
root in Bosnia," a most unusual phrase, that secms to look forward to a
tinrt: u'hcn the church will not exist there; something that wc would not
lxpcct the bishop of a church to do. A ioint court of djed (Bishop of the
llosnian Church) and two stroiniks and three noblcs will judge charter
violatkrns. Such a court is not an impossibility, but we know nothing of
rt ironr othcr docr-rmcnts, ancl most charters are not explicit about the
proccdure that will takc plat'c if a charter is violatecl. Whcn we consider
rll of thc abovc and adcl to it the fact that the Bosnian Church played ncl
rolc in any othcr surviving charter issuecl b;i J'vrtko, we must conclude
thrt most probably this charter is a forgery.(7) 1'hus I nrake no use of its
('0ntcnts in this study.
Jhcre is one more charter which allegedly mentions a djed. This one,
pulrlishccl in 1710 by B.A. Krlelii(S),was onc of six documents
publishcd by Fra Ivan Tomko Mrnavii (1580-1(r37) in a 1632 work
about the history of the Mrnavii family. 'fhis document purports to
be a grant by 'f vrtkn II to Ivan Mrnavid in l/t27 for services rendered
as a diplomat to the I-urks. It was witnessed by Abbot Mirohna. If such a
gr,rnt had becn matle, the charter would have been in Slavic; all that
l\lrrraviC passed on in I (t32 was a Latin translation. F. SiSiC in 1901
-Ibmko
dcnlonstrated convincingly that Fra Ivan Mrnavi6 was involved
rn;r variety of forgerics, that none of the six chartcrs are known
othcrwise, that all of thenr are at ieast highly suspect. and that no
i\lrnaviC is known from any other medieval clocuments.(9) I arn con-
l'rnr:cd that SiSii ttor cornpletely clcmonstrated the forged nature of this
I il7 charter. Recently 5i.lrk hur tried to rehabilitate the charter and has
arst'rted that "abbot" meant "djed."(10) I{owev.r, Siduk fails to come
to grips with 5i(ld's argumc'nts; thus I shall not make use of this charter
108 Medieval Bosnian Church
Examination ol Sources
109
in the study.
had rvnko really granted LaIva to Rajkovid around
The most famous of the forged documents is one which describes a 1370 he would have had to
takc part o{ it back within the decade. In addition in
grand council, which never took place, of ecclesiastical grandees at the r 390,s r_x* *".
.i"".rv
purt of. the family estat.es Batalo (Dj. Radojicic, ,,Oal_rt
of Teptija
Konjic in 1446 which issued various edicts against the Manichees. This lngomilskog, ievandejella U.gru1_r!gg tepa[ije Barala
iz 1393 godine,,, BAN,
document has been utilized by a variety of historians, including Run- l:utstija na Institut za istorija,xrv-xv, t6o<, p :o<. r"il"
Cospel, written in 1393,ir i..l1l"! thrt .,B.trio,
iir-ipii"" i",t,;,
ciman, even though RaEki long ago proved it to be a forgery.(11) In the who was gr..tty r.no*rr"a,
who held roriEan and LaYva . . . ") Batalo is known'only
same vein is a forgery, dated 1450, in which the King of Bosnia orders from the r390's but for
him t. haveleen given the high court rank t"pti;r;;8;;-;;,"f"'nua
Radivoj VladimiroviC to p..se.ute the Patarins of the Neretva and to prrviously.held significant rerritory. Hence it i,s "i pruuuut. ,r,i ti, ir-iiy t,.ra
defend the faith received from the Franciscans (an odd way for anyone rr.'r of La\va for rcme time. His hoid;ng all of Laxva (as the inscriptr""
1393 in no way contradicts the l3g0 g.rn,
.rri.rj i.,
but a Franciscan to describe Catholicism). The document also refers to to A.uoje, for Batalo had married
llrvoie's sister; rhus it is likely that 'he hal received Hrvoje's
the Council of Koniic, which cinches its forged character.(12) The rrllagrs as part of her dowry Thus we may
.i,.." iutuo'
Vladimirovii family also was closely tied in the later period to the suggest that Bararo's originar
tcrrrr'rial base had incrudcd the grearer prrt otit,.y.up,
Franciscans. A variety of forgeries also turned up concerning the Oh- ,rrrr"."r"., i,
1'-\'*hlr unlikely that Tvrtko would have been granting "rirr"^ll"
L"K;; ;';;""
muievii family.(13) I 170 "..rra
8. B. Kerchclich, De regnis Darmariae, croatiae et srauoniae
notiriae
ltutltninares. 1770.
9..1' SiYii, "5i\o i" car.J^ustiniian postao Slaven, ,, Nastauni
ojesnik, lX,
1901 , pb 390 415 (esp. zr t 3 - l z+).
FOOTNOTES TO APPENDIX A l{) J. Sidak, "O auten,tilnosti izna[enju jedne isprave bosanskog ,dleda,
tl " Slowz, XV-XVI, l9(r5, pp. 2Bt' 9i.
1l7),
I .J. Jelenic{ (ed.), Leropis 1ra Nihore Loilrarina, sarajevo, l9l(r.
l.
l. Published by M. Struki (., Poujesnithe crtice f(7s'ssps i franjeaaZhoga *rrh rhe chronicle, Jerenid published a variery Along
samostana, Saraievo, 1899, pp. 38-39. "(.uncilof Kon.lic'.' ar" publi.h"d of documents. The edias of the
here pp. ion ri. For Runciman'. ,r".i it"
2. Bartholomaeus de Pisa,"De Conformitate Vitae . .," Analecta Fran^ *rrr:lt'banning the "Manichees" from building any more
ciscana, IV, t906, pp. J5)-56. churches, see his
I-t't 'lledieuor Manichee, compass book editiof, p.'rij.'irrti.l'i"*."ri.r,.a
3. Di..Surmin , Hruatski spomenici,I, pp. 8)-86. thrt not onlv were the Councii'.s articles forged'tiut
there never was such a
zr.V. CoroviC , Kralj Turtho I Kotromani/, Beograd, 1925, pp.97-100, who torrntil. B.yr,yili i Paxareni,SAN edition, pp.462 61.
1y
- refusing to utilize its contents
also questions the authenticity of this charter
but also refusing to reject them entirely believes that f'vrtko's title as given in . 12..J. Jeleni6. Kraljeusho visoho i.samottan'su. Nihore, sarajevo, r906. The
lurged order.to Radivo j Vladimirovif is included
-
the charter is clearly a combination of two different sets of titles. Whether the
in the Appendix.
I J on these and other forgeries see
error was made by a forger or a careless later copier is ofcourse not known.
A. Solou jeu,' "Vlasteoske povelje
horanskih vladara," Istorisk, frauni zbornik,
J. Iam aware of only one example (other than the questionable Raikovi6 li{ I, 1949, esp. pp. ll2-821.
liurii"uo prauni fukuttii), i,
charter) in which Tvrtko placed Bosnia before Serbia in his title; this exception
occursin a chafter to Dubrovnik in 1387. (Lf. StojanoviC, Stare srpske poaelje i
l>isma,l, pt. 1, p. 86.) Tvrtlo's seal , signi6cantly, places Serbia before Bosnia.
(lbid., I, pt. l, pp. 83, 85.) Sidak ("O vjerodostoinosti isprave bosanskog bana
Tvrtka St jepanu Raikovidu, " Zbomik radoua Filozofskog fakulteta, Zagreb,ll,
1954, p.42) ingeniously suggests in place of "Serbia" we should read
"Usora" which was frequently part of the ban's title. This would necessitate,
however, a major error by the copier since the two words when written are not
similar. Bur even if Sidak should be corre{t on this suggestion, there are enough
other strange things about the charter
still dgubt its authenticity. - which I point out here - to make us
(,. Surmin , I'lruatsh.i ipomenici,l. pp. 83 84.
7. Also odd is the inclusion of Latva among the lands given to RajkoviC. In
1380 when Tvnko made Hrvoje VukEit Great Vojvoda to succeed his deceased
father, he awarded Hrvoje three villages in La{va (TribouXa, Lupnica and Bilo)
as hereditaryproperty. To have made such a grant to Hrvoje would mean that
110 Medieval Bosnian Church Examination of Sources
111
APPENDIX B FOR CHAPTER II: AN ALLEGED TRACT OF questioned. For how could
anyone who knew anything
even theology or contemporary about Jacob (or
JACOB DE MARCHIA AGAINST DUALISTSIN BOSNIA history) mix up the most prominent
heresyof his time, ,tt" ir"sr'r",'j" 'dli".nta,
Presumably to make up for the lack of mention of dualism in sources worked so unflassingly, against whom .racob
with M.;;.;;;about whose
connected with Jacob de Marchia's mission, the contemporary Croatian Bohemia we have-no existenle in
.evidenceT anj-rny.n. who can make such a
Hercegovinian Franciscan emigr6 D. Mandi6.(1) reverts, it seems, to glaring error abour Bohemia;;rr;;;
for his data on Bosnia,
methods akin to those employed by some of the Bosnian Franciscan ir,i, i, ",lf"g ou. ir *".on,iil.,r,"
families of the sixteenth-eighteenth centuries. MandiC's work provides a ;f[$*'fi#jilI"",i-". "*".,",,,
good illustration of the pseudo-scholarship utilized to support pi s rr .
u ;;;;liF
;;" ffl; JI
preconceived beliefs, common in works about the Bosnian heretics. written a "d, "jl":iif I
sermon about the.Bos"rr;;';;;babry
i:::*}" :;X;,:i.j
"Against Bosnian heretics" wourd have entit'led
Mandii refers to a work of Jacob which he calls "Dialogus contra rin.. rt,u, iioiirt r,. called the heretics it
manicheos in Bosna," and claims it was referred to in the 1697 in- Bosnia in his retters' And
it rh";jj'; in
vestigation of Jacob's qualifications for sainthood. The book or tract, chronicle does nor provide that Fra Marianu.s,
",nlnrrtr"o
,h;-;;;;ifr'ruruna;6,, narrative wourd
written byJacob, stillexisted in L697 but is now lost; but the chapter
headings of it as recorded in 1697 have been preserved, and MandiJ H;l:,::iffij,!;;lrhus, on ,r," u",i, "r this nimsy."r",",.i i, ,r,"
gives us these chapter headings as an appendix at the end of his book. As over a docum"", i" h;;;;l:,::: ilI.,i5ifi;::1,il,1;:::lfilf
a title for these chapters Mandi6 writes,"Dialogus contra manicheos in title of the no:ltng".
ro.t"*nor"
Bosna." Since Mandi6's book is in Croatian, one would naturally ;J;ilf "*,"ni chapter headings he
assume that this Latin title was in fact taken from the title of Jacob's
tract as recorded in 1697. The chapter headings, amonS other things,
do refer to items such as "on material churches" and twice refer to
Patarins (though never specifying Bosnia); so the reader accurately
concludes that a certain number of chapters truly discussed dualism.
However, in the 1697 list of chapter titles the word Bosnia never
appears. Puzzled, I looked at the very bad photographic reproductions of
this 1697 list which Mandi6 publishes and nowhere could I find the title
oi the work as given by Mandii, which was the only link between the
chapters and Bosnia. In other words, the title did not come from a
document o{ the 1697 investigation but was a creation of Mandi6's. The
chapters on dualism and Patarins could easily have been written about FOOTNOTES 1'O
Italians or heretics anywhere and be based on inquisitional material; APPENDIX B
Mandii simply decided to supply them with a title to connect them with
Bosnia. Where did Mandi6 find this title? In his narrative Mandii cites a
Franciscan chronicle written by a "younger contemporary and fellow
n"ju,?;Li",lii;fi:"r?:J*" crkua bosanskih hrstiall,Chicago. 1e62, chapter
countryman Fra Marianus of Florence," that Jacob when in Bosnia ,h.; ,i';;", h::fi*';:??;':".1 pp' 442'4tt pnoto,tui'o"i,r,.
wrote ' 'Diaiogus contra manicheos in Bosnia.' ' (2) Again Mandid goes ".'i,"Xl .r
to great pains to give the complete title as if he had a source saying that
Jacob had written a work with such a title. In a footnote, though, we see i3x;;:il;xiJ:{,#,.;ii{!ii:it,,:I.T;ril'in',xilriii'.:;r;
dl il ;;il j;Jlil::,
cnd,t Jo.o b iSS"; n,t usui
ir,i,-l",
that the chronicle does not give such a title but simply lists various of ;1 #il ",r,.* put togetheri
"," ",
his chronicle
in thc eieht';enth century
Jacob's writings including, ". Item alium contra manicheos de -yt rs,,T::1
and thus
drewhis remark aboui"rrrrr";"i".i,:'"'l: .::"rre,
no source. Presumably
Boemia, et alium contra Manicheos in Bosna. ..." The authority of he

Fra Marianus on anything to do with theology or Jacob has to be Ltl,',#l';;1iT,ffi*dTf t;H1:,:#Xtrhl;ilT$'.1[i+t:

 CHAPTER III

BOSNIA FROM THE END OFTHE

TWELFTH CENTURY TO THEACCESSION
oF STJEPAN KOTROMANTC CA. 1315
L' Background: Catholicism and
Ortbodoxl in Bosnia and Enuirons

Bosnia's geographical location has made it a meeting ground between

the cultures of Eastern and Western Europe. However, its mountainous
terrain has limited the degree of penetration of both these cultures and
has left Bosnia relatively isolated. Prior to the Slavic invasions,
Christianity had, to some degree, spread through Bosnia in the fifth and
sixth centuries, as evidenced by various ruined basilicas, and by the
participation of a bishop from Bistue (from Bistue Nova near Zenica, at
whose site are ruins of a large basilica) at two church councils in Salona
(nc'ar Split) in J30 and 532.(l) Christianity seems to have been of two
types- Nicene, which spread inland from Dalmatia, and Arian, which
was the faith of the Visigoths, who were in the area from roughly 49O to
535. In some locations, two churches both dating from this period are
found in close proxinrity to one another, which, it has been argued,
shows the co-existence of the two faiths and considerable tolerance by
the respective congregations.(2) Late in the sixth century, the waves of
the Slavic invasion began. Not yet Christianized, the Slavs brought their
own religious beliefs with them. Unfortunately very little concrete
information about those beliefs has survived. In time, probably by the
tcnth century, most of the Slavs were nominally Christian. Once again,
Christianity had spread inland from the coast. During this period there
was a language dispute among the Dalmatian churches between the
partisans of the Slavic and Latin liturgies. There is no evidence that the
dispute ever reached Bcisnia, however, nor is there evidence that Latin
rven penetrated into central Bosnia during our period until the Fran-
ciscans came in the fourteenth century.
We have almost no sources for the region of Bosnia prior to the reign
of Ban Kulin (1180 1204). Except for a brief period of Byzantine
ovtrlordship in the third quarter of the twelfth century, the state was
rt4 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia to Stjepan Korromanii
11J
governed by a ban who ruled under nominal Hungarian suzerainty.
Extant sources suggest that, at least from Kulin's time, the ban was then in Dubrovnik. Resti reports that in
generaliy able to act as an independent ruler. Bosnia was divided into
many Yupas ("counties"), and presumably the tendency toward local l" i::,"J,'::::ffi;' i::
R'dis;; ; u',r,.n' ", llgg the Archbishop
u",,,, n" Lu.,,'::;u". * o{

oathorraithanffi ,,"1i:,t:.?,ffi"|,.. ji:,,TT::"',._:f

units seen throughout Bosnia's subsequent history was already in
existence. It is hard to believe that Kulin had much control over those
language' "(7) In addition,,r," i*,X*l:
,n.it""rr Gosper manuscrints
and church inscriptions ^ru.uiurrif
regions away from the center of his state (the Visoko-Zenica-Vrhbosna-
assume
from Bosnia
that a Slavic rite was used in
;. ;ii in sravic. Thus we can
Krelevo area), or that he even had much knowledge of what was oc- .hur.h"r.
curring in more distant pafts of his banate.
The region of Hum, south of Bosnia, was less isolated than Bosnia II.. Herery in tbe Balkans
and Dualism
{rom the coast and thus received more outside influences. Christianity
had penetrated parts of Hum earlier and deeper. From I 168 to 1126 Actual heretical movements
also existed in the vicinity,
know how deeply ,r,"y but we do not
Hum was ruled by princes of the dynasty that ruled in Serbia under p*"rru;;',;;.rnia. The most significant
hereticar movemenr
which Orthodoxy spread. An Orthodox bishopric was established for
duatism' which in various
oi ti,. ,*"riiti r"a
#r, thirteenth centuiies was
Hum in 1219 with its seat in the coastal town of Ston. In the coastal
over sourhern
f"r;;;;';,ii". uuriou, names existed
region of Hum, there already existed a Catholic population. The Serbian Europe as wet arl
in A;;;lia. Duarism which
rulers brought into the area and supported Orthodox priests, who rhar two principles "t
were engagea ;n srugglg _ believes
cvil, spirit against marter _ usuall) good against
converted a considerable portion ofthe population. This caused a certain can b" trr?.d back to rn.i"nt persia.
Berween 100 B.C.
amount of conflict between the two churches, and in turn contributed and 300 A.b.;#r," was the dominant and
common aspect of
to and exacerbated the quarrel between Prince Miroslav of Hum (ca. many differen, Cnoriil-rects,appearing
1170-ca. 1198) and the papacy which broke out after Rainer, Ar- East' some of which,.combined in the Near
Gnostic sects generalty
.t ciririi^nity.(8) These christian
*i,r,
chbishop of Split, had been murdered and robbed in "Neretva."(3) identified Testament God with the
grxrd principle who
Pope Alexander III expected Miroslav to repay the money and punish ^i";
created the spiritua'*o.ra
and opposed him with
the murderers. In the course of the dispute, Miroslav drove the Catholic
satan (often identified
*irh j"l;;';;;"'ord restament), the evil
principle who created
Bishop of Ston from that town and refused to let the vacancy be filled. ma.tter, this world, and
iambus of the dualist...,her"rierl", man,s body. The most
The pope then excommunicated Miroslav, who in turn allowed Or- ,rr"lrr"r*eeism, founded by
Persian named Mani (born ii ,^. Zii,.r".,f,.O a
thodox priests to take over many of the Catholic churches in the vicinity
of Ston.(4) Miroslav, brother of the Serbian ruler Stefan Nemanja, was
rdeas spread rapidly
in North Afri;; uni'*urr,".n
in 275).Manichee
suppressed after a r""e Europe but were
clearly Orthodox. Not only did he favor the Orthodox clergy, but he also r"j'*ai'ou, b"ttr" bv
built the church of St. Peter and St. Paul on the Lim River to which he
;'ffi*"t the catholic
gave over twenty villages for its support.(t) . Most scholars agree Manicheeism had been destroyed
Whereas Hum thus had a mixed population of Catholics and Or-
the early Middle
Ages. It in Europe by
,uruiu"J.urr"nt in persia and in
nme lands farther east
thodox in the coastal regions and a predominantly Orthodox population and rnr, ^'r-]n",.U
fr*"'iri some influence on the
Paulicians who had
inland, Kulin's Bosnia (ca. 1200) was nominally Catholic. All of the appeared ln
arlt.fiu
tcnrury.(9) The paulicians by the early ninth
Bosnian state, as well as the territory north of it as far as the Sava, was were""rr.rn
;;",
included in one diocese under the Bishop of Bosnia. The bishop was
Bvzanrine empire *aeed
u-rong-#';i#; "nO'U.r"" warriors, and the
hnally destroying war against them before
consecrated by the Archbishop of Dubrovnik (Ragusa), whose theiifortiri"a 3"f;irr .i i"in
t
suz-erainty over Bosnia had been recognized in papal confirmations
tha ror
''i", .r,r,.
rowed,
Brlkans and settledin
.;;, ;;;ffi ;fffiT';;: .?li; J:,::",I"fr:
throughout the twelfth century up to 1187 and 1188.(6) All the Thrace
Bosnian bishops mentioned in sources up to 1233 were native Bosnians.
Philippopolis r..a"- plovdiv). -
^"a-grr*r.* "
specially in the region
of
During the reign of T1a.r
If our sources are accurate, the Latin rite was not used in Bosnia. 1"t". of Bulgaria (927-969), a dualist
ftovement arose in
Writing early in the eighteenth century on the basis of archival material that kingdom. ih" dri
fi,rsom t, whose
"r.,.'i""' b.r"".a ;;'flT: nlna;:t.?:#ff
i
nam e'n
I
t,t6 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniC lfi
and social aspects.(10) The religious doctrine was dualist. The good thc.l.gy. lt is hard ro conceive that
the Bulgarian
-u peasants would have
spiritual God created a spiritual universe, the angels, and human souls. I*rn any nrore likery to be attract"a ,o theorogicalry speculative
One of the great angels, Satanel, sinned or revolted in heaven from d()ctrine (particularry. one rh"t rejected
this world; than the Bosnian
which he was expelled. Having thus been exiled, Satan (who, as a result |rrsants whom we discussed in the first chapter.
of his expulsion, had lost the "el" from his name) set about making his Bogomilism spread to constantinople,
where its philosophical ideas
own world and created the visible and material world and all material altracted a following among the
intellectuals and pseudo-intellectuals
things in it. He created man from clay, but in order to give him life he thr uppcr classes' From,there its doctrines of
(stories vary) either induced God to blow upon the clay or else captured
rp.*a rnto Anutor^ unJurro,
thr.ugh nrcrchants and crusaderr,
to ttr.'*"st. It quickly attracted a
an angel and sealed him up in the clay body. Through sex and lirable'follclrving in northern Italy
und ,orth".n France,*r,"." u uu.i.,y
reproduction the human race of souls
bodies
- angels imprisoned in human
has been perpetuated. Finally, taking pity on man, God sent a
ril dualist ch'rches were formed.ltt;
tn rrun.. the dualists were called
c'rthars (thc Pure ones) or Albigensians
- 1rft.. tt" town of Albi , one of
spiritual being
- Christ - to earth to bring his message of salvation.
The human aspects of Christ's li{e were only apparent and after his
thcir centers). Thc
--..y11d.
r,lrrtroycd thcrn (120g
,"nt ogrinri them, which
I22g), """"i"rily
is called ,f," e.tUig.nrian Crusade. In
apparent death he returned to God in heaven. The way to salvation was northcrn Italy, the dualists were putr.i.rr.
'l'hcse often .rtt.a
basically through an ascetic life, renouncing material things. western Europ_eans kept up their
contacts with their co_
Society was divided into two orders: the layman and the initiated rrligirnists in the East. In 1167 u
bish,rf nrmed Niketas from con-
perfected Christian. The latter, having undergone a spiritual initiation, trlntinople appeared in Saint'Felix-cre-carnman
near Tourouse to attend
became possessed of the Holy Spirit. If he did not sin thereafter, upon his i.rnd dominate) a Cathar church .oun.it.fti;
Later in .h";;,;;;,
death, his soul escaped from matter forever and returned to heaven. The cathar bishop name. Nazarius went
to Burgaria for baptism"
uninitiated mortal who died without this initiation had to endure ''nrbard
end brought some sacrecr Bogomir ,.*,,
il.-L to Italy. Inquisirion sources
another worldly existence with his soul once again imprisoned in rh.w that all the Lomhard cturches
d".i;;; th"i, buptir* and doctrine
another body. The perfected Christians led ascetic lives, worshipped (for lr''l (i'e ol rhrec Slavic centers _ Bulgaria, Dragovica tr.rr-pi;f ip
the Holy Spirit within them) by an act of adoration by laymen. They ..Sclavania.
Srpolis)( l -3.1 or "
rejected as many material things as possible, renounced family ties, llulgarian Bogomir influence
spread west chiefly via the rreretical
recited the Lord's Prayer a prescribed number of times a day, did not ihurch founded in Constantinople,
work, lived on the charity of believers, kept long fasts (never eating wrrictr traa extensive contacts with
Itx,Wcstern rvorld. Bulga,rian dualism
meat or drinking alcohol), and rejected marriage and sex. Linking the tothc rest.r the sourh slavs in
,fr"rpr*a directly from Bulgaria
,h.
Old f'estament God with Satan, they rejected that book and all the ttrcsrcd in Macedonia, Thrace, "or,".n'Brrkans. The movement is
patriarchs and prophets in it, since they believed those men served una po.riity Serbia in the twelfth
s*'llury, although we have no evidence
Satan. In practicing their religion, they rejected all material aspects of of it this early in B.;"ir; H;r"
sr Darmatia' Late in the 1170's,
st"tun r.l"-unja herd a church council
the service (e.9., church buildings, icons, crosses, baptism with water *hich exitcd some h11e1ic1 fr3m
S*-Jir.ir<l Even though the
- hence their hatred of John the Baptist - and the bread and wine of
the Eucharist).They had a very simple service held in private homes
drx'ription .f the councit .
in his L,/, g;;r; il_a.tuit, that wouid
help
&'ntify rh. nature of th.eir tr"."ri,
which consisted of the lord's Prayer, the ceremonial breaking of bread, ft*rerics wcrc Bogomils. This
?".rr'r.fr"lrrs assume that the
rou... state where the exiled
and the exchange of benedictions with the believers.
Bogomilism soon acquired the character o{ a social movemenl
hcretic werrt. They may well
frru""l--i".rl"r
n"J io Mucedoniu or Bulgaria;
trleve.r' it is also possibre rhar some
Ai'nerents beiieved thes should not obe;- their masrers. pav raxes, or lrr bt,gin to hear of heresy in Rosnia
n"Ji.t Hum and Bosnia. when
iight v.'art. Such teachings musr have been atlractive to rhe Bulgariea in tf,. thirteenth century, only
;tnxlm of r\lexandria exple^ssly links
prasantry, who had su{fered greatly during Tsar Symeon's (891-927} that h;;;y with heretics from any
{?f;sn east of Bosnia'(15)
However, most of our material
long wars with Byzantium. Since the Bogomil movement seems to hart ir.{'!f1
{rom western sources, which about Bosnia
been quite widespread in Bulgaria and Macedonia, it seems probabk lackecr informution about Bosnia,s
t*rr nith tht, East.
that these social aspects contributed to its successes far more than iE Tht sour.cs for the late twerfth and
earry thirteenth centuries arso
118 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia to Stjepan Kotromanid
lrg
mention heretics in Dalmatia, but neither the papal agents who visited previously been distinguished, most probably it refers
Dalmatia nor the Dalmatian clerics who wrote about local heretics give to the Slavic
world excluding Bulgaria and Dragovica (i.e., the general
any details about their doctrines. area oI
Dalmatia, Croatia, Bosnia, Zeta, aid Ralka, or some specific
Thornas the Archdeacon of Split, whose chronicle of his city was within that area).
place
written prior to 1268, tells a story of two brothers, Aristodios and The "De Heresi catharorum in Lombardia" gives a fairry
Matheus, born in Apulia and brought up in Zadar. They were gold- detailed
description of some of the sophisticated duaiist beliefs
smiths by trade, and frequently went to Bosnia in connection with their held by
caloiannes' which were also shared by the church that derived
work. They knew Slavic and Latin. They fell into heresy and began to its
doctrine from Bulgaria.(18)
teach it with much success. We are not told where they acquired their Bosnia is not mentioned in this document. Since elaborate
heresy or what the nature of their heresy was. Archbishop Bernard of doctrines
could only have arisen among at least semi-educated people
Split tried to convince them to give up their heresy but failed; so he having some
acquaintance with theology, it seems plausible to prace
confiscated their property and exiled them from the city. We are not told tire center*of this
church of the Sclavani in Dalmatia, where intelectual life
where they went. They may well have returned toZadat,which Thomas was con-
siderably more developed, rather than in rural Bosnia.
elsewhere tells us was then a hotbed of heresy (without stating what In addition,
Italian was widely spoken in Dalmatia, which wourd have
sort). Smarting under their heavy punishments the two goldsmiths facilitated
communication between ltalians and Dalmatians. In fact,
recanted, accepted Catholicism again, and recovered their lost property; Dalmatia had
contacts, through commerce, with both Italy and Constantinople
so did all their "misguided" victims.(16) Since we iind Matheus (where there were Bogomils). It is quite possible,
witnessing a decision to award some village lands to the monastery of sv. however, that during
persecutions on the coast the leadership of this
KrYevan (St. Chrysogonus) in 1198,(17) we may suspect that their Dalmatian current had
sought refuge in Bosnia and may even have attracted
renunciation of heresy occurred prior to 1198. Thomas never hints that some Bosnians to
its be liefs. It must be stressed that it is probable
the brothers relapsed into heresy again aher their reconciliation with the thatsome,or even many,
of the beliefs held by the Italian churches and described in
church. Much has been made of this story, but it really tells us only that document, regardless of where in the slavic rands
the
two cultivated and persuasive artisans were heretics for a time and often they derived their
baptism, came from their own milieu namely French and other
went to Bosnia. They may well have been in Bosnia at some point that Italian Cathars. -
coincided with the time they were heretics. Since the brothers seem to A second inquisition treatise, "Tractatus de Hereticis,',
hlue returned to the fold before I198, we probably cannot link them -Dondaine attributes to Anselm which A.
with the Dalmatian heretics, whom we shall meet shortly, who fled to of Alexandria and dates about 1270,
also describes the period from the lare twelfth
Kulin's court from Split in 1200. century. This document
contains much detail on the splintering and factionalism
Whether the two brothers were dualists or not is unknown. However, of the Lombard
cathars at the end of the twelfth anJ the beginning
it does seem likely that there were some dualists in Dalmatia. Inquisition of the thirteenth
centuries, and gives details on their hierarchiei
sources speak of dualists in ' 'Sclavania.' ' The earliest of these up to the date of writing.
fhe most interesting part of this tract fo. u, ls the very
inquisition tracts is "De Heresi Catharorum in Lombardia," written where the author traces the origins of the movement.
beginning,
about 1210, which describes the chaotic state of the Cathar church in This is the first
reference to Bosnia in the inquisition literature
Lombardy during the preceding decades when it splintered into six about the origin of the Bosnian heresy.
as weri as an explanation
distinct churches. For ordination and establishment, each o{ these Anslem starts his tract with Mani in persia and his
churches turned toward the Slavic world. The two largest Lombard doctrine of two
principles.
churches turned to the churches of Dragovica and Bulgaria. Two others
And he (Manil) raught in the region
had bishops who received their ordinations in "Sclavania": Bulgaria and phiraderoit;;
of Drugontie (Dragovica) and
Caloiannes, Bishop of Mantua (a church later known as Bagnolo), and ""d
;;.";;';;:";r'"rd
there so that they
three bishoprics: Drugont;'", erijr.;",
Nicola, Bishop of Vicenza. We shall concern ourselves only with these l":"&f
tcrwards the Greeks of Constantinopte,
philadelphia. Af_
*ho'^r" ,f,r". Aryr'iiorn ii.
last two Cathar churches. "Sclavania" is a vague term referring to the borders Bulgaria, came thither on account
,of
returned to their land.and after t,rulng
of crommerce, and
whole South Slavic world; but since Bulgaria and Dragovica had ,pi"rJ-heresy ,f,"r., fo"ra"i
there a bishop called the Bishop tr,iCi*r.r. After that the Franks
"i
I2O Medieval Bosnian Church
came to Constantinople in order to subiugate the land and came into
contact with that sect, and having (its doctrines) spread among them,
they made their own bishop, who was called Bishop of the Latins.
After this certain people from Sclavonia, that is from the land called
Bossona (Bosnia), came to Constantinople on account of trade. They
returned to their land and taught (heresy) and it spread and they
constirured a Bishop who is called the Bishop of Sclavonia, that is of
Bosnia.(19)
The author then goes on to speak of the spread of heresy to France and
Italy.
This document written in about 1270 is the earliest extant reference',
to Bosnia in the inquisition literature. Anselm clearly equated Sclavonir
with Bosnia and in fact states that the church of Sclavonia was, from the"
beginning, Bosnian. Dondaine dates the Franks' hope to conquer
Constantinople to the crusade of II47 , but it is equally plausible o,
think Anslem was referring to the Latin expedition that really took the'
city in 1204. After the arrival of whichever crusaders Anselm had in
mind, Slavic merchants came. Thus he would date the formation of thc
Church of Slavonia after 1 I47 or after 1204.
It is unfortunate that we do not know the source upon which Anselrn
relied for this information. Writing at least sixty years (if not ov€r I
century) after the event, Anselm is not a firsthand authority. I find iti1l
hardto believe that heresy could have arrived in "slavonia" in just the
way he described. There is no evidence other than this one work ol
Anselm (a foreigner who probably never visited the South Slav lands)
that at any time in the twelfth or thirteenth centuries any Bosnirn
merchants went to Constantinople. However, Dalmatian merchanB
(from whom Bosnians bought goods) did, so it is more probable that, il
heresy came to "Sclavonia" in this way, Dalmatian merchants, trading
in the East, had brought it. In fact, this is a very likely way for dualis
ideas to have come to Dalmatia and then, with Dalmatians as mid.
dlemen, to have spread inland from Dalmatia to Bosnia.
Anselm,however,isasourcethatclearlystatesthattherewefG
dualists in Bosnia in the thirteenth century. Since he links these dualisu
with merchants and the general term "Sclavonia" we can conjectutc
that the Bosnian dualists and the Dalmatian dualists were part of one ,:.
current.BecauseofAnselm'semphasisontheBosnians,wecen
coniecture that by 1270, when Anselm was writing, the Bosnians were
thought to be more important or numerous in this current than any ',
other people who lived in the region of Sclavonia. Though it is a likely
conjecture, we cannot be certain from the above, however, that all or
even most of the Dalmatian heretics referred to by Thomas the Ar.
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniC r2t
{:hdrxon of Split and other sources were necessarily dualists. And we
st&ssl a$$un)c that dualism was necessarily a sizable movement in
SsEu.
. 0rtn{irmation that the Church of Sclavonia (Ecclesia Sclavoniae)
.: *nU..t imth llosnia ancl Dalmatia is found in a Dominican source
.#iefil in 1259, shortly before the composition of Anselm's "Trac-
- Ss*" ln his "Commentary on the Founding of the Hungarian
'hmitican Provincc," suibert (Peter Patak), a prior of a Hungarian
,, ffiMl*rry, wrote of the Dominicans being sent at the time of Coloman
: -- i",f,, during the Flungarian campaigns against Bosnia and environs in
r Sr llJO's -*' to Bosnia and Dalmatia, where the Church of Sclavonia
'ffi|*il klavoniae) was to be found and where many souls perished
,t tm hrretical crrors.(20) The author never elaborated on the nature of
.
i,,*ttlt9rso{ the Sclavonian church. But because the Dominicans were
r,*hdt connected with the inquisition which called a dualist current
ffi*cClurch of Sclavonia," it is reasonable to connect Suibert's term
; mf, &lrlists called by that name. This would indicate that there were
wrdurlists in Bosnia, and that, as we have iust suggested, Bosnian
#dl)rlmnrian dualists were part of the same church.
:,
IIL' Ban Kulin and Catbolicisrn
I I hsdl I180. when Ban Kulin is first encountered in the sources, until
r
,l fi'}A*, thtreis no reason to view him as anything other than a Catholic.
't * ltg) he rcceived a friendly letter from the pope treating him as a
iffi*fut ron of the church.(2l) Kulin's charter to the merchants of
':,fu&*tvvnil in 1189 iscouched in typical Catholic style, beginning with
r
#trsrltion to the Trinity and ending with the date, given as the Day
: r, $An the llaptist.(22) We also have inscriptions from two churches
,,*t{l# during Kulin's reign, one by the ban himself and the other by
i *ma d his iudges (sudiia).
t. ' "3b€ inrcription from Kulin's church appears on a stone plaque (now
# fu 7-emalirki muze j in Sarajevo) found not far from Visoko at the
,ssqeof MuhaSinovidi.(23) The plaque has on it six artistically carved
:, ,+s$rtr* rithin circles and bears the following inscription: "Ban Kulin
h&*lr*church when.. . KuIev'skoZagorie and found for it stones
t4 * Pulgorie Sllepii'ist' and placed his image (portrait) over the
:
&ffi*h$ld- God, give health to Ban Kulin and to (his wife) Banica
' W"{*rbw."(2'1) Thus the ban built a church and Put up a plaque with six
;;, Wmr,* $vcr the entrance, and somewhere (presumably a fresco inside
$W,grht dtxrr)placed his own portrait. Since, as we shall see shortly,
**npi **rcrittrs two Bosnian Catholic churches bei,rp dedicated in
r22 Medieval Bosnian Church
1194, most scholars have attributed Kulin's church to that date. Thc
"this-world" orientation of the Bosnian is reflected in the prayer which
asks God to give the ban and his wife health, rather than to save their
souls.
There is further writing on the plaque, a carved figure and soriltlii
scratched symbols. Some historians have argued that these items werc
part of the original plaque. However, even a superficial examination of i
the plaque shows that this is impossibie. The six crosses and Kulin's
inscription are carefully and artistically placed and carved. The otherrr,.
markings, on the other hand, are crudely scratched across the face of thc
plaque and clearly deface it.(25) Professor Andjelii has succeeded in
deciphering as much o{ this writing as is legible and has proved that it il l!
subsequent to Ban Kulin since it states in part "Desjen' Rat'n'cevittl;'$
writes in the days of Ban Stjepan and may God give him health and long iri
life."(26) Because of the style of writing, Andjelid dates the secondil.f.i
inscription as fourteenth century and places it in the reign of Ban St-
jepan Kotromanii (ca. 1318-13r3), though he points out the possibility
of it being from the time of that ban's father, Stjepan Kotroman or, if hir
analysis of the writing style be incorrect, even from the reign of Kulin'r
son, Stjepan.(27)
The second church inscription was found ln 1964 in the village o{
PodbreYja, three kilometers to the west of Zenica. It reads : ' 'In the days
of the Great Ban Kulin, Gra(d)je5a was a (or the) Great judge in it and
(he) built (the church of) St. George. And he lies (was buried) in it and
his wife said, 'put me in it' (also, when I die). Drale O(h?)muEanin (the
master who carried out the building) built (it)."(28) The inscription
continues with the wish that God appreciate the church (or the builder)
and then owing to lacunae becomes unintelligible.
ln 1794, Orbini tells us Archbishop Bernard of Dubrovnik con"
Hum, after which he went to the realm of Bosnir.
secrated a church in
to which he had been invited by Kulin Ban. There he was received
regally by Kulin, consecrated two churches, and then returnd
home.(29) The same story about the consecration of the two churches is
given in the Ragusan chronicle of Nicolo di Ragnina, cornpiled in th*
second haif of the sixteenth century; Ragnina, however, dates Ber"
nard's visit in 1190.(30) It is possible that the two churches Bernard
consecrated were these two from which we have inscriptions. Becaust
Kulin invited the archbishop to visit his realm, he could hardly havt
thought anything was amiss there from a religious standpoint. Th*
archbishop, having carried out the consecrations, apparently went homr
without further ado, which suggests that everything in Bosnia appeared
to be in order to him also.
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniC 123
,. furthrr evidence of Kulin's loyalty and good will toward Catholicism
I Mrh* pope is contained in an unknown source used by both Orbini and
i **rti, Eoth wrote that when a certain Radigost arrived in Dubrovnik to
i:,&x mn*scrated as Bishop of Bosnia by the archbishop, he brought
;ll:gwd*n$for the pope sent by Kulin.(31) Resti's date of 1189 should be
"'CWtd in preference to the 1171 date given by Orbini, because we
ii,.ftmmcvidence that Kulin had become ban by 1171 and because the
. i,,,m$s*t chronicle compilation which discusses Radigost (i.e., that of
ifoFUr dr Ragnina) states that Bernard, who became archbishop in
,
il6l. consecrated Radigost
l,-1, k fucribing Kulin, Orbini says the ban "was a pious man, very
,1,;,Mini*us. with affection for the Roman Pontiff."(32) Perhaps he drew
iji,. hrnrrcment from another source; perhaps he came to that conclusion
&kriltf , on the basis of Kulin's gifts to the pope and the ban's invitation
; ffi tht nrchbishop to consecrate two churches. In any case, Orbini's
i W*durion seems in agreement with everything else known about the
hm pricrr to 1199.
IV: Charges of Heresl and Foreign Interference
liii.. Tb fir*t act of outside interference which may have had an important
f ,i,#uet ffi thr course of future developments occurred in IL92, when the
Fupt usnsferred Bosnia from the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of
&&rotnik to that of the Archbishop of Split.(33) This act is usually,
{S*$ gxobably correctly, attributed to Hungarian machinations.
$&*#*y, having close ties with Split, probably sought to assert, by
wmmso{ thc church, its authority over Bosnia. Bosnia seems to have
fud***ndly ties with Dubrovnik, and there is no evidence that Kulin
fi*x *rrepted the new arrangement, corresponded with the Archbishop
d $pht. or even let him consecrate any Bosnian bishop. If Orbini is
wrtrt in dating Archbishop Bernard of Dubrovnik's consecration of
& Surninn churches in I19/t, this may give us reason to assume that
&,mk rirnply ignored the new arrangement and continued to cleal with
&fu**ik.
,' $fu*cvrr. it is dangerous to rely on Orbini for dates about this period.
i',.. W
et"* of .Radigost's consecration as bishoq was incorrect by
{rykmn years. In addition, the sixteenth-century chronicle of Nicolo di
lll . rypurE*ives I190 for Bernard's visit, a perfectly reasonable date, and
'ffi{hct would place the archbishop's trip at a time when Bosnia was
Wudti*irtty under Dubrovnik. Unfortunately, then, we must conclude
1i;,furr*crnnot ascertain with certainty the effects of and the reactions to
r24 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia to Stiepan KotromaniC t2t
That Innocent may well have had this association in mind (or even
this alteration in ecclesiastical iurisdiction. we can only suspect that the
called the heretics "Patarins" for this reason), however, will be seen in
Bosnian reaction was unfavorable and that Kulin may have protested or
his letter of 1202. And since we have found reference in inquisition
ignored the change. And these suspicions are confirmed by the fact that
documents to dualism in Dalmatia (Sclavonia), making it likely that
we find Kulin dealing with Dubrovnik, and not with split, in l2o2 and
many of the Dalmatian heretics were dualists, and since we shall find
t203.
Bosnia' In 1199 ' references to dualism in Bosnia in various later inquisition documents,
We do not have long to wait for mention of heresy in
being an earlier it is quite likely that these Dalmatians seeking refuge in Bosnia were
Vukan the ruler of "balmatia and Dioclea" (Dioclea dualists. Thus, this may well have been the beginning of a dualist
nameforZetaandMontenegro)informedthepopethat..significant current in Bosnia. All we know for certain, however, is that Innocent
heresy is seen to sprout ln the iand of the King of
Hungary' namely
his wife' and his called these Dalmatian heretics Patarins and said that they called
Bosnia, in such numbers that Ban Kulin himself' themselves Christians, and that not a few clf them seem to have found
his relatives'
,ir,"., in. widow of Miroslav of Hum'as well as many of
asylum in Bosnia.
have been seduced by the sin' and he has led more than 10'000
on the In November 1202,Pope Innocent wrote Archbishop Bernard of Split
Christians into this i"-. he..sy."(34) Vukan's emphasis that "in the land of the noble man Kulin Ban there are a multitude of
makes one
adherence of Ban Kulin and the ban's relatives to the heresy
he calied on the certain people who are strongly suspected of (belonging to) the con-
wonder if Vukan did not have ulterior motives- when
in.Bosnia' 6irkovi6 points out that demned Cathar heresy . . . But he (Kulin) in his own justification an-
pope to take action ug"i.,,, heresy
different Balkan rulers at this swered that he believed them not to be heretics but Catholics, and that
considerable tensionsixisted among the
his brother Stefan who were he was prepared to send some of them on behalf of all to the Apostolic
ti*", pu.ti.ularly between Vukan and to See, in order that they demonstrate to us their faith and way of life, and
,i."ggii"g for the Serbian throne' ln Kulin attack
1202 was some
these were that by our judgment they be confirmed in what is good or be converted
iunai"ruU;..ted to the Hungarian king; CirkoviC suggests
from (what is)evil . . ." Kulin had recently sent to the pope an embassy
Vukan,slands'Itispossiblethatthecausesoffrictionthatledtothis including the Archbishop of Dubrovnik, Marinus the Archdeacon of
attack already existed in I f 99' We also know that'
in his war against his
Imre'-who also Dubrovnik, and some o{ the above-mentioned alleged Cathars. He
brother, Vukan was supported by the King of Hungary' requested that the pope send a qualified legate to his realm to investigate
like all such figures in
had designs on Bosni"'(35) The figure 10'000'
matters. The pope decided to send Johannes de Casamaris thither to
medieval sources cannot be taken literally' investigate and asked for the cooperation of the Archbishop of Split.(37)
Hungaryasking
ln October 1200, Pope Innocent wrote King Imre of
that he had.heard The sources say nothing about the beliefs and practices of the Bosnians
him to take action ugui.,st the heresy' The pope stated
Kulin dispatched to Rome. The pope clearly suspected them of
,,that when recently our brother (Bernard) the Archbishop.of Split
Split and Trogir.' the.noble Catharism, yet seems to have had some doubts as to whether they really
expelled not a few Patarins from the cities of
asylum to their. evil but were Cathars. We do not know whether they were Dalmatians who had
*un 8.., Kulin of Bosnia not only gave
{ledearlier to Kulin's court, or Bosnians who wereor were not linked
bestowed upon them open help and (let them) display their evil to
Catholics' nay even with the Dalmatians. If Bosnians had been sent , if we consider their lack
himself and his land andhonored them the same as
of theological education, it would not have been at all surprising that
by the name they called them-
more than the Cathoiics, calling them Innocent could not be certain of whether they were dualists or not. Part
to the Chronicle of Thomas
selves Christians."(3(r) When vde tL4ril
of the thirteenth centufy)' of the pope's concern that there may have been Cathars irr Bosnia could
Archdeacon of split (written in the miclclle well be owing to his preoccupation with that movement elsewhere
Bernard's activities against
we find much material about Archbishop (particularly in southern France) and his knowledge that Slavic dualists
n^tut" of their errors' All that
the heretics of Split, but nothing on the were active in the vicinity of Bosnia. The sources never again use the
pope attached to the
has been given us is the label "Putarin" that the
word Cathar in connection with Bosnia. Even in his letter to Bernard,
heretics. Innocent said only that the heretics in Bosnia were suspected of beinp,
to be used in
But if we consider the way this term was subsequently
it necessarily referred to Cathars. Although there may well have been some dualists in Bosnia
Bosnia, we see that we cannot assume that and although segments of the population may have acquired certain
of that name in northern ltaly'
doctrines akin to those heiu oy the sect
r26 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia to Stfepan Kotromanic 127

views or practices from dualism, we shall see that the

main current of the territory of Bosnia" on behalf of all those of their brotherhoods
beliefs and practices inBosnia was not Cathar' -
i.e., the priors of several monasteries representing only their order and
Kulin'i that he thought the accused heretics were good its membership. Since, in addition to the names of Kulin and Marinus,
"*..rr"
Catholics is often interpreted as clever statesmanship in
an attempt to seven other names were appended to the document, there were seven
buy time. However, b".uu," everything else we know about Kulin priors, and therefore at least seven monasteries in Bosnia at the time.
that he was loyal to
1.*.tuding Vukan's tendentious letter) Besides the priors, present were: Johannes de Casamaris, the Ar-
suggests
a profound grasp of
i.o*", urid b"...rr" it is unlikely that the ban had chdeacon Marinus, and Ban Kulin, whom the priors called "patron
matters I find it believeable that Kulin if he really did have Ban Kulin lord of Bosnia."
it ' '
"ofogi."f
.on,..I with the Dalmatian emigr6s' actually accepted tf91e,more The priors promised to accept the rites and commandments of the
good faith is also
educated people from the coast as good Christians' His Roman Church and to live according to them. Then they pledged
some of the people' about whose faith.the themselves and their property (landed and movable), on behalf of their
,.".Uy tte fa.t that he sent
in Dalmatia had doubts, to Rome for the pope to examine'(38) brothers, that at no future time would they ever pursue the depravity of
Cutnoii.,
The possibility that ulterior motives were lurking behind the
ac- heresy. There follows a series of promises to follow certain particular
heresy should always be kept in mind' Catholic practices properly in the future. Obviously, the monks had not
cusations uguinst Bosnia about
The Hungarians may well have hoped to use a charge
of heresy as an previously followed these practices properly, but we do not know exactly
intervention' even for conquest' The how or why they had erred.
excuse for military and political
been deliberately maligning Bosnia' They ended their schism with Rome and recognized her as the mother
Archbishop of Split may also have
Huuing been awarded iurisdiction over Bosnia in Il92' he seems to church. They promised that in places where they had convents, they
havehadnochance,ourr.ahisauthority,sincetheBosnianscontinued would hold services where the brothers would p:rticipate morning, day
to maintain relations with his rival in Dubrovnik.
If he was offended, he and night, and would chant the hours. Henceforth they would have
*uy *"U have believed that to show Bosnia as heretical would altars and crosses in their churches, and they would read, as the
Bosnia's religious affairs Catholic Church does, from the books of the Old and the New
demonstrate Dubrovnik's inability to handle
intervention' which could force
and might lead to papal and Hungarian Testament. In all their convents they would have priests who at least on
And we notice that much of Sundays and holy days would serve the mass according to church
Bosniaio submit to the Archbishop of Split'
that reached the papacy appears in
it lo11rpf^int about heresy in Bosnia prescriptions. These priests would hear confessions and administer
"
;;;.*p.;;"tce with (or concerning the work of) the Archbishop of penance. Beside their churches there would be established graveyards
Split. where they would bury brothers and also travelers who happened to die
V: The Bilino Polje Renunciation at the monasteries. At least seven times a year they would receive
communion from a priest
was - namely at Christmas, Easter, Pentecost,
The legate, Innocent III's own chaplain, Johannes de casamaris' St. Peter's and St. Paul's Day (a single festival for Catholics), the Day of

duly senf to Bosnia. Before him at Bilino polje on the sixth of April
1203 there was enacted a renunciation of errors. This abjuration
provides us with some actual details about religious Practices
in Bosnia.
The surviving document is generally thought to be a contemporary
Latin translation of a now-lost Slavic original. Prior to its proclamation,
JohannesdeCasamarishadspentseveralmonthsatKulin'scourtand
ih,r, p."ru*ably had some notion of the state of affairs there. Marinus,
Archdeacon of Dubrovnik, also witnessed the abjuration' and' knowing
of
both Slavic and Latin, would have been able to insure some degree
communication between the legate and the Bosnians'
At Bilino polje were Sathered "the priors of those men who up to
name in
now have alone been calied by the prerogative of the christian
the Virgin's Assumption, the Day of her Nativity, and All Saints. They
promised to observe fasts and church festivals as ordered by the Church.
Women of their order would be separated from the men both in sleeping
and in eating arrangements, and no brother would talk to one of the
somen alone lest it give rise to evil suspicions. They would not accept
married people into their order unless both parties agreed. In the future
they would not accept into their order anyone they knew to be a
Manichee or any other sort of heretic. They promised ro wear particular
dress, a habit without colors reaching to the ankles, to distinguish
themselves from laymen.
They promised, that from now on, they would call themselves not
"Christians, " as they had done up to then, but "brothers, " so that by
 r28 Medieval Bosnian Church
monopolizing the name(Christian)injury is not done to other Christians
(i.e.. people other than themselves. who as Christians would want to us€
rhar namel. On the dearh of each magister (presurnabll' the head of the
rtrcerl" the pricrs s'jth the consent c,J tJre orher brothers l*'c'uld hen-
cetonJr select a nen'magister to L'e conGrmed b1' the pope- \\'hatever rhe
Rc,man Church might want to add to or subtract from this document
qould be acceptab\e to tiem and thev *'ould accept it wirh devotion'
l-he document s'as then signed bl Dragice (Dragite). Lubin. Drageta
iBragera. Bergela). Pribis, Luben, Rados, Biadostus (Bladosius),
presumablv the priors of seven monasteries.(39) Ban Kulin, and
.l\larinus Archdeacon from Dubrovnik. As a postscript to the document
is the repetition of the renunciation by two of the priors before the King
of Hungary and the Archbishop of Kalocsa. The visit to the Hungarian
king will be discussed later.
The fact that Marinus of Dubrovnik was present, instead of someone
from Split, suggests that Bosnia had kept up its connection with
Dubrovnik and had not submitted to Split. That the renunciation was
repeated before the Hungarian king reflects the status of the king as
overlord of Bosnia.
The promise in the document that the priors would not pursue heresy
in the future suggests one of two things: 1) that until 1203, the priors
had had certain heretical practices (possibly dualistic or possibly errors
through ignorance) which the legate noted, pointed out to them'- and'
possibly o*ing to extenuating circumstances' decided not to charge
them with. However, even if they had had heretical practices' it
is
probable that they had not been full fledged heretics (i'e'' following
.o*pl"t" heretical rituals and doctrines); for if they had
Casamaris surely would have made them renounce heresy
in general as
well as their specific errors in cloctrine and practice' It is almost
im-
possible to beieve that a legate of Innocent III would have excused
(2) that the
members of a determined heresy from renouncing heresy, or
priors were not implicated in heretical practices' but Casamaris'
i noring that heretils were in the area and that these monks were
fall the influence of
ignoruniof theology, feared the monks might under
h"eretics and thus by this article tried to anticiPate and
prevent this'
Therethenfollowsarenunciationofschism.Whatwastheschism
abouti, Had Rome broken off relations pending the investigation2-Or
had Split, angry at being ignored, broken off relations with
Bosnia? The
answers to these questions are unknown'
The men renouncing schism and possibly heresy were prior-s
Here. then'
monasteries who acted only on behalf of their monasteries.
abjuring errors or bad practices
was a group of Catholic monks who were
Bosnia to StjePan KotromaniC ng
*ixh they had acquired. No mention is made in the document of
tl'rrnirns in general, the supposed 10,000 heretics, heretics from
f"hinratia or heretics in Kulin's family. Although Kuiin witnessed the
p"r*reeilings, we do not know how closeiy he was associated with the
Lxrery or schism of the monks. They called him ' 'patron ' ' , but whether
rhls rneant that Kulin had actually aided their order or had given it gifts
*r whe1fis1 this ternr merely reflected Kulin's status as ruler or patron of
hrpeople is unknown. In fact, since the document is most probably a
rr*nrlation from the Slavic, we do not know what Slavic word, the Latin
*r.jrd "patronus" was meant to render.l canthink of no word found in
trrlcs or in Bosnian documents that bears the connotation of "patron";
thur it is p.ssible that "patronus" is a poor translation of some worcl
rdlecting Kulin's status as Lord of Bosnia, And even if Kulin had
prtronizcd them, he could easily have done so believing these men to be
g'ud Catholics.
'l'hcre
is no evidence that the leaders of any heretical movement were
prc\cnt at Bilino polje. This all suggests that Casamaris' personal in-
vstigaticln had turned up no hard-core heretics. This, of course, only
nrrans that the legate did not find them. lt does not mean that such
hrrctics were not to be found somewhere in Bosnia. After all, Bosnia
nas a large region with rugged mountains and poor communications. To
(rr)ss the country was then a trip of at least ten days.(1i0) However, had
Casamaris heard about the cxistence of heresy anywhere in Bosnia, it is
inconceivable that he would not have at least suggested prolonging his
mission or sending funher missions. But he did nclt. Casamaris seems
anly to have found deep ignorance among the monks and tried to correct
been' that, presumably with the hope that they, in turn, would be abie to
pruvide proper church services and thereby straighten out the errors
thrt nrust have existed among the general lay public.
'I'here
is almost nothing in the document that points to dualism with
tertainty. The absence of a cross in a church may well have been in-
l*rpreted by the pope and his agent as a dualist practice and may have led
thtm to suspect dualism. It may even have been that this lack was owing
to thc influence of dualists (directly or indirectly) upon the Catholic
,
nxlnks. Ilowever, we could also explain the absence of crosses on the
b,r-sis of ignorance of practice; the monks may not have realized that it
F.rs nccessary to have crosses in their churches. Thus the absence of a
cross nced not indicate a conscious rejection of it because of dualist
thcrrlogy.(41) We also do not know how prevalent this "error" was; it
m Jrrssible that some churches had crosses and others did not and
of
C.r:amaris wanted simply to make them universal. It seems to me that
thr rbsence of various holy items from churches can most easily
be
130 Medieval Bosnian Church
explained by the monks' abysmal ignorance about howchurches should
be furnished. ln no case is it certain that any of these items were
generally lacking in all churches. It is probable that the errors of one
monastery would frequently have differed from those of a second, and
that in the abjuration, Casamaris had simply lumped together in one
general condemnation all the deviations he had found during his in-
vestigation.
The statement in the abiuration about graveyards has been in-
terpreted by scholars to mean that at the time the Bosnians had no
cemeteries; and this lack has been attributed to the dualist rejection of
material things and the denial of bodily resurrection. However, the text
of the abiuration merely says that henceforth the brothers would bury
their dead beside churches. Thus Casamaris was trying to enforce the
church canons requiring church burial for clergy. We find numerous
fourteenth- and particularly fifteenth-century gravestone inscriptions in
Bosnia and particularly in Hercegovina, referring to nobles, being
buried on their own land. This suggests that there was no local custom
against burial of the dead. We can conjecture that the monks prior to
1203 had either been buried on their own family estates or else in
unconsecrated village cemeteries. The aim of this article, then, was only
to make the monks follow the church canons, laymen presumably could
continue to treat corpses according to their customafy practices,
whatever they were.
The document's statment about Manichees says simply that the
priors would not accept them or any known heretics into their order. It
does not say that the order had been accepting Manichees. And one
could argue that the reason Manichees were singled out and named was
because the papacy was preoccupied with dualists elsewhere in Europe at
the time. However, that Manichees were singled out, it can be soundly
argued, implies that at some time in the past the order had accepted into
its ranks people who were Manichees, or who Casamaris thought were
Manichees. Casamaris may have been in error and have assumed that
certain practices (e.g., absences of crosses) resulted from Manichee
influence. In such a case we can be certain that the uneducated
Bosnians, who probably had no idea what a Manichee was, would not
have been able to understand the accusation sufficiently to prove to the
legate that they were innocent of the charge. Yet we do know that there
were dualists in the vicinity of Bosnia, and very probably within its
borders by L2O3 as well. The order may well have unwittingly accepted
some dualists, or people influenced by them, into its ranks, not realizing
that they were heretics. However, this does not make the Bilino polje
monks dualists. and their abjuration strongly implies that they were not.
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniC
r31
Surely, if casamaris had considered the monks dualists, they would
have been forced to renounce Manicheeism itserf , as welr as belief in two
principles and a whole series of beliefs and practices connected with that
creed.
Thus our document is not a renunciation of dualism. Through
ignorance the Bosnian monks had fallen into grave errors in practice and
in discipline, but there is no reason to believe that any of their errors
were made consciously or were owing to intentional rejections of
practices on theological grounds. In Iact, the document never touches
on matters of belief at all.
Nor is there evidence that the Dalmatian heretics had any connection
with or influence upon the monks at Bilino polje. we certainly do not
need to postulate ties between any heretics and the monks to explain the
situation that was being rectified at Bilino polje. The whole document
therefore reflects only a reform of discipline and practice in the spirit of
the Catholic Reform movemenr.
Finally, we may note that the monastic order was composed of
monks, calling themselves "Christians," who lived in monasteries,
cach of which was under a prior. The order itself was headed by a
"magister" (we would like to know his Slavic title), who henceforth
was to be elected by the priors with the consent of the brothers and
c'onfirmed by the pope. The absence of the magister from the important
proceedings at Bilino polje is noteworthy and gives us reason to believe
that the position was vacant at the time. The situation paralels (or may
even be identical to) that of the fourteenth century when we shall find
the Bosnian church based upon a monastic organization, whose clergy
bear the Slavic rendering of the word christian, krstjanin. Thus we may
suspect that by 1203 the organization of the future Bosnian church
already existed. This monastic order of L2o3 may well have started out a
century or so earlier as a branch of a certified catholic order, such as the
Benedictines, but have subsequently lost conract with its original order
and the rest of the catholic world and have come to be an autonomous,
stlf-perpetuating "catholic" body, under its own locally erected priors
and magister. Quite possibly it was simply this autonomy which con-
stituted its schism. As we have seen, despite certain errors! some of
which could well have been owing to heretical influences, there is no
reason to consider the order heretical.
The monks, in calling themselves ,,Christians", seem to have
clairned that they alone am'ng all the people of Bosnia had the right to
u$e that name. This obviously bothered casamaris since their
rnunopolizing the name, would impry that other christians were nor
re*llv christians, since the priors stated that they claimed this
 132 Medieval Bosnian Church
prerogative only in the territory of Bosnia, we suspect that they were
slandering, not Catholic clerics and believers beyond the Bosnian
borders, but laymen who were Catholics in Bosnia. Since in the four-
teenth century the term "krstjanin" was to designate only ordained
monks in the Bosnian Church, we must speculate that, already in 1203 ,
the Bosnian monks believed that a man had to be ordained as a monk to
be a Christian.
Another reason that may have caused them to insist on their ex-
clusive right to the name "Christian" is the fact that all groups in
Bosnia, claiming to be Christians, called themselves by this name the
Dalmatian heretics who fled
-
to Bosnia in 1200 were self-styled
Christians, the Bilino-polje monks were Christians, shortly we shall find
the Bosnian Church clerics calling themselves krst jani , and in fifteenth-
century Slavic sources we shall find Catholics calling themselves kar-
steni (or what was to become the standard form, krX6ani) and the Or
thodox, Hri$6ani. Thus any group in Bosnia, faced with Christian rivals
using the same name, would have had to insist on its exclusive right to
this name.
Most scholars have failed to reahze that the Latin documents of 1200'
1203, which we have examined, may well deal with two different
phenomena. In 1200, Innocent was cornplaining about Dalmatian
heretics being received at the Bosnian court. The 1203 renunciation
clearly was made by Bosnians. It has usually been assumed that the
Bosnians had acquired errors from these Dalmatians and that
Casamaris, the papal legate, had been dealing with a single Bosnian-
Dalmatian movement. However, if I am correct in arguing that the
tsilino polie renunciation shows only that the monks, through
ignorance, were abusing church practices and says so little about
heresy, we may well conclude that there had been no connection bet-
ween these monks and the Dalmatians. Thus the abjuration sheds no
light on the nature of the Dalmatians'heresy. The few Dalmatian
heretics, of unknown doctrine (very likely dualist), who had come to
Bosnia and taken refuge at Kulin's court, must be considered a separate
phenomenon. There is nothing in the legate's reports to the pope about
Dalmatians. Were they still in Bosnia and kept out of sight of the legate?
Had Kulin, on learning they were heretics, exiled them from his court
or even from his land2 In any case, the Dalmatians are never heard of in
Bosnia again.If they had been dualists, since from time to time we shall
hear of dualism in Bosnia, we may conclude that their teaching had
borne some fruit and had attracted the allegiance of various Bosnians.
But because our local sources do not hint of dualism in Bosnia until
the fifteenth century, we probably are justified in concluding that
Bosnia to Stjepan Kotromanil 133
dualism never acquired a large following in Bosnia. This does not mean,
however, that the pope did nor think it had or was not afraid that it
might; thus, many of the papal references to "heretics" throughout
the thirteenth and following centuries may well be to the dualists. He
also may well have believed, or been led to believe, that other religious
bodies in Bosnia, which were actually quite independent of the dualists
had been infected with their heresy. 'fhe Hungarians, who sought an
excuse to reassert their authority over Bosnia, may well have tried to
convince the pope that dualism was widespread in Bosnia, and that
institutions which were actually orthodox had fallen into this heresy.
Such a view of l{ungarian intentions is supported by Suibert's
"commentary" (written in 1259),(42) which suggests that the
l"lungarian crusade of the 1230's was sent against the "Church of
k'lavonia" (i.e., dualists).
llowever, there is no evidence thar our monks at Bilino polje in
120J, or even later when they were to break away from Rome and form
their own independent Bosnian Church, were influenced to any extent
by, or even had any contact with, the dualists. Thus the Dalmatians
(probably dualists) should be regarded as separate from the movement of
well-intentioned but misguided Bosnian monks who were the main-
stream of Bosnian formal religion. In May, two of the priors, Lubin and
Drageta, visited the King of Hungary and repeated the promises made at
Bilino polje.(43) Later that year King Imre wrote the pope about a visit
to his court made by Kulin's son. His letter is undated but it clearly was
subsequent to the visit of the two priors. The king refers to Casamaris
having brought be{ore him two leaders who in the land of Kulin Ban had
been instigating the condemned sect of heretics. Kulin's son took on the
obligation neither to defend nor support in his lands the above-
n'lcntioned or other men in heresy lest he have to pay a thousand silver
marks.(41r) It is clear Hungary wanted to depict the monks as heretics.
We do not know how faithfully the monks fulfilled their pledge.
tlowever, because the sources from the 1,220's and 1230's show little
change, things probably continued much as they had been.
Shortly after the abjuration Casamaris wrore the pope about his
nrission. Only part of the letter is extant and we find the legate had
traveled considerably from the time he left Bosnia. "Having handled the
business of these former Patarins in Bosnia as tr have already written
your Holiness, I was in Hungary a few days . . . . In the realm of Ban
Kulin of Bosnia there is only one bishopric and the bishop has recently
died. If possible, some Latin (i.e., a man knowing theology and proper
nractices, if not even a Latin liturgist) should be installed there (as
bishop), and also three or four new (bishoprics) should be created there,
r34 Medieval Bosnian Church
which would immeasurably increase the effectiveness of the church,
which realm (takes) at least ten days or more (to cross)'"(45)
Casamaris used the term Patarin, presumably about the priors unless
he had had dealings with other religious groups in Bosnia about which
we know nothing. His statements that the Bosnian bishop was dead,
accompanied by the fact that the magister of the monastic order had
been absent from the proceedings at Bilino polie, suggests that the head
of the monastic order may also have been Bishop of Bosnia (or at least
that this had been the case with the particular individual who had
recently died prior to Bilino polie). Since there seem to have been few
priests in Bosnia (and thus a limited amount of church administration),
and since there would also have been few people to select a bishop from,
it seems likely that the Bosnians might have frequently, or even
regularly, combined the two positions in the hands of one man.
VL' Religious Affuirsfrom 1203 to the 1220's
With the exception of a Hungarian confirmation (in 1207) of the
Archbishop of Split's rights to iurisdiction over Bosnia,(46) (a claim
ignored by the Bosnian clerics, whom Resti depicts as continuing to deal
with Dubrovnik), the only source for the period l2O3-L220 is the
eighteenth century chronicle compiled by Resti. Since Resti's data about
the late twelfth century is similar to that of Nicolo di Ragnina and
Orbini, it is likely that his material on this early period came from
documents in the archives of Dubrovnik. However, the reliability of the
lost documents upon which he based his account of relations between
Bosnia and Dubrovnik early in the thirteenth century is open to
question.
Resti describes a visitation in 1206 of Bosnia by the Archbishop of
Dubrovnik, Leonardo, who visted all the dioceses of his archidiocese on
papal commission.(47) If true, this statement could not be a more clear
contradiction of the Hungarian confirmation of the rights of the Ar-
chbishop of Split of the following year, for Resti not only shows the
Archbishop of Dubrovnik acting with authority in Bosnia but also
shows him doing it with papal approval and recognition. We are told that
Leonardo was received with great honor in Bosnia and that its prince
presented him with many gifts. If accurate, this statement shows that
the Bosnian ban still was on good terms with the Catholic Church. In
1209 Leonardo consecrated a man named Dragohna(48) as Bishop of
Bosnia, showing that Dubrovnik was continuing to exercise its rights
over Bosnia. By 1211 Dragohna was having a great deal of difficulty
with his people, who were exclusively of the Patarin sect, but in time he
Bosnia to Stjepan Kotromantc 135
had considerable success against them.(49)
We cannot be sure what sort of heretics or schismatics Resti thought
he was describing by the term. It is difficult to believe that, only five
years after the warm reception which the Bosnians gave Leonardo,
nearly all of them would have become "Patarins." Thus we may
suggest that Resti, or his unknown source, at least is unreliable insofar
as he exaggerates the number of "Patarins" in Bosnia.
VII: Cbarges of Heresy in the 1220's
In the 1220's the papacy and the Hungarians again showed interest in
the Slavic lands apparently because of the activities of the Kati{ family,
who were successf ul and troublesome pirates centered in the Dalmatian
coastal town of Omi!. King Endre of Hungary was writing them in
about 1220, calling them pirates and Patarins.(50) Perhaps they were
heretics; perhaps the Patarin label was attached to them for showing
little respect for church property in their pursuit of wealth. ln I22l a
papal legate, Acontius, was sent to Dalmatia to deal with the Kati6i. He
was also to handle the heretics who were sheltered in Bosnia, openly
propounding their errors to the detriment of the lord's flock.()l)
ln 1222 Pope Honorius III called on Dubrovnik to elect an archbishop
who would aid Acontius against the heretics and people of OmiX.(52)
Apparently by this time the pope had given up the attempt to subject
Bosnia to Split and again recognized Dubrovnik's suzerainty over the
church in Bosnia. If Resti's information is correct, then papal
recognition of this fact dates back to at least 1 206.
The Chronicle of Thomas the Archdeacon of Split describes
Acontius' activity against the pirates and heretics on the coast. The
legate called on Dalmatia and Croatia to help him and raised a navy and
horsemen to go against OmiX.(t3) Having done this, Acontius turned
to the problem of heretics in Bosnia. Thomas had no interest in Bosnian
affairs and thus he tells us no more than that Acontius labored a long
time on behalf of the Catholic faith in Bosnia against the heretics.(54)
Since Thomas' lack of interest makes him a poor source for Bosnian
affairs and since Thomas tells us Acontius died in 1222 (probably this
date is a year or so too early), we have good reason to believe Acontius
labored only a year in Bosnia.(55)
ln 1225 Pope Honorius asked the Hungarian Archbishop of Kalocsa,
Ugrin, to take action against the heretics of Bosnia, Soy (Sol, the region
of modern Tuzla), and Wosora (Usora).(56) The pope, we see, believed
r36 Medieval Bosnian Church
that the heresy was penetrating the region to the northeast of the
Bosnian state up toward the Sava, in the region between the Bosna and
Drina rivers. This region seems to have been nominally under the
[losnian ban, and later in the century we find members of the ban's
family (i.e., descendents of Kulin) governing it, though we do not know
who ruled over the area as local lords in the I22O's and how much
control the ban actually had in this region. In any case, the Hungarians
did nothing in I22i; King Endre was then in no position to interfere in
Bosnia since he was having trouble with his own nobles.
ln 1227 Pope Honorius III assigned the city of PoYega (north of the
Sava in Slavonia) to the Archbishop of Kalocsa for him to defend against
heretics.(57) This signifies either further movement of the hereticso the
spread of heretical ideas among the populace of this area beyond the
Sava, or both. A few days after the letter about PoYega, Honorius wrote
John the "Prince of Constantinople" (John Angelus Lord of Srem) to
fulfill his promise to the Archbishop of Kalocsa to take action against the
heretics, for which he had aLready accepted 200 marks.(58) The pope
was trying to organize a crusade but was having great difficulties in
getting it underway.
Thus in the 1220's Pope Honorius was constantly referring to
"heresy" in Bosnia and the need to take action against it. Whether he
was referring to dualists, to heretics of some other doctrine, or simply to
our unreformed Catholic monks and their followers is impossible to
determine. And probably we should not expect the term "heretic" to
have been used with precision or even consistently for the same group in
all these letters. In fact, Honorius probably did not really understand
the situation in Bosnia and may not have realized that the "heretics"
and ignorant monks were members of separate groups. He also probably
feared that heresy was more widespread than it actually was and may
well have believed that it had infected many people who were actually
quite untouched by it. And such confusion would play into the hands of
any party, such as Hungary, which sought an excuse to intervene in
Bosnia.
Gregory IX succeeded Honorius in July 1227, and, in accord with
the usual custom, reissued a variety of charters, among which was one
confirming the Archbishop of Dubrovnik's suzerainty over Bosnia and
Hum.(59) Hum, ruled by members of the Serbian royal house, was
predominantly Orthodox under a fairly well organized bishopric, with
its seat in Ston. Catholic believers, however, were to be found in the
coastal regions of Hum.
In 1228 the Franciscans were given assignments in Dalmatia and
Slavonia.(60) They do not seem to have been sent to Bosnia, and it is
Bosnia to Stiepan KotromaniC B7
not known how many actually went to Slavonia or how long they may
havc remained thcre; it is possible that nonr: reached Slavonia at all in
these years. lt is often dangcrous to assumc that assignments by a popc
wcre actually carried out. I-l()wcvcr, the attemPts to organize a crusade,
as well as the assigning of Franciscans to preach in this area, both reflect
a renewed papal interest in the Slavic lands.
ln 1223, as noted in Chapter II, a papal legate named Conrad spoke of
a dualist anti-pope from somewhere in the Balkans (within the boun-
daries of Bulgaria, Croatia, and Dalmatia next to Hungary) who played
arole in reorganizing the French dualist church.(61) I shall not discuss
this document here since there are almost no details to discuss. We
cannot be sure the man was from Bosnia, or even that Conrad knew
exactly from where he did come. We do not know whethcr he was really
an anti pope or whether Conrad was simply projecting the Catholic
organizational structure upon the dualist church. There is evidence that
there were dualists in Bosnia; however, we know almost nothing about
how they were organized. We do not even know whether the dualists in
the Bosnian banate were a sizable movement by 1223.1am sceptical
French dualists would bow to his
that a heresiarch
wishes
- so impgrtant that
could have come from Bosnia as early as 1223, and do not
-
believe this one vague report evidence to demonstrate that this man was
Bosnian. Moreover, I am sceptical about the level of knowledge and
undef standing of Balkan mattefs possessed by Western clerics who had
not themselves been to the Balkans or who did not have close contact
with those clerics who had.
WIL Papal Action and Hungarian Crusades
in the 1230's
ln 1232 the papacy began actively to reorganize the Catholic Church
o{ Bosnia; its initiative was followed by Hungarian military action
against the heretics. Our sources now multiply.
On June 5 , 1232, Pope Gregory IX wrote to the Archbishops of both
Kalocsa and,Zagreb, asking them to investigate the Bosnian bishop,
hecause it had come to the pope's attention that the Bosnian bishop
kncw nothing of letters, was a public defender of heretics, and had
received his episcopal office through a certain open heretic by the crime
of simony. No one in his church celebrated the divine offices or ad-
ministered the sacraments. It was even said that he was a foreigner (or
hostile) to the ecclesiastical services, was completely ignorant of the
 138 l\ledieval Bosnian Church
baptismal formula; and this was not astonishing because, as is asserted,
he lived with his own brother, an open heresiarch, in a certain village
and, instead of leading him back from iniquity to the way of truth as
he ought to have done he supported and defended him in- his
error.(62)
- rholar of languages
In May 1233 Gregory assigned a legate, Jacob of Preneste, to remove
the bishop, stating that after an investigation the bishop had been found
unworthy to hold office. He had told the investigators that he had sinned
through ignorance. The pope did not question the truth of this, but
found him unfit and ordered him removed. The pope concluded that
probably the Bosnian territory was too large for one man to administer
(particularly since it was infected with heretical errors) and reiterated
Casamaris'recommendation of 1203 that two to four new bishoprics be
carved out of the Bosnian territory.(63) The bishop's plea of ignorance
was accepted. His case clearly illustrates the low level of religious un-
derstanding in Bosnia. Such a man probably should not be called a
heretic
- i.e., anbecause
doctrinal basis
adherent of a heretical movement with defined
he apparently considered himself loyal to
-
Rome. Once again we are faced with the same situation that we observed
with the monks at Bilino polje, who, we know, had also failed to carry
out a whole series of basic Catholic practices, and yet were apparently
not heretics or in any way hostile to Rome. These situations were
natural result ofthe fact that there was no education in Bosnia.
The removal of the ignorant ineffectual bishop was the first in a series
of events which were to cause Bosnia a tormented decade, although the
immediate aftermath seemed to augur well. In October 1233 Pope
Gregory placed Ban Matej Ninoslav of Bosnia and all his lands under the
protection of the Holy See. Ninoslav reportedly renounced heretical
errors, accepted the Catholic faith, and turned to persecuting
heretics.(64) What Ninoslav's heretical errors had been is not stated.
The pope was so satisfied with Ninoslav's new Catholicisrn that on the
same day he wrote the Dominicans to release, provided that he be fully
converted to the faith, the son of " Ubanus " called Priezda, Ninoslav's
relative, who had been held as a hostage for Ninoslav's good faith in
accepting Catholicism.(65) Perhaps we can link Ninoslav's acceptance
of Catholicism with the mission of the legate Jacob of Preneste to
remove the bishop.
On the same day the pope also wrote Coloman, Duke of Croatia and
brother of the King of Hungary, that, because Ninosiav had now been
placed under papal protection, Coloman was to leave the problem of
hereticsin Bosnia to Ninoslav.(66) This probably indicates that
Coloman and the Archbishop of Kalocsa had been seeking an excuse to
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniJ 139
rerissert Hungarian authority over Bosnia.
The next important event was the appointment late in 1233 or early
in l23tt of the Dominican, Johannes von Wildeshausen, as Bishop of
Bosnia, the first foreigner to receive the post. Johannes was a noted
although as far as we know he knew no Slavic
bnguage
-
who had studied in Paris and Bologna, and prior to his
-
rrrival in Hungary sometime in 1232 he had served in Bremen. We
know that he did not want the Bosnian post and that in 1235 (after
violence had begun) he requested, though in vain, to be relieved of his
mpleasant duties.(67) We have no evidence that Johannes ever resided
in or even visited Bosnia.
Pope Gregory's attitude toward Bosnia changed greatly in the course
tf the year that followed these October 1233 letters, which were
[riendly toward Ninoslav. In October 1234 the papal letters were
&.manding military action against the Bosnian heretics. What caused
this change? Had the pope sent agents to Bosnia who had reported that
rrligious deviation was prevalent? Or had Coloman, seeking an excuse
to invade Bosnia, sent such a report? Or had Ninoslav done nothing
llxrut the heresyT Whatever the cause, Gregory wrote six letters in
three days (between October 14 and L7, 1234) to Coloman, to the
[5osnian bishop, and to would-be crusaders about the new crusades. The
a
popc said it was necessary to convert to the faith heretics in various parts
ol "Slavonia."(68) Bosnia was singled out by name ("land of Bosnia")
only in the letter to the Bosnian bishop. Presumably this referred to the
Bosnian diocese. It is usually assumed that by "Slavonia" Gregory
meant Bosnia (and environs). Yet "Slavonia" could also have referred
to Slavdom (i.e., the South Slavic lands) in general or even to Slavonia,
north of theSava,in particular. Since the Bosnian bishop was informed
elxrut the crusading plans, it is obvious that some of the crusaders'
rttivities would be directed against heretics in his diocese which in-
cluded not only the Bosnian banate but also all the territory up to the
$ava River. In these letters Gregory promised indulgences to those who
would fight the heretics, and, in accepting Coloman as a crusader, put
him and his crusaders under the protection of the Holy See.((r9) The
crusade seems to have been directed against the Bosnians in general with
no defined group being singled out as the enemy. Papal letters
throughout use only the general term "heretics," rendering it im-
possible for us to ascertain whether the papacy was alarmed solely by the
herctics (probably dualists) or whether it was also concerned with the
ffrors and ignorance of the Bosnian Catholic monks.Only one source,
Suibert's "Commentary," implies that the crusade may have been, at
kast nominally, sent against dualists.(70)
140 Medieval Bosnian Church
The crusade presumably began in 1235 and continued through 1236.
We do not know where the armies went or how far they penetrated
during these two years. In August 1236 the pope told his crusaders to
leave Sibislav, Knez of Usora, and his mother alone, since they were
good Catholics in the midst of a nobility in the Bosnian diocese infected
with heresy, lilies among thorns.(7 1) The two were placed under papal
protection; Sibislav was called the son of a former Ban Stiepan of
Bosnia, and is generally considered to be grandson of Ban Kulin,(72)
which would make him either the brother or nephew of Ninoslav.
It is generally assumed that in these years the crusaders ravaged
Bosnia proper. However, we cannot assune this. It would have taken
time to occupy and convert the populace of the territory of Slavonia,
Usora and Sol, in which we have been told lived heretics, and which
would have had to be pacified before the crusaders could proceed to
Bosnia itself. lt is reasonable to assume that Ninoslav and other Bosnian
lords would have resisted, which, when we consider the mountainous
terrain of Sol and beyond into Bosnia, would have insured that the
crusaders' progress was slow.
In May 1237 Dubrovnik prohibited further trade with Bosnia until an
embassy it had sent there returned.(73) Since Bosnia usually had
friendly relations with Dubrovnik, it is probable that some difficulties
within Bosnia (possibly connected with the crusades) may have ham-
pered the embassy. Warfare continued through 1237 and 1238.
Johannes von Wildeshausen in these years finally managed to extricate
himself from the post of bishop since on April 26, 1238 Pope Gregory
IX could write to Bishop Theodoric of the Cumans about the selection of
the Dominican Ponsa as the new bishop. This letter, which announced
that after great labors the Bosnian land had been brought back to the
light of Catholic purity, shows that by then the crusade was considered a
success. The pope also wanted Hum (Cholim) to be subiected to Ponsa.
Whether this reflected crusader gains into Hum or future plans for the
crusades is unknown.(74) ln addition, it is apparent that part of the
central region of Bosnia had fallen, because in the same letter the pope
mentioned raising money for the establishment of a future Bosnian
cathedral chapter.(75) In other words the pope wanted to create in
Bosnia a new seat for the Bosnian bishop and his staff , with sufficient
income to support it.
Later documents give further details about where the cathedral was to
be established: a letter to Ponsa in December 1239 calls him the Bishop
of the Chapter of St. Peter, and a charter of Bela lY of. 1244 states that
the See was located at Brdo (Burdo) above Vrhbosna (modern Sarajevo),
("supra Urhbozna Burdo . . ."X76)
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniC 141
Because the pope presumably desired a safe site for the future
cathedral and its clergy, his choice of Vrhbosna suggests that he con-
sidered that town safe; thus probably byApril 1238 Coloman had ac-
tually occupied the place. That Vrhbosna must have been lost to
Ninoslav is also deduced from the fact that plans for the cathedral
chapter continued after December 1238 when the pope declared that
Ninoslav had relapsed into heresy.(77) If Vrhbosna lay in the lands of a
relapsed heretic, presumably papal plans for the new See would have
been postponed. Besides, if Ninoslav had been involved in the plans for
the new See, we would expect the bishop's seat to be established in the
Visoko-Zenica region, the heart of Ninoslav's state. That the church
was to be erected at Vrhbosna, then, shows that Coloman had
conquered this region from Ninoslav and also that Coloman's crusaders
most probably had not been able to occupy the Visoko-Zenica center of
Ninoslav's banate. Thus Ninoslav had managed to retain his in-
dependence despite some territorial losses.
Finally, the involvement of the Dominicans who were closely
associated with Coloman shows both that the project was Coloman's and
that the planned new bishopric was to be a Dominican venture. Thus,
the new bishopric under the Dominican Ponsa, staffed by Dominican
clerics, supported by the Hungarians, and located inside Bosnia was
intended to assume whatever authority the Bosnian monastic
organization had had and to reintegrate Bosnia with the international
Catholic Church. It is not surprising that the pope, in an area of shaky
faith, would have wanted to establish the bishop's seat in an area under
Coloman and to have the church under the direction of the Dominicans.
Wc can assume that Dominicans, and very likely Ponsa himself , arrived
in Hungarian-occupied Bosnia during 1238.
One strange fact remains to be explained: in the papal letter of
December 1238 Gregory says that Ninoslav had, at some previous
rime, deposited money for the cathedral with the Dominicans.(78) But
why should Ninoslav have contributed for a cathedral to be established
by his enemiesT We have noted that, in 1233 when Ninoslav accepted
Catholicism, one of his relatives had briefly been held by the
Dominicans as a hostage. It seems likely that Ninoslav had then had to
post a sum of money with the Dominicans to guarantee his adherence to
Crtholicism, to be forfeited if he relapsed; perhaps, then, it was this
cunest-money, posted by Ninoslav with the Dominicans, that they
lrter decided should be used for the cathedral. It is, however, even more
likely that, at the time Ninoslav had accepted Catholicism in 1233 and
prior to the crusades launched against him, he had given money for a
iuture cathedral to be built in his lands.
142 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia to Stiepan KotromaniC t43

In Bela's charter of. 1244, which we shall discuss shortly, we find that
Ninoslav had both granted and recognized the church's rights to collect
had maintained trade and friendly relationswith Bosnia throughout. In
1214 and i240 Ninoslav confirmed treaties of friendship and com-
tithes and to possess various lands within his banate.(79) Unfortunately,
mercial privileges between Bosnia and Dubrovnik.(83) The religious
we cannot demonstrate whether these privileges toward the church had
aspects of the war seem to have been entirely under the control of the
been granted by Ninoslav prior to the launching of the crusades or
Archbishop of Kalocsa and the Dominicans. This confirmation ran
whether he had been forced to grant them by the Hungarian armies.
counter to Gregory's own policies; in 1238 he was discussing with
Since the 1244 charter purports to be a reissue of a 7239 charter ol
Hungarian bishops the election of Ponsa as the new Bishop of Bosnia.
Coloman's, and since we know of no treaty or submission to Coloman
The Archbishop of Dubrovnik, who as suzerain should have confirmed
by Ninoslav tn 1238-39, I think it most probable that Ninoslav had
and consecrated the new bishop, was neither consulted nor had a part in
recognized the church's rights to these lands back in 1233, at the time
Ponsa's consecration.
the pope's letter had noted his acceptance of Catholicism. Yet his ac-
ceptance of the Roman faith, and possibly even his recognition of the
Thus, Dubrovnik's overlordship was empty. Hungary was in the
church's rights to income and lands, had not protected his banate from of, and in fact by 1238 had succeeded in, usurping control of the
process

- a bishopric which would shortly become an empty

Bosnian bishopric
the l{ungarian armies. Naturally he would have become anti-Catholic
(in loyalty though not necessarily in doctrine) and at least have severed title itself. Why would the pope go out of his way to issue a meaningless
charter? We can only assume, if the charter is authentic, that he was
relations with the Bosnian church hierarchy, which by then was
answering some complaint that no longer survives from the Archbishop
composed of foreigners and no longer residing in Bosnia. In fact,
of Dubrovnik about the usurpation of his rights by the Hungarians. In
Ninoslav's alleged relapse, noted by Pope Gregory IX in December
reply, we conjecture, the pope simply reissued the old charter since,
1238,(80) may not signify more than a refusal by the ban to recognize
after all, no official change of suzerainty had yet been authorized.
the Dominican Ponsa as bishop.
The conditions of war had also cut off the Bosnian clergy {rom its
In Deccmber 1238 the pope called upon both Ponsa and Duke
official hierarchy. And since this hierarchy supported the invader, it Coloman to persecute the Bosnian heretics.(84) These letters were
perhaps motivated by Ninoslav's alleged relapse. Presumably during
would not be at all strange if both Bosnian ruler and clergy should have
1239 papal wishes were carried out, because the pope wrote Coloman in
begun to seek ways to make their church independent of the now foreign
December to praise him for his zealous persecution of heresy;(85) but
Bosnian bishop, the Dominicans, and the Hungarians. The simplest
we have no information about Coloman's activities. The Bosnian state
step would have been to choose a bishop from their own ranks, as had
cannot have been entirely overrun, for in March L240 we find Ninoslav
been the local custom until the 1230's.
issuing a charter of peace and friendship to Dubrovnik.(86) We do not
Whatever the pope originally intended the crusade to be, it became a
know whether Dubrovnik's leaders were motivateci by commercial
war of conquest by the Flungarians against Bosnia. Such, of course, is
interests or by frustration at the loss of ecclesiastical authority in Bosnia.
the natural result of any crusade which meets resistance, for the
However, it is clear that f)ubrovnik (whose Catholicism was beyond
crusader sees clearly that the only way to establish what he is fighting for
question) did not regard the l{ungarian invasion of Bosnia as justified,
is to conquer and administer the recalcitrant region himself. Many
did not consider Ninoslav to be a heretic, and did not believe that Bosnia
believe that the conquest of Bosnia had been Hungary's goal from the
was a land of heretics.(87)
beginning, and some even claim that "heresy" in Bosnia was a
ln December 1239 Gregory called on the Prior of the Dominicans in
Hungarian hvention to excite the pope into blessing and supporting its
Hungary to send several preachers to "the land of Bosnia" against the
war of conquest.(8l) Such a view, although perfectly plausible and
heretics.(88) The letter as usual says nothing about where they should
temptingly in accord with what we know, cannot be demonstrated from
go in Bosnia (does "land of Bosnia" refer to banate or dioceseT) or
the sources.
about the nature of the heresy. Presumably these new preachers were
In 1238, in the midst of the fighting, a strange document appeared, in
sent to work in Hungarian-occupied Bosnia (Vrhbosna and environs). A
which Pope Gregory confirmed Dubrovnik's rights over Hum, Bosnia,
few weeks later Gregory wrote some Dominican brothers of Bosnia to
and Trebinje.(82) So far as we know, Dubrovnik had had nothing to do
send Ninoslav's deposit to the Bishop of Bosnia.(89)
with the crusade, had not even been asked to participate, and, in fact,
l'hough the Dominicans provided the religious impetus for the
L44 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia to Stjepan Kotromanii
145
in Bosnia, and their influence was
crusade, little is known of their role in the central part of Bosnia at a time when many scholars
short-lived. In the 1230's they supplied "Bosnia" with two bishops;
think that
Bosnia was without churches, because ofthe presence
ofheretics.
the first almost certainly never set foot inside Bosnia. The second, The charter tells us nothing directly aboui heretics.
But the presence
Ponsa, presumably entered Hungarian-occupied Vrhbosna in 1238 in of so many churches suggests that heretics had not bothered
the train of Coloman's armies. The influence of Ponsa and his entourage these
catholic churches in various parts of Bosnia. In addition,
the text of the
could not have been extensive, however, because they could have charter states that Ninoslav, his brothers, and barons
recognizeJ the
remained only until the Tatar invasion of. 1241. Thus the Dominicans bishop's right to these possessions. It also refers
to possessions in
Usora,
would have had influence only in part of Bosnia and this for a maximum given to the church at some unspecified time
by Ninoslav. Above, we
of three years. There is no evidence that they ever set foot inside the have speculated that this recognitior ru. given
prior to the launching of
territory that Ninoslav retained, and considering the existing state of the crusades.
war, it seems highly unlikely that they did. Bela's re-issue of coroman's charter shows that the
We have a list of Dominican monasteries from 1303, which includes Hungarians in
1244 hoped in vain, as it turned out _ to re_occupy the parts of
none in Bosnia.(90) Thus it is clear that the Dominicans never -
Bosnia they had briefly held and lost and to extend
established any convent or permanent mission in Bosnia. Their failure
their domination
into new regions.
was due to the fact that the Hungarians were never able to establish
lasting control over the banate. Most likely the Dominicans began in the
1230's to establish themselves in Slavonia and the region around the IX: Bosnian Catbolic Churcb Subjected to Kalocsa
Sava, and presumably they had some success in converting heretics or
teaching the unenlightened of that region. During the period 1246-52, pope
Innocent IV made official what had
ln I24I the Tatars invaded Hungary. Coloman and Ugrin, the Arch- in fact occurred at least a decade earlier: the
subjection of the Bosnian
bishop of Kalocsa, perished in battle, and Dominican sources add that bishopric to the Archbishop of Karocsa. By
this act was ended the
thirty-two Dominicans were drowned by the Tatars in a river. nominal suzerainty of Dubrovnik that had hit'herto
b..n .".ognir"a
Coloman's crusade had failed to destroy Ninoslav and his state. And often confirmed. The Hungarians had pressed
for this .rrou", l', ," ,t"ra
the territory it had conquered was lost as the Tatar invasion led to the see from the text of Innocent's retter of July L246, since it would "ff
withdrawal of the Hungarians from the Vrhbosna region.(9l) The simplify their task; in theory as long as Bosnia
was under Dubrovnik,
crusade clearly increased Bosnian hatred for the Hungarians, a sen- the Hungarians had to obtain papal plrmission
for their activities there.
timent which would prove to be an influential factor in determining PJacing the Bishopric of Bosnia under
the Archbishop of Kalocsa wourd
Bosnian politics up to and beyond the Turkish conquest. And by give them complete freedom of action.
making religion a factor in this international dispute, it no doubt in- Th.e document of
July 1246 describes the chaotic and evil state of the
^Bosnian Catholic Church.
creased the rupture between the Bosnians and official Catholicism, and It had lapsed into heresy with a heretical
was an important factor in mustering support in Bosnia behind one or bishop who had had to be removed for not
performing church services;
more anti-Catholic local movements. The events of the following decade the Archbishop of Dubrovnik, it is noted, had
installed the man and had
would solidify and make this schism permanent. tolerated the situation. To exterminate heresy
and to improve *.r,"., i,
In 1244 Bela IV, King of Hungary, confirmed a grant made in 1238 had been necessary to entrust the Bosnian
caiholc church to the care of
or 1239 (but no longer extant) by his brother Coloman to the Bosnian the Archbishop of Kalocsa. The Kalocsa church,
after much labor and
bishopric.(92) The document lists considerable territory inside Bosnia crpense, and despite many perils, had succeeded
proper which nominally belonged to the bishop. But apart from Vrh-
in carrying o,ra ih;,
cnormous task' King Bela had therefore requested
bosna, held from 1238 to I24L, and other territories which might have
that-the Bosnian
crtholic church be transferred from the Archdiocese of Dubrovnik
been occupied by the Hungarian crusaders, we can suppose that, from to
that of Kalocsa. After much thought, the pope
called upon the abbot of
the crusade's beginning, the bishop had neither administered these thc Pannonhalme monastery and iertain oihe,
clerics to inuestigute ih.
lands nor derived any income from them. The document's greatest mttter so that the pope would have the information
necessary to decide
significance lies in the fact that it lists a considerable number of churches ttre question.(93) The fact that Innocent
called upon this pannonian
r46 Medieval Bosnian Church
abbot to head the inquiry leads us to believe that the pope intended to
accept the Hungarian request.
In August 124(> the pope wrote the Archbishop of Kalocsa,clearly
hoping for further cfusading activity since he bestowed upon the ar-
chbishop the power to let true believers divide up the heretics' property
among rhemselves.(94) In January 1247 , the pope called on Bela to take
action against the Bosnian heretics.(95) The pope, thus, seems to have
hoped for zealous action by the Hungarians while their case was pen-
ding.
In the summer of 1247 lnnocent wrote to a Hungarian cistercian
abbot: The Bosnian catholic church had fallen into heresy. The Ar-
chbishop of Kalocsa had labored hard to exterminate heresy, with a
great shedding of blood, and at great expense. A large part of Bosnia was
conquered and many heretics were captured and led away. But the
fortifications that the Church controlled were not strong enough to
defend this territory from attack or to maintain the purity of faith
there. since rhere was little hope that the land would (naturally) come
around to catholicism, and since Kalocsa had gone to such great lengths
in leading crusades, the Kalocsa Archbishop, the Bosnian bishop
(Ponsa) and King Bela had requested that the Bosnian Church'be
If, the pope stated, that was the way things were,
subjected to Kalocsa.
let the Bosnian Church be subjected to Kalocsa.(96)
However, subjection does not seem to have occurred immediately,
since on May 23, 1250 the suffragan bishops of the Dubrovnik ar-
chdiclcese were summoned to Rome to settle a disagreement about filling
the Antibari (modern Bar) bishopric. Among those called was a Bishop
of Bosnia.(97) Since a letter of Ponsa, dated L212, cites the papal
summons,(98) clearly Ponsa was the Bosnian bishop called- Thus' in
1250, the pope still could summon Ponsa as a suffragan bishop of
Dubrovnik.
other events may have postponed the papal decision. we have noted
that in the aurumn of. 1246 and the spring of. 1247 , the pope was calling
for another crusade. whether any movement of troops actually took
place we do not know, but in March 1248 the pope made an about-face
and called off the crusade. The new papal view was expressed in a letter
to Benedict, Archbishop of Kalocsa, in which he said that he did not
want the armies to march against Ninoslav because Ninoslav had ap-
pealed to the pope and claimed that he was really a good Catholic but had
been forced by circumstances to favor the heretics and to accept their aid
against the foreign enemies of his country.(99) Ninoslav may well
have
been trying to play for time but the strength of his argument certainly
was clear to the pope. For even if Ninoslav was a good catholic, how
Bosnia to Stjepan Kotromanrc 147
could the pope have expected him to persecute heretics when he needed
their help to defend himself and his realm from the invading
Hungarians ?
So the pope stopped the new crusade and sent legates to investigate
the situation. FIe dispatched a Split Franciscan and the Bishop of Senj ,
(100) two coastal clerics, both of whom probably spoke the language, a
considerable advantage in understanding llosnian conditions. By not
sending a f)ominican and by not ordering the Archbishop of Kalocsa to
send an agent, the pope was seeking a neutral non-Hungarian opinion
before yielding to Hungarian pressure for further military intervention.
We may suggest that the pope postponed a decision on the subjection of
the Bosnian Sec until these legates hacl macle a report; quite possibly
they were expccted to gather facts to help the pope decide which ar-
chbishop should have jurisdiction over Bosnia, in acldition to in-
vestigating Ninoslav's Catholicism.
What Ninoslav's religious opinions and loyalties at this time were we
cannot say. Doubtless, he was hostile to Flungary. His "relapse" in
1238 possibly had been no more than a refusal to recognize Ponsa as
bishop, which the pope might well have interpreted as a refusal to accepr
papal supremacy, since the popc, had supported Ponsa. However, had
the pope been willing to relieve Bosnia of any and all ties with Kalocsa
(and the Dominicans) and to allow the Church of Bosnia to be subjected
toDubrovnik
- de facto as well as de jure -- Ninoslav might well have
become reconciled with Catholicism and Rome. But this decision was
not taken. Unfortunately, the sources give us no reasons as to why. We
may speculate that F{ungarian pressure was too great. Nothing is known
aborrt the legates' mission of. 1248 or whether they judged Ninoslav
Catholic or relapsed. Nor can we tell whether further Hungarian
military action occurred in or near Bosnia in 1248 or 1249. Ninoslav
was still in power in 1249 when he signed a treaty of friendship with
Dubrovnik.(101) Thereafter he disappears from the sources entirely;
perhaps he died about this time. We do not know the name of his suc-
cessor.( I 0 2)
Thus, in 1249: Ninoslav still maintained friendly relations with
Dubrovnik; the papal inquiry into the ban's Catholicism and the general
situation in Bosnia was either in progress or completed. The Hungarian
request for Bosnia's subjection to Kalocsa was still pending ; and
Dubrovnik still maintained a tenuous hold on its de jtre rights as
surerain archbishop, as is shown by the fact that in May 1250 Ponsa
was summoned by the pope as one of several suffragan bishops under
Du brovn ik.
Next on October 11, 1251, the Ragusan archbishop wrote a letter
 148 Medieval Bosnian Church
listing the precedents for his archdiocese's rights of suzerainty over Bar,
Ulcinj, and Bosnia. The letter lists various popes who had confirmed
Dubrovnik's rights over these three dioceses, as well as various
Dubrovnik acts demonstrating the suzerain rights of the Dubrovnik
archbishop. Among these other acts was the consecration of a Bosnian
bishop named Bratislav.(103) Unfortunately, no other document refers
to Bratislav so there is no way to determine when he had been con-
secrated. Kalocsa is not mentioned in the letter; thus, we cannot be sure
whether the pope by then had decided for Kalocsa which had elicited this
Dubrovnik response, or whether Dubrovnik, believing that the pope
was on the verge of so deciding, had written to try to dissuade him.
On May 8, 1252, we find Ponsa, still Bishop of Bosnia, residing in
Djakovo in Slavonia.(104) This is the town where the Hungarian-
sponsored, and the only papal-sanctioned, Bishop of Bosnia was to
reside until the fall of the Bosnian Kingdom. By the establishment of the
See in Djakovo, Hungary recognized that its puppet bishop could not
find support in Bosnia. Thus, the Hungarians had to give him a court in
Slavonia to go with his empty title until such time as they might
reoccupy Bosnia. This bishop in Djakovo, except for Peregrin Saxon
during his brief tenure as bishop (1349-55) and Peter, his successor,
never set foot in Bosnia or had anything to do with Bosnian affairs; he
was a Hungarian court personage, whose main activities concerned
affairs in Slavonia.
Thus we may conclude that the pope, though apparently ready to
subject the Bosnian See to Kalocsa in 1247 , and though encouraging
Kalocsa's activities in Bosnia and recognizing the Kalocsa-sponsored
Dominican bishop of Bosnia, Ponsa, only reached his final decision after
May 125O.It is likely that the decision had been made prior to October
1251, and that the Dubrovnik archbishop's letter asserting his See's
suzerain rights was a response to the papal decision.
X: Establishrnent of tbe Bosnian Church
. From the beginning of the Hungarian crusades in r23i if not from
the time of the first foreign bishop,s appointment in -1234 _ and
throughout the Dubrovnik-Kalocsa quut."l-fo, jurisdiction over
Bosnia,
the Bosnians must have been themselves administering religious
matters and churches within Bosnia. There is no evidence in'these
]ears
that the Archbishop of Kalocsa had any authority within the
banate, nor
is there evidence that Dubrovnik, in defianc! of papal policy,
was
supervising religious matters in Bosnia. since we h.u" no kno*ledge
of
any religious organization inside Bosnia other than the monastic
oid.r,
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniJ r49
we may suspect that the monks, in addition to their usual activities, had
taken on the burdens of ministering to the peasantry. Thus the magister
and priors, in addition to their monastic administrative duties, Jould
have assumed the role of bishop and staff for Bosnia. If as seems likely,
,
the magister of the order prior to 1203 had on occasions, or even
regularly, been the Bishop of Bosnia, then his assumption of these tasks
alter 1234 would have been natural. since in the fourteenth century we
shall meet a Bosnian church headed by its own bishop or djed, it seems
plausible to date the foundation of this autonomous church to the period
alter 1234.
That the sources do not mention such a church until 1320 is hardly
an argument against its establishment between 1234 and 12)2, since
the seventy-year period 1250-1320 is one almost without sources.
Presumably, the initial act in the establishment of this church would
have been the assumption by a local Bosnian o( the bishop's title in
opposition to the Hungarian-sponsored bishop. The likely time for this
act to have occurred would have been after the launching of the
flungarian crusades. It may well have occurred in or before 123g;
possibly it was such an acr that the pope referred to then when he stated
that Ninoslav had relapsed. If the anti-bishop had not been established in
the 1230's, a natural time for his establishment would have been ca.
l2J0 t2, when it became apparenr that the Bosnian catholic church
would be subjected permanently to the Archbishop of Kalocsa and
the
Hungarians. Interested Bosnians must have rearized that their bishop
would henceforth serve Hungarian interests. There would be no further
elections of local clerics with Ragusan consent to the post, as had
been the practice untrl -1233. Such a realization- would have further
stimulated the Bosnians to form some sort of autonomous "national"
church. The precedents of Serbia and Bulgaria were there. Most of the
Bosnian nobles would have felt the need for such a church and would
have supported it, no matter what its doctrine might be.
The Bosnian clergy and monks would have favored such a move,
.because
they were already separated from their hierarchy of foreigners
who had artacked them, who lived abroad, and who had little interJst
in
or sympathy for Bosnian conditions.
The Bosnian Church, which appears as we shall see _ in the
sources from the 1320's to the falr of the- state, resembled
a monasric
order in many ways. Then we shall find this church headed
by a single
djed, below whom were a number of gosti, many of whom headed
Bosnian church monastic houses. This arrangement resembles
the

150 Medieval Bosnian Church
monastic organization seen at Bilino polje in 1203 when we found a
single magister (who most probably was also Bishop of Bosnia) below
whom were a number of priors, heading monasteries. Orbini refers to
the died and stroinik (an administrative position in the church) as being
connected with monasteries.(105) Pius II, writing in the middle of the
fifteenth century, who believed the Bosnian Church to be dualist,
referred to Manichee monasteries.(106) Below the djed and the gost was
the starac. The term stafac (elder) is an orthodox monastic term. In
addition, in l2O3 the monks called themselves Christians (as a term for
those ordained), and the ordained members of the Bosnian church were
called by the Slavic equivalent, krstiani. Finally, there is no evidence of
any other clerical organization in Bosnia from which the church could
have been formed.
Thus I conclude that the Bosnian Church as an autonomous church
was created between 1234 and 1252; and for its hierarchy it utilized the
existing administrative organization of the monastic order. Thus the
Bosnian Church would, in fact, be the same institution that we met at
Bilino polje in 1203. The main difference between the "Christians" of
1203 and those of ca. 1250 lay in their relations to the Catholic world.
ln 1203, they, at least verbally, recognized the pope and promised to
adapt themselves to the ways of international Catholicism. Now in these
violent years 1234-52, in defiance ofthe pope and the papally sponsored
foreign bishop appointed to govern them, the Bosnians severed relations
with foreign Catholicism and established their own autonomous church'
And, with the Bosnian decision to go it alone, the whole controversy
over the subjection of the Bosnian See disappeared. The "Bosnian
bishop" in Djakovo clearly was under Kalocsa since Slavonia was. But
since this bishop had no authority in Bosnia, Dubrovnik had no further
reason to protest.
Professor Cirkovii believes, as I do, that the Bosnian Church was
formed in the mid-thirteenth century and sees it as developing out of the
existing local Catholic organization (i.e., the monastic order). He also
believes that there was a dualist heresy in Bosnia that was growing
during the thirteenth century, against which the Hungarian crusades
were directed. During the first half of the century, although the monks
may have been somewhat influenced by dualist ideas, they had managed
to remain distinct from the heretics until the wars. The wars threw all
Bosnians together to repel the invader, and also, by making the
populace anti-Catholic, attracted many toward the heretical movement'
Those so attracted included the now bishopless Catholic organization.
The two groups, Cirkovii believes, merged about the middle of the
thirteenth century. This merger resulted in an administration based on
e
Bosnia to Stiepan Kotromania r51
ffi
the former Catholic Chr.rrch organiz-ation of monks, with a theology
ffi
ffi taken from the dualist heretics.(107)
#
It is clear that there ,is great similarity between my construction of
ffi, events and Professor Cirkovic<'s, and I acknowledge my debt to his
presentation for many of my own views. I accept with no hesitation his
contention that the local Bosnian Catholic organization severed its links
ffi (however weak) with Catholicism and declared its independence at or
shortly after the middle of the thirteenth century.
ffi tJowever,,l see no reason why the Catholic monks had to accept
dualism as CirkoviC believes. There is certainly no evidence in our
ffi s)urces from the fourteenth and fi{teenth centuries to conclude that the
Bosnian Church was dualist, though it may well have had certain
practices similar to, and possible even acquired from, dualists. There
could easily have been a dualist current which continued to exist in
Bosnia, but which remaincd as it had prior to ca. 1250 , distinct from the
ffi monks' organiz.ation even after that organization became the Bosnian
Church. There is no reason why two different movements, both deviant
from a Catholic pointof view, could not have coexisted in Bosnia. The
lJr:snians have always tolerated the coexistence of different faiths
whenever outsiders did not force them to violence. Thus, the Bosnian
ffi
Church could have peacefully coexisted with and even have had relations
with "Manichees" or Orthodox, just as Catholics, Orthodox, and
ffi
Moslems coexisted in relative peace in Bosnia a{ter the Turkish
eonquest, so long as they were not stirred to conflict by the Turks, or
later by the European powers, or finally by Croatian or Serbian
ffi chauvinistic nationalism.
It seerns likely, then, that the Bosnians, in utilizing the monastic
ffi, rirder to establish their church, would have tried to preserve the beliefs
ffi
and practices which that order had had up to that time.(108) Thus, at
w
first we would simply have had a schism, and owing to the ignorance of
the rnonks we would also trave found a variety of deviations in belief and
practice. As a result of Hungary's attempts to assert its authority over
ffi I]osnia, we would expect the church of these monks to exhibit all the
traits that anthropologists would associate with a "nativistic
ffi,
m,lvement." This type of movement is defined as a reaction against
thmination from a foreign culture by means of an organized attempt to
revive or perpetuate certain aspects of the native culture in the face of
ffi
pressure to change. Generally, such a movement will be religious in
ffij nr(ure. It is pointed out that it usually focuses on a few selected elements
ol the native culture that have emotional and symbolic value. These
tendencies are often strongest in the classes who occupy favored
ffi psitions and who feel these positions are threatened.(109)
ffi
152 Medieval Bosnian Church
This definition applies perfectly to Bosnia in the middle of the thir-
teenth century. Its political leadership was threatened with loss of
position and authority by Hungary. Its religious leadership (the local
monkish hierarchy) was threatened as well by what would happen if
Hungary and the Hungarian church organization achieved dominance
over the church in Bosnia. The Hungarian Catholic invasion would
have made many Bosnians hostile to both the Catholic Church and
Hungary and thus ready to turn to a local organization, and the choice
of local religious organizations seems to have been limited to the
monasticorder.(110) There would have been a strong desire among the
monks, and those who were influenced by them, to maintain what was
theirs, what was Bosnian; this would include all their deviations in
practices. In fact, if there was pressure by Hungary to change particular
deviant practices, this alone would have been strong impetus to make
those particular deviations into important practices that had to be kept,
and into symbols of their church. If these deviations were in matters
considered important by Rome, this alone would have been enough to
make Rome regard the Bosnian Church as heretical as well as
schismatic.
However, itshould be stressed that there is no evidence that this
"nativistic" emotion swept Bosnia. As was stressed in the beginning
the emotions are usually strongest in the classes with the most to lose.
Thus, we can suspect that nativism would have been found among the
monks and among some of the nobility (in other words, the leaders of
the society) and among those townsmen and the limited number of
peasants living near enough centers to be influenced by the spirit. The
majority of the population would probably have been relatively slightly
affected.
Thus, I postulate that the Bosnian Church was organizationally and
doctrinally a continuation of the monkish order of Bosnia. In the way I
have described , it based its ' 'theology' ' on its own brand of
Catholicism, a combination of uneducated Catholicism and what
originally were chance deviations, now through nativistic pride, inflated
to assume the role of basic practices. As a result of making deviations
from Catholicism into prescribed practice, it could well have earned the
label "heretical" from Rome. The existence of heretics in the realm
gave Rome additional justification to call this church heretical.
However, because it was basically Catholic in doctrine, Dubrovnik was
able to continue to regard the Bosnian Church as schismatic and not
heretical. Thus, Dubrovnik maintained good relations with Bosnians for
the next two centuries and even had close relations with certain clerics
of the Bosnian Church. In fact, Dubrovnik rarely called Bosnia heretical
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniC 153
and usually referred to Bosnia as schismatic. It is only after 1430, and
then only in wartime, that Dubrovnik bandied the labei heretic about.
trn
the same way we can find the orthodox on occasions tolerating
Bosnian
churchmen. The Bosnian church bishop, Djed Miroslau, *u*, allowed
to witness a charter in 1 305 ,(11 1) and Metropolitan David
of Milexevo
was willing to appear alongside Gost Radin of the Bosnian
church as a
witness to Herceg Stefan's will in 1466.(11 2) All the above examples
would have been inconceivable, on the part of either the orthodox
or
Dubrovnik if the Bosnian church had in-fact been neo-Manichee.
The seventy years following the establishment of the official bishop
_ in
Djakovo, and the last mention of Ninoslav in the sources is a iark
period for which we have very few documents. When we again
have
sources in the 1320's, we shall find the Bosnian churih firmly
established under a bishop bearing the Slavic title of djed.
XL' References to Hereticsfrom the I2g0's to 130j
In the period from r250 to 12g0 the onry mention of heretics appears
in a letter from ottocar, King of Bohemia, to the pope in 1260. ot,o.r,
reported that Bela's armies included Greeks, Bulgarians, Serbs,
and
Sosnian heretics.(l13) By this time, after the papal missions
and
crusades, combined with the general lack of eduiation in Bosnia,
it
would not be surprising if the term heretic had become a natural
labei to
bt attached to the Bosnians by foreigners, like ,,damn yankee.,' We
(snnot say if there was any real heresy among these
Bosnian soldiers or
whether this was just a pejorative rabel that came naturalry
to ottocar.
Not until 1280 is a crusade mentioned again; on this occasion it is
clearly a papal idea. Two letters refer to the matter. In the first,
Jelisaveta, mother of the Hungarian King Ladislas and Duchess of
t\lacva. Bosnia, PoYega and,,Wolkou', (The Vukovska lupa in
$lavonia),promised the pope to persecute heretics in her territory; ,h.
*id nothing specific about the heretics.(114) whether she took any
rution between then and the end of her reign in r2g4 is not known. At
the same time, King Ladislas, at the request of the pope, called for
the
pe'secution of heretics in "our kingdom and the diocese of Bosnia
and
ruijacent lands under our jurisdiction.n' He mentioned heretics
of
"whatever errors or sect" and of "various heretical sects."(115) His
firtement clearly shows that he believed there was more than one
heretical movement.
ln 1282, Stefan Dragutin, King of Serbia, was forced to abdicate his
throne to his brother. Having the good fortune to be brother-in-law
of
tt4 Medieval Bosnian Church
the King of Hungary, Dragutin shortly thereafter was given the Banates
of Ma[va, IJsora, and most probably Sol (Tuzla).(l16) In 1284,
Dragutin's daughter, Jelisaveta, married Priezda's son Stjepan
Kotroman. This marriage would have tremendous implications, because
the son born of it, Stjepan KotromaniC, would re-establish a strong
Bosnian state, and because by the marriage, Kotromanic<'s nephew,
Tvrtko, would justify his claim to the Serbian royal title a century later.
Archbishop Danilo, who wrote a life of Dragutin, states that Dragutin
found many heretics from the Bosnian land, and he converted many and
baptized them.(117)
Though Orthodox, Dragutin had good relations with the papacy and
in I29I turned to Rome for aid against heretics. Pope Nicholas IV called
upon the Franciscans of Slavonia to send two capable brothers, knowing
the language, to Dragutin's lands with full authority to act against
heretics and those defending them.(l18) We know nothing of their
mission. In 1298, Boniface VIII in almost the same words ordered the
Franciscans of Slavonia to send two brothers to investigate
purpose of destroying
- for the
heresy in Serbia, Ra"ska, Dalmatia, Croatia,
-
Bosnia, Istria, and the province of Slavonia.(1 19) That no mention was
made of a previous mission suggests that for some reason the 1291 order
had not been carried out. We have no information as to whether the
1298 papal order was acted upon. The papal letters of assignment from
129 1 and 1298, however, were to become the basis of Franciscan
claims, when some thirty years later the Franciscans and Dominicans
came to quarrel over the right to conduct the mission in the South Slavic
lands.
In 1303, Pope Boniface VIII turned to the former militant ally of the
papacy, the Archbishop of Kalocsa, and called on him to take action
against heretics in Bosnia and other provinces of his archbishopric. The
pope allowed him to call upon the secular arm to wage war against
treretics and Patarins.(120) We can suggest that the pope was making an
intentional distinction between the Patarins and the heretics.
During the period 1290-130) the Bribirski princes of the 5ubi6 family
began to try to annex Bosnia.(l21) In the first decade of the fourteenth
century, their expansion was checked by Stiepan Kotroman, son-in-
law of Stefan Dragutin. Heretics appear again in a 1304 obituary of
Mladen SubiC, called "Ban of Bosnia" but whose territory was chiefly
in the Donji kraji region. His obituary simply reports that he was killed
by unfaithful heretics.(122) The most likely explanation for his death is
that he was killed in battle against some Bosnians (who tend to be
described as heretics by those fighting against them). We may speculate
that Mladen had died in a battle against Stiepan Kotroman, against
Bosnia to StiePan Kotromanil Lt5
whom he had been waging war in 1302.(123)
XII: Djed Mircslau of the Bosnian Churcb
One of the oddest and most difficult pieces of information that
try to explain appears in a charter, issued
studc"nts of the heresy must
between 130) and 1307, to the monastery of St. Mary near Boka
Kotorska by the Serbian King Stefan UroX (Milutin). Witnesses to this
charter included: Marin, Bishop of Bar (a Catholic), Ioan, Bishop of
Hum (Orthodox), Mikail, Bishop of. Zeta (Orthodox), Djed Miroslav
{ofthe Bosnian Church as we shall see), Y-upan . . . (a secular official),
and Dumina, Bishop of Kotor.(l24) One's first reaction to a document
including a djed in such company is that it must be a forgery. However,
this simple way out does not seem probable. For, as we shall see, there is
an independent source that mentions Miroslav at this time. This second
source was discovered in Russia in the nineteenth century and it is
highly unlikely that a forger of a charter would have known about
it.(125) Thus I conclude the charter is authentic.
[{ow, then, are we to interpret the word djed? Does the term refer
to the Bishop of the local Bosnian Church who (besides this charter) is
first referred to by that title in a charter in the l32}'s? The term
"died" was found in eleventh century Croatia, where a died, the abbot
o{ a royal monastery who was often found at court, witnessed several
charters.(I26) The Croatian djed was clearly a Catholic. In 1211 in
Bulgaria Tsar Boril held a synod against the Bogomils. Among those
*nathematized at the synod was a Djed of Sardica.(127) This Buigarian
dfud was clearly a Bogomil, but we do not find the term used in any
other document about Bulgarian Bogomils. More recently in Macedonia
lnd in parts of Serbia the term has been used both for an Orthodox
bishop (particularly in the form "deda vladika") and for an older
monk.( 128)
Since a Bogomil djed, as a member of a sect both opposed in principle
rr!
I
t*churches and anathematized by the Serbian Church, would have been .i:
lmost unlikely personage to witness a charter to a Serbian monastery, ',ll:
cnd since the other Orthodox bishops in the document are referred to as
"|episkup" (and besides, the term djed meaning an Orthodox bishop is
not found for another three hundred years), we can conclude that the
*nly possible meaning for the term at the time the charter was issued is
the Bishop of the Bosnian Church. Thus it seems highly likely that
Miroslav was the Djed of the Bosnian Church, and this theory is
tonfirmed by a second totally independent.source, which also refers to
 r56 Medieval Bosnian Church
Miroslav.
This source is a list of previous Bosnian Church leaders written at the
beginning of a Bosnian Gospel, copied in 7393 for an important
nobleman and lay member of the Bosnian Church named Batalo. The
relevant list reads: (presented as a column) 1. G(ospodi)n' Rastud'e, 2.
Radoe, 3. Radovan', 4.Radovan', ). Hlapoe, 6. Drago!', 7. povr'Yen, 8.
Radoslav',9. Radoslav', 10. Miroslav', 11. Boleslav', 12. Ratko.(l29)
Elsewhere I have shown that the list reads down from Djed Rastudije,
the top name on the list, who lived in 1393, through the eleven names
listed below his which represent his predecessors as djed.(l30) The
eighth and ninth names on the list are both Radoslav, and inca. 1322
we have a Bosnian charter witnessed by Djed Radoslav at the hila
(monastic house) of Gost Radoslav.(131) Thus, we know that a
Radoslav was djed inca. 1322 and since gost was the title below djed it is
likely that Djed Radoslav was succeeded by Gost Radoslav which would
identify the two Radoslavs on this list. The tenth name on the list is
Miroslav. Thus, the predecessor of Djed Radoslav (who was djed in
1322) was named Miroslav. Thus, there was a Miroslav listed as head of
the Bosnian Church during the same period that a Djed Miroslav
witnessed the Kotor charter. The Miroslav on the charter is almost
certainly this Bosnian Church bishop. The Kotor charter, then, is the
earliest source to mention a Bosnian djed.
It does seem strange, however, to find a Bosnian Church djed wit-
nessing a charter for an Orthodox monastery in the company of a
Catholic and several Orthodox bishops. That both Catholics and Or-
thodox witnessed the charter shows that the presence of a man of a third
faith is not excluded. But it does suggest that the man of the third faith
should hold more or less orthodox views, and that the distinction
between him and the other clerics would be more political and
organizational than theological. Thus, I think Miroslav's presence here
as a witness suggests that the church he headed must have held
relatively orthodox theological views. It is improbable that he could have
headed a dualist or Bogomil Church.
This charter is not the only document in which we find a member of
the Bosnian Church acting in the capacity of witness in the company of
Orthodox clerics. In 1466 Herceg Stefan's last will and testament was
witnessed by David, the Orthodox Metropolitan of MileYevo, as well as
by the Bosnian Church leader Gost Radin.(132)
. We cannot say positively
in the
what Miroslav was doing in Kotor,(133) or
suite of stefan uro$ (Milutin). However, we can speculate
that
the subici had occupied or at least'invaded the part
of Bosnia where
Miroslav resided and caused him to flee. since the Bosnian church he
Bosnia to Stjepan Kotrornanid 157
headed was in secession from the Catholic organization, it is probable
that Miroslav would not have been treated kindly by the Catholic 5ubi6i,
rnd it is not surprising that he fled. If his theology was not heretical, and
as we have argued above, his presence as a witness on the charter
sugSests that it was not heretical, then there is no reason for Miroslav
not to seek refuge in Serbian territory. For after all, the Serbian Church,
though more prestigious in its autonomy, was in basically the same
position vis-b-vis Rome, as was the Bosnian Church.
Thischarter, then, is an important source to show that the Bosnian
Church in 1305 was not significantly heretical. Though involved in a
quarrel with Rome, it was able to enjoy peaceful and even friendly
relations with the Serbian Church. This is exactiy what we would expect
if the church was simply a local autonomous church built upon the
organization of the local originally Catholic monkish order. If some of its
deviations had been raised to the level of doctrine as a result of nativistic
pride, either these deviations were not sufficient to bother the Serbs or
else the Serbs were unaware of the deviations at the time.
Before departing from the subject of the djed of the Bosnian Church
rnd the notation inside the Gospel, we might point out that two names
rppeared after (hence, preceded in time) Miroslav's. We know nothing
tlse about the two men (Boleslav and Ratko) who are referred to. But we
can conclude that if the author in 1393 accurately knew the history of
bis church and if he knew the names of all the leaders since the church's
bcoming independent, which are both big ifs, then either Ratko was the
lirst dled of the church or else Ratko was responsible for a significant
change (be it doctrinal or organizational) in an already existing in-
stitution. If we speculate that the first three bishops had terms of average
length this would date Ratko's accession or the establishnrent of the
independent church to roughly 1270-80 (of course, a period about
which we know pathetically little). Only if one, two, or even all three of
our {irst bishops had had very long rerms could we conclude that Ratko
was installed as the first djed back in the 12)0's, which is the most
likely time for the independent church to have been established. Thus,
tht 1393 dr:cument only roughly confirms our dating of the foundation
o{ the Bosnian Church.
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER III
l. Dj. Basler, "KasnoantiEko doba," in Kulrurna istorija Bosne i Her-
ttgat'ine (4. Benac, etal., editors), Sarajevo, 1966, pp. 3lr, 340.
2. Ihid., pp. 331, 338-339.
l. "Neretva " is the name of a River. The word was also used to designate the
r$rrtory along its course and specifically to denote the towns of Drijeva and
Xoniic.
158 Medieval Bosnian Church
4. N.Z. Bjelovuiii, Pouijest poluotoka Rata (PeljetcaJ, Split, 1921 , pp.26'
27. This work complicates matt€rs further than necessary by assuming that
Bogomils were active in the region of Ston at the time. No source indicates this.
5. On Miroslav's church of St. Peter and St. Paul on the Lim River, see R.
Ivanovid, "srednlovekovni baSinski posedi humskog eparhiskog vlastelin-
stva," Istorijski tusopis, IX X, 1959, pp. 79-80; also R. LiubinkoviC,
"Humsko eparhisko vlastelinstvo i crkva Svetoga Petra u Biielom polju,"
Starinar, n.s. IX-X, l9>8'r9, pp'97-l21.In the l2)0's the Bishop of Hum
was torced to vacate Ston; he moved to this church on the Lim which was made
his episcopal seat.
6. CD,II, pp. 206-07, 226.
7. Rcsti. p. (r3.
fi. On the Gnostics, see: H. Jonas, Tbe Gnostic Religion, (2nd ed.), Boston,
1958; R. Grant, Gnosticism and Early Christianiry, Qevtsed ed.), New York.
1966.
9. The dualism of the Paulicians has recently been questioned by N. Gar-
wian, "['be Paulician Heresjt, The Hague, l9(r7. However, Prof' Garsoian does
admit that a dualist wing of the movement appeared in Constantinople in the
ninth century. Thus this leaves the whole question of Paulician influence on
Ilogomil origins up in the air. See my review of Garsoian in Speculum, XLIY,
no. 2, April 1969, pp. 284-88.
10. On the Bogomils in Bulgaria the two basic sources are the tract of Cosmas
the Priest against them (written in the tenth century) and Tsar Boril's Council's
Anathemas against them frorn 1211. The texts, both edited by M,
Popruzhenko, appeared in B'lgarsh.i Starini,Cosmas in Vol. XII, 1936, and the
Sinodik of Tsar Boril in Vol. VIII, 1928. Both have been translated into French
with detailed and interesting commcntaries on the sources and the dualist
movcment by H. C. Puech and A. Vaillant, Le Trail| contre les Bogomiles de
(,rtsmus le PrAtre, Paris, 194) (Travaux publi6s par I'lnstitut d'6tudes Slaves,
XXI); See also the monographs, D. Angelov, Bogomilstuolo u B'lgaija, (2nd
ed.), Sofiia, l9(rl; D. Obolensky, The Bogornils, Cambridge (England), 1948.
I l. On the Cathars in the West, see A. Borst, Die Katharer, Stuttgart, 19)3
(Schriften der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Deutsches Institut ftir Er-
forschung des Mittelalters, XII); On the Cathar churches in Italy see the texts
with good (though biased) commentary by A. Dondaine, "La lli6rarchie
Cathare en Italie," Archiuum Fralrum Praedicatoram, XIX, 1949, pp.280'
I I 2, XX, 19)0, pp. 234'324.
12. On this Council, see the text published with interesting commentary by
A. Dondaine, "Les Actes du Concile Albigeois de Saint-Fdlix de Caraman,"
hliscellunea Giouanni Mercati, Vol. V, The Vatican, 19116,pp.324-35r.
I -1. Orr thg location of Dragovica, see I. DuiIev, "Dragvista-Dragovita,"
lleuue tlt'.r ttrdes B-yzdntines, XXII, 1964, pp. 215'221 .
tl. "f,iriie.u"tog Si-"una" by Stjepan PrvouenEani, see Chapter VI of this
life. Ed. L. Mirkovid, Spisi -rx.Saue i Steuana PnouenYanoga, Beograd, 1939,
pp. lfl 1-182. Simeun was the name taken by Nemanja when he became a monk
ar rhe end of his life. His biography was written by his son. All that thc
biography says about thc heretics' beliefs is that they did not teach that Christ
was thc Son o{ God.
I 5. It is worth noting that no source provides evidence of direct ties during
our period bctween Bosnia and Bulgaria, of either a religious or secular nature.
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniJ 159
(ltkr not includc thc Tractatus of Anselm of Alexandria -- to bc discussed below
sintc it states that Constantinople playrd the rolc of midclleman between
Bulgaria and Slavonia (Bosnia).) If the Bosnian Church was r:eally Bogornil or
dualist, the absencc of ties betwcen it and fellow South Slav dr-ralists in Bulgaria
- particularly when we considcr that Bulgarian dualists maintaincd ties with
itllow dualists both in Constantinople and Italy ---u'ould be, to say the least,
extrtrntly odd.
16.'l'homas Archdeacon of Split, IIistoria Saktnitana, (ed. F. RaEki,
MSllSM, 2(r, Scriptores, ), Zagreb, 1892t). The story oi the two brorhers
quotetl below is irom Chap. 23, p. 8t). For 7,tdar as a hotbcd of heresy see p. 83.
f.rr more details orr the brothcrs and thc cxalted position which they have
unjustifiably been given in certain historical works, sec my articie "Aristodios
nrr.l Rastudiie - a Re-examination of the Question" rn GID, XVI, Saraievo,
l9ti7. pp. 223 229.
17. ( l), 11, pp. 296-97.
18. ,'\. Dondaine, "La Hi6rarchie Cathare tn Italie," Archiuam Fratrum
Pr'ttdicutorum, XIX, 1949 (T'exr of "De [{eresi Catharorum in l-ombardia"
trvr{r plr. 106-312. For the belicfs of Caloiannes' church, see pp. 310'312).
lL). lhid., AFP, XX, 1950.'fext of "Tractatus de hereticis," pp, 308 2zt.
Pr.sagt't[iscussed in our text. p.3t]8.
l(). J. Sidak, " 'Ecclesia Sclavoniae' i misija Dominikanaca u Bosni,"
lhtrnih radoua Sut'uYililte u Zagrebu(Filozofski fakultet), III, l9tt,
pp.37 38 ;
md D. Mandid , Rogomilska crkart . . ., pp. 439 70. Both authors cite reievant
"
prs\allcs from the "Commentary . . . . The source is discussccl lurthcr bclow rn
notes 70 and 85.
:1 . (.D, II, pp. l(r8 (,9.
li l\liklosich, pp. I 2.
j.l. i\luha(inovidi horders on a village callrd Riskupi.{i obout n'hich there is a
bcrl tradition that a bishop lived theie in the timc of Kulin Ilan. Ir. Andjelii,
"Rrrrz-ij;r [itanja Kulinove plote," GZM.S(arch) n.s. XV'XVl, l9(r0-(rl, p.
'l
,!1i7. he namc of that villagc does suggest that thc village hacl hacl some
rdationship with a bishop, though pssibly it had been mcrely parr cf church
hnds providing incorre for thc bishopric. It would be intcresting to know if the
tndition connecting thc bishop w'ith the davs of Ban Kulin cxisted before the
$lque was discovcred. Ilowcver, since this rcgion was ncar thc center of
(ulin's statc. ancl since ht'built a church here, and sincc it is likely that the
hrhop u'ould have resided near thc center of thc statc (whcn relations were
hntrlly hetween church and statc) at a place htving a church" it is perfectly
pr*iblr that the bishop really did reside here. No source ever specifics where
lhr liishops of Bosnra resided bcfore 1233.
I'l I'j. Andielid, "Revizija . . .," p. 290. "siiu crkv' ban' Kulin' zida egd . . .
pn, Krr,t'v'sko Zagorie inatle na rru grom('i) v P<,dgt'ric Sliepifist' ipostavi svoi
nbrur'nad'(or "za") pragom' B(og) dac banu * Kulinu z-dravie i banici
\'u1.rhvi." Thc nreaning ol the phrase following the lacuna is not clear. And'
pl'f 's rnterprctation is most reaxrnable. Ile thinks that Kulin built this church
rhtn hc conquered (or bought) Kulev'sko Tagorie, ibil.,p. ?06.
J1. At first glantc onc rnight think that the intcnt of (hesc later carvcrs was
hr,rtrlc since not only do we find writing across the fact'of the plaque but wc
&4ric th.rt the centcr ol each cross has bcen roughly chopped at and dug out.
tf,,*rr'11,plnl.4ndielilpointed our tomethat popular bt'lief attaches medicinal
 160 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia to Stjepan KorromaniC 16l
properties to powder taken from these ancient monuments (particularly the
steic) and suggests that the crosses were not hollowed out to obliterate the sign Montenegro in 1760 and noted the absence of crosses, icons and books in
of the cross but since the cross was a holy sign, peasants believed that powder churches there. We have no evidence that dualism penetrated Montenegro;
hom that part of the stone would be most potent. This is quite possible, in which thus we find that such furnishings may well be absent in uneducated regions
case we can attribute the later writing to the same initial carving illness that is so without dualism being the cause.
universal today at important historic or natural sites. /t2. See below note 70 for this Chapter.
26. Andielii, "Reviziia . . .," p. 299. ztl. This was a posscript to the abjuration. Mandil, o p. c it., p. 436 ; C D, lll,
27. Andielii, "Revizija. ..," p.305. Whether Kulin really had a son named tt 25.
Stiepap,who ruled the banate is not ceftain. On that see below note72. 44. CD,lll, pp. 36-)7.
2S.5. Beltagi(, Z. Kaimakovid, F. IbrahimpaXi6, "6i.ilrki natpis iz doba 4t. CD,III, p. 36.
Kulina Ban1," NaYe starine,X, I96t, p. 204. ("V' d'ni B(a)na velik(a)go 46. CD, III, p. 70.
Kulin(a) bieie Gra(d) je'sa Sudi(ia) veli u neg(a) i s'zida (crkvu) Svetago Juriial f 47. Resti, p. 74.
se leEi u n(e)go i Lena eg(o)va rEe (: rete) poloYi(t)e me u nego. Ase iida Drale 48. Resti, p. 7).
o(h?)mu[anin . (To) mu vol'i B(oL)e. N(an') (A)z'pish'pro (dan') (po);'." 49. Resti, pp. 75 7(t.
29. Orbini, p. 3t0. 50. CD, III, pp. 187-88.
30. "Annali di Ragusa del magnifico Ms. Nicolo di Ragnina" in Annales 11. CD, III, pp. 196, 198-99. A Tautu, Acta Honorii IIL, p. IIl.
Ragusini, edited by S. Nodilo (MSHSM, Vol. XIV, Scriptores I, Zagreb, Against the Katili, CD, |il, pp. 20)-06.
1883), p.219. t2. CD, III, pp. 209-2t0.
31. Orbini, p. )r0; Resti, p. 63. 5J. ThomasArchidiaconus, Historia Salonitana, ed. F. Ralki, (MSHSM, 2(r)
32. Orbini, p. 3t0. kriptores, ),
Zagreb, 1894, p.96.
1). CD, ll, pp. 211-52. 14. Ihid., p. 98.
34. Cq, il, pp. 333 334. 5t. Ibid, p. 103. The year 1222 which Thomas gives for Acontius' death
J). S. CirkoviC, "Jedan prilog o Banu Kulinu," Istorijshi tasopis, IX-X, may not be accurate since we have a letter from Honorius III to Acontius dated
1959,pp.7l-77. Ste{an Nemanja had left three sons: Stefan who held Serbia, july 122) (CD, III, p.229) which shows rhat unless the legate had died without
Vukan who was assigned Zeta, and Sava the future archbishop and saint. Vukan the pope learning ofthe fact, Acontius did not die in 1222. A papal letter of
had his sights set on Serbia and was supported in this enterprise by King Imre of May 1221 refers to the legate as deceased. (CD, lll, pp. 242-43). Since we have
Hungary. Both Imre and Vukan were hostile to Miroslav of Hum as well. After noevidence ol Acontius working in the Slavic lands prior to 1221, since much
Miroslav's death, Imre appointed his brother Endre Vojvoda of Dalmatia, o{ his activity in Slavic lands took place in Dalmatia, and since Thomas'
Croatia and Hum. How much of Hum he actually controlled is not known. chronicle is a poor source for Bosnian affairs, it seems probable that the
Presumably Endre's iurisdiction was limited to Hum west of the Neretva. qaternent in his chronicle about Acontius working a long time in Bosnia is
Miroslav's widow, Kulin's sister, left Hum and returned to her brother's court cxugger ated.
in Bosnia at this time. various scholars have assumed that she had been forced )6. CD,lll,pp.242-43; Tauru, Acta Honorii IIL . .,p. 181.
to flee; however, we really do not know. ln 1202 Vukan aided by Imre invaded )7. CD,lll, p. 264.
[erbia; Imre made himself King of Serbia and gave Vukan the title of Grand
18. CD, III, pp. 264 65. John Angelus was called "Prince of Con-
zupan' Presumably Kulin's attack noted in the text was connected with this santinople" because he was a member of the family which ruled the Byzantine
war. We assume Kulin attacked territory held by Vukan. Shortly thereafter, tmpire from 118) until the Latin conquest of 1201+. After that debacle he came
stefan was able to recover his throne and later sava was able to bring about peace te t'lungary, whence his mother had come, and eventually was assigned the
between his two brothers. drelrict s of Srern , Beograd , Baracs and M ako which he governed until I 2 t4.
t9. CD, llt, p. 274.
?9. CP,II, p. 351 ; P.T. Halu5dynskyj, Acta Innocentii \il, p.209. 60. CD, III, p. 286.
?l 9P,III, pp. 14-l) ; Halu3dynskyj, Acta tnnocentii III, pp. Z24-2j. drl. See Chapter II.
38. Unless one wants to argue that Kulin, instead of s"rrdi.rg some of the 62. CD, lll, p. 362. Tautu, Acta Honorii III et Gregoii IX, pp. 2)j 34.
suspected heretics, sent some innocent substitutes. 6). CD,lll,p.379, Tautu, op. cit.,pp.268 69.
- .39.-Text
published in many places: D. Mandii, Bogomilska crhoa, pp. 43J, 64. CD, lll, p. 388; in a second letter, also p. 388, the pope mentions
16: CD,-!!1, pp. 24 b; Theiner MSM, I, p. 20; "HaluYEynskyj, 'icta In_ Ninoslav's acceptance of Catholicism. (Also in Tautu, op. cit.,pp.271 72.)
noc.entii III,
.pp. 235 37 . The chief variarion beiween the texti is tire rendering 61. CD,III, p.389. Tautu, op. cit.,p.271. Ubanus surely was a distortion of
of the priors'names. Hence for those names with variants, I have given in my the title ban. Priezda was therefore presumably a ban of some part of Bosnia
text the variants in parenthesis after the given name. undtr Ninoslav's suzerainty. Since in the period l25t 87, we shall find Priezda
40' The size of Bosnia in time, a typical rural way o{ measuring distance, was holding land in Usora and around Zeml janik on rhe Vrbas as well as in Slavonia,
provided by Casamaris in a letter.to the pope about his mission. 7n, m, *f (rn assumethat in 1233 he already ruled land in that region.
41. See chapter I, note 22, for a Russian envoy who visited neighboring i. Z;.
b6. CD, III, pp. 388-89.
 Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniC rc3
rcz Medieval Bosnian Church
7 4. The document states that Hum, having been cleansed of heresy, should
see A' Rother' "Johannes Teutonicus be given to Ponsa (see note 71). h is not evident whether the purification has
(r7. On Johannes von Wildeshausen' rai Christlicbe Altet'
rvon wildeshausen
' " ';"';;;;;;;
)' Quarta'tsch)in already been carried out or whether it is nrerelv planned and that after the plans
havebeen realized Ponsa should be given Hum. We also do not know what part
1i,",';,:;;;;;';,;;,y.,1"iffi:-ir,iij,":ii:r,,::,;r:,:,'"il:r*;^,It crf FIum is meant. M. Vego, Pouijest llumshe zernlje, Vol. I, Samobor, 1937,
tI i 5'i i l'' ) i i'- i"'
I e I 3' pp 6 0
:
'|'',u ; ?;,1,'"1",;:';415' "n'
2 -7
pp" 90 9l, suggests that the document refers only to that part of Hum between
Cetine and the west bank of the Neretva River. Vego believes that the
68. CD,lll, P' 419' Hungarians had successfully subiected this territory by 1238.
26. c-D:, lti, irp ",,i,"r"''
416'1] .rsions in Bosnia had been ef- 7r. CD,IV, p. 57; Tauru, ctp, cit.,pp.3\6 17.
76. December 1239 reference, CD,IV, p. 94; 1244 reference, CD, IV, p.
;ii:'::f rlnt*:*:'rrh:":11:l,iiir:iii::'$
it is probable that the
,14

"i;t;1ffi 't:;;:"'t.i.""'it'ri"
Sclavonia is to tre louncl'
with thc inquisition
tn"it'
with this *t'nin*' iftu' heie
w" have further
I)trminican Suibert u"a-tft"^tttt ln so*i'iand in Dalmatia' parts ol the samc
71 . CD,IV, p. (16; Tautu, op. cit.,p.330.
78. CD,IV, p. (16; Tautu, op. cit.,p.330.
79. CD,lV, p. 239.
evidence that there
*";"'l;;;;;; qtitt potsibly nominally
tfttt'u'la"' at least in part- ^na 80. CD, IV, p. 6(r; Tautu, op. cit.,p.33O.
t:urrt'nt) andthat that;i]il1
wls directed ,guino ,r'#li;s;.;["
or ihe ract
#ifi"r?ii\"I",'i; 81. See for example, fra L. P.(etrovit), Kr"slani bosanske crkue, in Dobri
poslir, Saraievo, 19)3, and published separately.
;i ;;' il'; t;;; ; q:::"i tJ,il,"r;'
"'":: X'f"I"; a.p r.t th em as su ch' 82. CD,IV. p. 54.
clualists were signrttcat 8). CD,III,
'''to" to thc papac'v p. 427 ; CD,lY , pp. 107 08, 126; also Miklosich, pp. 24-2),
rnssiblytojusti{y,t,"',ur""i.r,""aof.r'"..,.ud1].unapo''it,ty.tosupportthe
;tobablv been *titittg - to 28 10.
accusations tt'" uungu'lii$;;;;tt t"'"'a"'Ho*tut''iint" rhis is the onlv 84. CD,lV, pp. 65, 67 68.
rlcscribe rhem as
)i'i)' )'t"'"r1r'! (rather than
'n"
v)urce to imply the t:::;n: t" li'*t"a 'simply
;"Ii'i'i;;;; ;' to conclude that the
85. CD, IV, pp.93-94. Suiben's "Commentary on the Founding o{ the
t'" 'g'in'i"auttitls tlungarian Dominican Province" praises Coloman highly for converiing many
heretics of unspecified';"i;;il;;;ra '
:;:::'.i: *,, q
ii.*"a-:I'J,ii,#ii#ll&H":T; ;l\: t'.Xl ;:;l ;l ll: hcretics and adds that many who refused to convert were burned by Coloman's
mcn. Sidak notes that many later Catholic scholars have skipped this passage.
Bosnian ''herettcs Province" (written in 1259')'
Passag'es
See Siduk, " 'Ecclesia Sclavoniae' . . .,' ' pp. 37-38.
Founding of tr'" "sia'1' "''Ecclesia Sclavoniae''i' *"'lu
Hunili:t;"il;ltt'"*n
86. CD,IV, pp. 107 08; Miklosich, pp.28-29.In this charter, which opens
cliscussing Bosnia *;iH";;'i:'
Zuoi'ii *a"" s';;:ii;i;' u zasrebu
(Filozotski
with a cross, Ninoslav swears by, among other things, the honorable life-giving
[)ominikanaca u uo'lt"ilT' cross which suggests that if he had been heretical in some way, his heresy did
i"r,'i,"ii, irr. le55 ' PP 37-38'
ttto'"rt#"ther
t: underprotection' p' l7' not include rejection of the cross. In this connection we can note that Ninoslav's
(
1l' l)'lV' pp' Thc pope's
siulii)":tJ"ft'sti"pun' pcrsonal seal alrc had a cross on it (see P. Andlelii, Srednjoajekoani peYati iz
72 we kno* nothin'fi'ii"*i"t "r""t ni'"to'*tt Ban stlepan of Bosnia' li,tn,,iltercegrtL,tne, Akac\emila nauka i umjetnosti BiH, Djela, kni. 38, odj.
lctter mereiv *"t""i';iil;i:ii'*u"ht 'on
had' at so'ff ooinr' 'ut"a
the Bosnian banatc' [)ru\tv. nauk. 23, Sarajevo, 1970, p. t0).
The ritle suSSests ttt'i'dtlto* notni^ who rule-d ou"t
However' latcr we i"fle'tull"d"Bu'i' of 'o'nlv
Buttutt Subiected to
87. Dubrovnik was not alone among Dalmatian cities, in maintaining good
"litiiltl !'i;"' -w^"i""'e"tniun relationswith Ninoslav. Hungary's former friend Split also did not seem to find
small areas i" th" "in;^i;;'i' the Thirteenih C*tu'v?" '
East European
trt" s"tiili ti^ritr *nything heretical about the Bosnian ban, and in 1243 the citizens of Split even
Hunsarv in
'eiuul,)u.ur,
r"". iilc"io ii::zor *:
ii'::T;,ffii:;: K,}:]i'lH: trriefly elected Ninoslav "knez." of their city. Thomas the Archdeacon, who
rtports this event, and who usually is the first to suggest a taint of heresy about
;:;;';;;'" ;;; b* within sreater.Bosnia-11-t actuatly ruled tht'banate Various ptr,rple , never suggests that Ninoslav was heretical. See, Thomas, p, 195.

i:r*l ru l';:ff :l'?: f

U4[:*i[":#'Ji:'lli,i :':l*:
n r2o3
i* r{rl Ci), lV. pp. 94
It9
95.
CD, IV, p.95. Reference to the money in rhe same rerms as in 1238 (see
5i'::":':il;'*:"';il' ;"' ;;' tu'"garian court
**"gU:: Bn"' ' ' 'pp' 67 68)
*'a'n"tTnll:i;';'';^-1"'rcr'iiip""it uunut" until ca' 1232
,rhrvc, note 78).
!)(). Document published in appendix of N. Pfeiffer, Die lJngariscbe
Howevcr, r<"ir" tn#'\'-r"i1rt" I\,ninikunerordensprctuinz, Zurich, 1913, p.l)0. This 1303 notation simply
bclievcs ,r'ut stitpunl"l"t*ii"i '"a ttt" banate' installed lrus l)ominican convents: seven in Pannonia, six in Slavonia (including
unii"'r-*i.al nobles
when Ninosla" "".,.j'niil-ftot
only'U*ra' we h'ave no evidence to
Lhanrensis, Po/ega, Veronica, Zagreb, BihaE, and Jadrensis .- the last name
Ninoslav u'b'n'n'd't't'tl"i;];;;i" 'utt
re{ute th i s theor v I il;il' il':'* n:::,ll
;:*:: ::,1:ff;' :::"i:'i
rea.llv:T: t|]ftilil*'or- while
;"J':l
son
rurrly refers to Za<Lar , which points to the geographical ignorance of the writer),
*ntlcight in Dalmatia (not including Zadar there). The only location mentioned
i"r, o"rriure, if stlepa''t'ad nts
son,
^'.
death and was succeeded by Ninoslav' "ra"rt ht'rc that we would associate with Bosnia is BihaE, and that city was never part
r,{ tht'nredieval state. In the Middle Ages the area around Biha% was Catholic;
aili;i"" was assigned Usora'
13' CD,IV' P' 27'
164 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia to Stjepan KotromaniC
165
we have data about many catholic churches in the region and no references
to 108. In fact it_is very hard to conceive of a religious
heretics there (see R. LopXii, Bibai i bihatka krajina,Zagreb, lggO). order even a loosery
organized one like that of our monks -
rernainiig under its own hier.archy,
91. The Tatar invasion gave Ninoslav the chance to take the offensive on -
vo!11ta1ily changing in a major way its religious beliefs
and practices.
-'-- -- -
behalf of Split against Hungary's ally Trogir. And in 1243-44 we find Ninoslav 109. R. Linton , ' 'Nativistic Mouements;' in W. Lessa
allied with Split (in fact he was briefly Prince of Split), Andrel of^flum and
,"a E. t;g;, Reader
in
Co.npyaliue Religion, 2nd ed., New york, 196-J, pp. igg >OZ-,'
variousother nobles against Trogir, King Bela and Bela's vassals theSubi6i and published in American Antbropologi.rr, XLV, -"''-'
Dq\,'pp. ZIO-/IO'. ".lgi".ffy
the Nelipci. (se* KlaiC, Pouiest Bosne . . ., pp. 77-78). ll0' Similar things have happened elsewhere, e.g., in the philippines: ...
92. CD, IV, pp. 236-40. cvtn under Spanish rule there was a great dear "oi religious r"?l""ni
.

93. CD, rY, p. 297. produced native movements of a so-callel 'heretical'

*r,i.r,
94. CD, rY, p. 299.
nr,ri., ."..r
rrers. on various occasions these movements had been t "rp*i.iiyl"
ry n"'ti;;-;rn
95. CD,IV, pp. 310-ll. members of a catholic religious order, who had becomc' ""a"a
openry antagonistic to
96. CD,lV, pp. 322-23. ,-!..Slrli$ hierarchy." (V. Lanternari, The Retigioo, il UrL OeeTiirri')vo.
97. CD,IV, p. 420. The phenomenon of a rurar caihoric order"breaking .*uy ion.'
98. CD, rY, p. 494. 121.22)
crtholicism to go it alone seems also to be an accurate desiription
oli.iur
99. CD,IV, pp. )41'42. of *h"t ,.
6nd in medieval Bosnia.
100. CD, lY, p. 342. Hostility to a form of christianity because of its association
l0l. CD, IV, pp. 386-87. Unfortunately there are no references to with a foreign
ec- power (seen against Spain in the philippines) is regularly
clesiastical affairs in this charter. The charter is actually issued by a Bosnian ... found in Ar.i.u.
Lrnrernail, op. ctt., p.60, remarks, . . oneof the most influential factors in
ruler who is called Matej Stjepan though it bears the seal of Ban Ninoslav. Most tht growth of these (native) churches and cults has been the nature
scholars believe that Matej Stjepan is Ninoslav. This problem, which un- bcween the white man and the natives, and those personal
.f ;;i;;;",
cxperiences which
fortunately cannot be conclusively resolved, is discussed in some detail in my grrdually caused.the indigenous peoples to look upon the
missions as facets of
article, "Wasthe Bosnian Banate Subjected to Hungary in the Second Half of curopean rute. l he native church is thus to be regarded
as the limit to which the
the Thirteenth Century?" East European Quarterly,III, June 1969, pp. 168- ndependent movements wiil go in accepring the'iull doctrine
70. See also. G. CremoYnik, "Bosanske ihumske povelie srednjega vijeka," r,
rrveels a middle course between traditibnaf beliefs and
the n"*"icr,.irri."iiy.
ih;;;;.;1 h
GZMS, n.s. III, 1948, pp. 124-29 and V. Molin's..review of eremotnik's this vein the Bosnian church can be seen both as a reaction to
the threat of
article in
Historijski zbornik, lI, 1949, pp. 316-17. fremolnik believes that Hungarran dominance and as a compromise between
traditional values and
Ninoslav had had ro share power with a relative named Stjepan; Motin believes Crtholic doctrine.
that either Matei Ninoslav changed his name to Matej Stjepan or else was lll. Miklosich, p. 69.
succeeded by a new ruler having that name. ll2. Li. StoianoviC. Stare srpske poaelje i pisma,I, pt. 2, pp.79_gJ, and
102. Assuming that Matej Stjepan (the name given in rhe 1249 charter, see Puri{, tt, p. izo.
note l0l) refers to Ninoslav and not to a successor. It seems that Ninoslav did lll. M. Rixi(, Bosna od-t^rylo bana Matije Ninoslaua do ulade sremskoga
have more than one son. According to Thomas the Archdeacon of Split, when ba.lia.Ste^u1rng pragutina, Beogiad, 1910, p. 105.
- --'"
Ninoslav departed from Split in 7243 he left in control a relative named Rizarda tt4. CD, VI, pp. 3r7 358._12i0-1284,
and "oneof hisown sons" (seeThomas, p. 191); also both the I24O and1249 l15. cD' VI, pp. 378-79. Twice this letter stresses the lack of uniformity
charters to Dubrovnik sated that the terms were binding on his children and rmong the heretics.
grandchildren ; of course, this may have been a formal way of stating the terms ll(r' usora and Sol, in fact, are rhe only regions which previously had been
were binding on his successors rather than reference to individuals who actually tnnrrolled by Ninoslav, be it directly or as ove".lord (see reierence
existed. Ninoslav also had brothers. Bela's 1244 charter ( CD, IV, 239) refers to
to priuileses
hc granted the catholic church in usora in Bera's r244 charrcr,
property which Ninoslav with his brothers and barons had granted the church. ab-, iv:p
lJ9), found in rhe second half of the thirteenth century in the hands
The 1249 charter also refers to Matej Stjepan's brothers. It is logical to assume of bans
Afl'j,..d by the King of Hqpsary.
that either a son or a brother succeeded Ninoslav; however, whether one of ll7. Arhiepiskop Danilo, Ziuoi Kraljeua i Arhiepishopa Sryshib (Srp. kni.
them actually did is unknown. rr&uga), Beograd, I9)J, p. 34.
t0). CD, IV, p. 460. lJS Pope Nicholas IV wrote,three letters pertaining to sending this mission
104. CD. tY. p. 494. on 13 lVlarch 1291, see F. Delorme and A. Tautu
10). Orbini, p. )14. ieds.), Ari'no*ooo)i_
fiisfirtcum ab Innocentio V_ad^Benedictum XI (12)6-1i04), nu_beru l0l,
106. Europa Pii Pontificis Maximi nostrolum tettporam aaias contitent It)], l0t, pp. 171-174, 176-80.
ltistorias, pasel, l50l , p. xxiii. I 19. Delormeand'fautu, op. cit.,pp.2OZ.01
I07. S. CirkoviC, "Die Bosnische Kirche," Accademia Nazionale dei Liacci,
; CD,VII, p. 302.
120. Delorme and Tautu, op. cit.,p-.23g; CD, VIU, pp.47_4g.
Problemi Attuali di Scienza e di Cultura, Rome, 1964, pp. 152-)55 t see also lll ,On this.principatity, 1ee V Kl^i|c, Bribirshi hn)ioui oi p,lr*rooKubito
his Istorija srednjoaekoune bosanske drYaue, Beograd, 1964, pp. 58-69. &. pdine 1347, Zagreb, 1897.
t66 Medieval Bosnian Church
122.S.Zlatovi(, "Bribirski nekrolog XlV XV v," Starine, XXI, p. 84.
123. M. DiniC, "Odnos izmediu Kralja Milutina i Dragutina ," ZRVI, vol.
3, 1955, p. 61.
124. Miklosich, pp. 67 -69.
1 25. The main signs of a forged document are absent ; the maiority of South
Slav forged charters were the work of families in the late sixteenth. seventeenth
or early eighteenth centuries who sought to provide proof of their families'
importance in medieval times. Since not one witness of the Kotor charter gave
his last name, this charter could not have been used to support this sort of fraud.
The only party who might have stood to gain by forging such a charter would
have been the monastery itself. I do not know enough about the monastery to
pass iudgment on the matter. An argument that might indicate that the charter
was not particularly important for the Kotor church, however, ijs the fact that
the charter was discovered in the middle of the nineteenth century, not in
Kotor, but in Vienna.
126.bra L. P(etrovi/), Krtiani bosanske crhue,pp. 142-43.
127" T. Florinskij, "K voprosu o Bogomilah" in Sbornih statej po Slaa-
.ianouedeniju sostaulennlj i izdannlj utenikami u test V. L Lamanskago, St.
Petersburg, 1883, pp. 37-39. Florinskij gives the original text and we see the
Bulgarian was called "Dedec (Ded) Sredec" (presumably Sardica, modern
Sofia).
128. V. GluYac, "Problem Bogomilstva, " GID,V, lgt3, p. 107.
129. For rhe texr see Dj. RadoiifiC, "Odlomak bogomilskog jevandjelja
bosanskog tepati,e Batala iz 1393 godine" n Izaestija na Instituta za Isrorija
(B'lgarska Akademija na naukite), XIV-XV, 1964, p. 502.
130. See J. Fine, "Aristodios and Rastudije," GID, XVI, 1967, pp. 22)
228. Most of the argumenrarion is also preseoted below in Chapter V.
l ll. L. Thalloczy. "lstraYivan ja o posranku bosanske banovine sa narol.itim
obzirom na pnvelje kiirmendskog arhiva,." GZMS, XVIII, 1906, pp. 4O1t 405.
lJ2.Pucii. ll, p. 12(r, and Stoianovi( Stare srpske pouelje.. .,l,pt.2,pp.
79-83. The Metropolitan David also participared in depositing some of Herceg
Stefan's valuables in Dubrovnik in 1461 in the company of several krstjani, see
M iklosich, p. 497 .
133. There is no evidence that Miroslav's church had any following in Kotor
at the time.
ffi
ffi
CHAPTER IV
ffi
BOSNIA FROM CA.1315TO I39T
L' Ban .srjepan Kotromani/; Earllt Political Successes and
uith tlte Different Faiths
elations
ffi
Ban Stiepan Kotroman died sometime between 130) and 1315, and
ffi his death paved the way for local disorders which forced his widow and
son to flee to Dubrovnik. During the second decade of the century, the
run, Stjepan Kotromanil, returned from exile and established himself as
ban.(1) I{is holdings were clearly in the central part of the state; he
i.ssued charters in the 1320's frorn places located in the Visoko-Zenica
area. We know neither how he recovered his position nor how extensive
was the banate he controlled in these first years.
Kotromanid was most probably Orthodox when he became ban. His
mother, Jelisaveta, daughter of Stefan Dragutin, was Orthodox, and
prrsumably raised her son in that faith. This supposition is supported by
Orbini(writing in 1601) and Peter Masarechi(writing in 1624), both of
whom probably drew on Pietro Livio of Verona (ca. 1530), who report
that Stiepan KotromaniC was of the Greek rite.(2) In 1318 the new ban
wanted to marry the daughter of Menhard of Ortentrurg, a Catholic.
Ilctause the two were cousins of some sort, special dispensation had to
hc ohtained from the pope. This dispensation was obtained through the
ffi ,,llit rs of Mladen II SubiC.(3) Mladcn's intervention on-behalf of Stiepan
rhrrws that relations wcre patched r.rp between the 5ubi6 family and
Kotroman's successor.(1+) With SubiC recognition of Kotromani6's
ruthority in central Bosnia, Kotromania's state would be free to develop
ffi without interference from his family's long'time most powerful rival.
i\loreover, since the pope approved the marriage, obviously the groom
was not heretical. Indeed, Kotromanic{ later would cooperate in the
{$tablishment and work of the Franciscan mission. Since we have no
widence that the ban accepted Catholicism at the time of his marriage,
and since the contemporary l3obali documents, utilized by Orbini (or
Pictro Livio before him), attribute the ban's acceptance of Catholicism
tn Bobali 'sinfluence af ter the establishment of the Franciscan mission in
1i,10,(5) it seems probable that the ban remaine d Orthodox until the
I 14i)'s.
168 Medieval Bosnian Church
However, we shall also see that the ban was cordial toward the
Bosnian Church. He had dealings with its hierarchs and allowed them to
be active in the center of his state, which reflects his favor (or at least
tolerance). If this church was really a Slavic liturgy schismatic off-shoot
of Catholicism, there is no reason why he should not have been kindly
disposed toward it. Since in Bosnia there do not appear to have been
Orthodox believers, the ban, if he was to receive sacraments and par-
ticipate in the activities associated with a church, would either have had
to have his own Orthodox chaplain (which is quite possible) or else to
have made use of the offices of the Bosnian Church. It is quite possible
that he followed the latter course; it would have been slight change from
the Orthodox Church, and would not have involved him in heresy.
The fact that the ban had cordial relations with the Bosnian Church,
when weighed with the other data we have about this church, gives us
reason to believe that this church did not differ much from orthodox
forms of Christianity, and certainly was not dualist. We have argued
above that the Bosnian Church (called Patarin in Dubrovnik) developed
out of a Slavic rite Catholic Church in Bosnia. This view is supported by
the report of an Irish Franciscan Symeon Semeonis, who visited
Dubrovnik in 1322. He reports that Slav Barbarians, "Paterini" and
other schismatic traders came to Dubrovnik. The language of the Slavs
is quite similar to that of the Bohemians; though in rite they depart
considerably for the Bohemians employ the rite of the Latins while that
of many Slavs is Greek.(6) If the Patarins were heretical in doctrine we
would expect local Franciscans to have told Symeon of this, yet he
classified them with other Slavic schismatics. Thus he made no
distinction between the Bosnians and the other Orthodox Slavs
(presumably Serbs , Montenegrins, and Bulgarians) whom he saw. Since
he made a general statement about the rite of "many Slavs" (i.e.,
presumably distinguishing these Slavs from Latin rite Slavs), he
evidently thought these South Slav schismatics mentioned, among
whom he includes the Patarins, all practiced the same rite. And this is
exactly what we would expect if the Bosnian Church followed a Slavic
liturgy version of the Catholic rite.
Further evidence of the schismatic (non heretical) character of the
Bosnian Church comes from the account of a Catholic collector of tithes
from the years I)17 -20. The cleric's task had been to collect tithes from
the towns and Diocese of Bosnia.
He repofts that in his trip to the cities and Diocese of Bosnia he found
them ' 'near to schismatics and almost destroyed.' '(7)We do not know if
by Bosnian diocese, is meant the former diocese including the central
state and the region north to the Sava, or only that territory north of
Bosnia from ca. LSIJ to l39I r69
Bosnia proper where the bishop in Diakovo actually had some authority.
Since we have no evidence of Orthodox believers having influence in
either (so that their propinquity might be relevant to the state of
deterioration within the diocese), we can suggest that by "schismatic"
hc meant the Bosnian Church. That he did not use the term "heretic"
*rows that he did not believe the Bosnian Church was heretical. Neither
did he note the existence of any large scale heretical movement in the
diocese; he attributed the destruction of Catholicism in the diocese
rrlely to schismatics.
In 1318, in Pope John XXII's letter to Mladen Subi{, approving
KotromaniC's marriage, the pope also called on Mladen to exterminate
the long-standing heresy in the Bosnian land.(8) By "Bosnian land" did
the pope mean territory to the west that Mladen might still have held, or
was Mladen expected to put pressure on KotromaniC to discipline his
rubiects? Quite possibly the pope did not even know who controlled
what region in Bosnia. In 1319 Pope John again wrote Mladen to take
rction against these heretics. The pope stressed the decline of
Crthcllicism, which was said to be owing to long neglect and to the
heretics, and pointed to abandoned churches and the absence of clerical
orders. He said that the cross was not revered and that the sacraments of
lrrptism and communion were in many places ignored by the people.(9)
Here the pope was clearly speaking about the condition of the Catholic
Church in Bosnia, and the absence of clerics refers to Catholic priests.
By 1319, Bosnia had had no contact with official Catholicism for
reventy years; thus this absence is not strange. And without priests,
churches would naturally have been abandoned and sacraments not
rdministered. If by chance these churches had been taken over by
lkrsnian Churchmen the pope would still have considered the churches
sbandoned. And any sacraments that might have been administered by
thcsr"'heretical" priests would not have been considered valid by the
prpr, who would naturally say the sacraments were being ignored. Thus
on rhese matters, the letter is simply describing the decline of
Crtholicism; it provides no information on the number of Bosnian
Church priests or on the attitude of that church toward churches and
$rr'raments. In addition, it is likely that after the disappearance of
Clrholic priests, in many areas there would have been no priests of other
lriths to replace them. If there were no priests , then the people could not
prrtake of sacraments, and if many years passed during which the people
rxver saw a priest they might well have forgotten about these rites. Even
thc significance of the cross might well have been forgotten by popular
*pinion.(10) Such a situation could easily have occurred without any
sunstious rejection of the sacraments by the populace. Although lack of
170 Medieval Bosnian Church
priests and church education can well explain how this situation came
about, we cannot discount the possibility that dualist heretics in the
area, with their hostility to the cross and sacraments, might have had a
certain influence on various Bosnians, including some who remained
members of other non-dualist bodies.
The 1320's was a period of rivalry and warfare among the Croatian
nobles. The Hungarian king played an active role in these affairs as
overlord of most of these nobles. In addition, he had to struggle against a
rival for the Hungarian throne.In all this chaos, Ban Stjepan remained
loyal to the king, and the two seem to have had cordial relations through
the 1320's. Although papal letters to the King of Hungary about
Bosnian affairs suggest that some sort of Hungarian overlordship over
Bosnia existed, we have no evidence that it was anything more than
nominal. There is no evidence of any actual interference by Hungary in
the affairs o{ Kotromani6's banate. tn 1324 Kotromani6 added the lands
of Sol and Usora to his title of Ban of Bosnia.(1 1) These lands previously
had been under his grandfather, Stefan Dragutin, but we do not know
how Kotromanit obtained them or how great was his actual authority
over these regions. Between L)22 and 1325, he obtained suzerainty
over the Donji kraji, and the magnates there, the Stjepaniti, paid
homage to him.(12) This acquisition reflects the decline of the SubiCi.
For the rest of the century, except for the early years of Tvrtko's reign,
the Donii kraji region was to be considered part of Bosnia, though in
reality it was a more or less autonomous region under the powerful
Stjepani6-Hrvatinii family who paid nominal homage to the ban, and
might better be considered allies than vassals.
With the decline of the Subi{i, the baiance of power among the
Croatian nobles was upset; old alliances collapsed and new ones were
made. At this time the Nelipac family rose to predominance, and in
7324 an alliance including Djuraj 5ubi6 and Stjepan KotromaniC was
formed against them. In the warfare that followed the Bosnian ban
reaped handsome profits in enormous gains to his west, acquiring
territory all the way to the coast, including ZavrEje and the Krajina.
with the towns of Hlivno, Imota, Duvno, Glamo[, and Makarska. This
territory included many Catholics, two bishoprics (Makarska and
Duvno, the latter being reestablished at about this time) which were
subject to the Archbishop of Split, and a relatively well-functioning
parochial ftupa) organization. Most of this territory was to remain
Bosnian until the Turkish conquest.(13)
Owing to the decentralized nature of the Bosnian state, the in-
corporation of this Catholic territory had little effect on the development
of Catholicism in the territory of the old banate; with poor com-
Ilosnia from ca. 131J to 1391 I7t
ntrrnications and little migration, the Catholics, left undisturbed to
practice their religion, remained in their towns and villages to the west
and had little or no influence on religious affairs in the banate. The
Bosnians alrc did not seem to seriously interfere with the Catholic
Church in these annexed regions. The only sign of trouble is seen in a
papal letter of 1144 asking the ban to let Valentinus, the Bishop of
l\lrkarska, return to Makarska from which he had fled to OmiI, and
once again to collect tithes.(14) We do not know why the bishop had had
to leave; various scholars have attributed his departure to persecution
iry Bosnian heretics, which, though not impossible, seems no more
probable than any number of possible political or financial disputes
between the church and its new overlord. 'fhere is no evidence that the
llosnian Church made any attempts to acquire adherents in this newly
anncxed region. No source speaks of the spread of heresy here. In the
beginning of the fifteenth century we shall find in the nobleman Pavle
Kle{iC, who held territories around GlamoE, clur only example of a
[]lrnian Church adherent in this region. Probably it is not surprising
that Pavle's son was to be a Catholic.
As a result of the death of the Serbian King Milutin in l32l and the
f{rwer struggle in his lands that followc.d, the Bosnian ban was able to
innrx most of Hum. Thc, most recent research dates this acquisition to
1126.(1t) Relations between Bosnia and Serbia evidently were tense in
the years that followed. The leading noble family in l-lum prior to the
anncxation had been the Branivojevidi, and those of that family who
survived the Bosnian take-over fled to the Scrbian court, where they
presumably played a role in anti-Bosnian agitation. Their departure
prrmitted the Draiivojevi6i, who by the 1330's had become vassals of
thr Bosnian ban, to become first family of Hum. From this family came
the powerful Kaznac (Treasurer) Sanko and his sons Beljak and Radif
Sankovi6 who were to play such a central role in Bosnian and Hum
aliairs later in the century. We know of no actual warfare between
Bosnia and Serbia after the annexation, but we can be sure that a search
i*r allies, as well as local feuds between allies of the two more powerful
u,ilms, followed. In 1331 Dubrovnik offered to mediare, and, though
ne have no evidence that a treaty was signed, it seems probable that one
wrs; for we see no further sign of hostility between the two states for
rs'enty years. In addition, the ruldr of the aggrieved party, the new Serb
Krng, DuXan, was more interested in expanding to the south into
llacedonia, and certainly would not have wanted war on two fronts. It is
alwevident that f)u5an had limited interest in these western lands; in
l1-l] he sold Ston with the Peljetac Peninsula to Dubrovnik for cash and
*lnual tribute.(16) After negotiarions, Bosnia, too, recognized
172 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia from ca. I3I5 to l?igl 173
Dubrovnik's rights to administer these lands. picture will be modified only by the arrival of the
Franciscans in the
The magnates of Hum and of the territory east of the Neretva (which 1340's, who would begin proserytizing and whose activities
together comprise what we now call Hercegovina) retained semi- wourd
gradually begin to increase the number
oicatholics in the central pu.t of
autonomy until the fall of the Bosnian state. Which families had greatest the state.
influence and how much and what parts of Hercegovina they held varied Thus in the 1320's Bosnia was ruled by an energetic
with circumstances, but at least one or two families always existed there ban, who was
threatcned by no outsidcrs ancl in fact had taken the
with sizable lands and with virtual independence, whose loyalty could offense himself
against his neighbors. I'he previously hostile King
not be taken for granted by the ban. At times these nobles would be loyal
of Hungary, now
threatened by a rival for his throne, by factious
nobles, ,nd uy"ciuii *ur,
to Bosnia, at others to the ruler of Serbia, and sometimes one of them clcarly posed no threat to Bosnia. Besides, in these q,ru.."l,
might even try to go it alone, with the lesser local lords aligning the, ban
sided with the Hungarian monarch. As a result
of thechaos and civil
themselves with or against him. wars in croatia, the main rival of the Kotromani6
In the following century, men like Sandalj HraniC and Herceg Stefan family, the 5ubi6i ,
had so declined in power that they could no
longer interfere in the affairs
were able to set up an independent state in what is now Hercegovina; of thr banate. shonly rhereafter, (between rj22-2r) the
chief vassal of
their power and influence could seriously rival the ruler of Bosnia. Most the SubiCi in rhe Bosnian region,
if not all .the Stjepaniti-Hrvatini6i, shifted
-fourteenth - of these families holding power in Hercegovina during the
centuy were Orthodox; and in fact most of the nobility as
alliances and came over to Kotromani6's camp. ln I32I the death of the
Kingof serbia, which initiated a struggle for power
well as the bulk of the population were to remain Orthodox until the there, allowed the
ban to expand south into Hum, whicfif,ad
'Iurkish conquest. It seems likely that the Orthodox in Hercegovina previousry been more or less
Scrbian, Thus the ban, with no outside
enemies on his borders, was able
remained under the jurisdiction of the Bishop o{ Hum, located at the tt solidify his position in central Bosnia and to assert his overlordship
Church of St. Peter and St. Paul on the Lim River, until the seat was over the nobles whose lands ray on the borders of the Bosnian state.
transferred to Milelevo (in the same region) in the second half of the r'his situation explains why we begin suddenly to find
foufteenth century. Only in the fifteenth century shall we find signs of . a faiily rarge
(f<rr Bosnia) number of charters,
fromlhe 1 320's and 1330, s,issued by
the Bosnian Church in Hercegovina; then we shall meet Bosnian the ban after a long hiatus. These charters re-affirmed
Church clerics at the court of one magnate family there and shall find the nobles, rights
tolands they had previously possessed, but now
references to a few of their monastic houses in Hercegovina. asserted the ban,s Jght
of suzerainty.
Thus from the above
- and from what we shall discover later - we
see that each faith was active only in certain parts of Bosnia and Her-
In one of these charters (dated r322-2t)
we find our first reference to
the term "Bosnian church"; its hierarchy guaranteed
cegovina. The Bosnian Church was present in the central banate and and witnessed
thr terms of the grant. The church'r .ot" oi
ludicial guarantor has breen
had some following (but never enough to be called a strong movement) noted in most studies of the Bosnian church. yet
in the regions to the north (Sol, Usora, Donji kraji). In the fifteenth in extant charters rhe
&rsnian church rarely played this role. The
bulk of medieval Bosnian
century on a very small scale it would obtain followers in a limited charters were guaranteed not by churchmen but
number of new regions. The Catholic Church, absent in the banate from by nobles or court
of the six charrers published by Thalloczy from about 1322 to
olficials.
ca. l25O until the arrival of the Franciscans in the 1340's, retained at liil(17) only two had hierarchs of tire Bosnian church among the
least a nominal hold over many people in the northern regions; and in
tudrantors' we shall find no more of such charters from the fourte"enth
the territory to the west of the Vrbas River, straight south through (('ntury and only two or three examples
from the fifteenth century.
Zavr\je and the Krajina, including Livno, Duvno, and Glamo8, it had charter begins, "rn trre name of the Father and don and
the loyalty of almost everyone, iust as the Orthodox Church had the ..I'he^first
lltrly Qfies1, I, Saint Gregory (Gr'gur) and called Ban
Stjepan, Lord
loyalty of almost everyone in Hercegovina (excluding some Catholics lkruia. .." This formula is then folowed by the text about the lands of
of
near and along the coast). There is no evidence of any large-scale Vukoslav HrvatiniC, which were .onfirmei
migrations in this period. Thus this general picture will remain valid
in the treaty, after which
lhr r:harter states that this act was carried out before
into the next century. In the early fourteenth century, there is no sign tr," cr"u, o;"a
t"De(do)m'velikim"') Radoslav and before the Great Gost
that any faith tried to acquire followers in other regions. And this t"(krstem' velikim' ") Racloslav and before elders ("Starcem, ,,)
174 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from ca. 1315 to I39I 175

Radomir, Zun'bor, and Vl'E'kom and before all the Bosnian Church against the grantee or his heirs without asking
the Bosnian church.(2r)
("Pred v'som cr'k'vom i pred Bosnom.") The charter concludes with A formula, frequently found in medieval Bosnian charters,
follows to
the statement that this deed was enacted and written in MoXtre at the the effect, that, if the charter should be violated, the violater
is to be
monastery of Gost Radoslav ("u gosti velikoga hiXi u Radoslali cursed by a series of powerful forces commonry
invoked: The Father,
(sic)").(18) the Holy Ghost, the Twelve Apostlei, the Four
Besides being the earliest document to use the expression "crkva
the.So1, n"r.,g"iir,r,
Judas Iskariot, rhe Pure Brood of God, and all heavenly
creation.(22)
bosanska," this charter gives evidence about the hierarchy of this such a curse is not found in the first charter
and thus is not absorutely
church: it mentions and names the head of the church, the djed, a necessary to legitimize a charter. However,
it was a common p.".ti."
leaderof thesecondrankof hierarchs, the gosl, andseveralof the third which helped strengthen the charter. probably
rank, the starac. The existence ofthese ranks in this hierarchical order is
it was also intended to
put the fear of God into the heart of
those making the contract, uui tt i,
confirmed by later documents. The gost headed a monastic establish- seems ro have been an idle hope conside.ing
how fr.qu"nily-ih"r"
ment, which supports the theory that the Bosnian Church was a con- charters were violated. The formulaic way
of lisiing tt trrgh". po*".,
tinuation of the Bosnian monastic order present in 1203 at Bilino polje, suggests an invocation or spelr and "r"
so reflects the medieva'i Bosnians,
where each prior had represented the members of the convent he beliefs in magic. The fact that charters
huJ to be written in a certain
headed. The monastery (hiZa) of MoXtre, where the charter was signed, form is also connected with magic. The
form of a charter had to be
was roughly six kilometers from Visoko, and thus very near the center correct or else the magic would not work
and the charter,s contents
of the state. This fact suggests that the church enjoyed the favor of the would not be fulfilled.
ban. The church thus sometimes guaranteed charters, though not The language of the charters may be compared
_ to the langu age and.
always. Church guarantees were not felt to be necessary; in a society fu:y.t the medieval spells written on metal strips and praced
fairly indifferent to religion this is not surprising. The ban was clearly which call on the same powers in the
in fields,
same sort of ranguage ,o p.oi".,
friendly enough with the church (and its leadership) to visit its the field from the devil and inclement weather.(23)
Thus the charter
monastery and to allow its hierarchy to play a role in the affairs of state. intended these powers to punish the violator
and also to act magically
The invocation to the Trinity at the beginning shows that the Bosnian upon the parties of the contract to prevent
them from ,i.r^i;?f rt.
Church's doctrine did not oppose the concept of the Trinity, though Because such formulas were not thought
out at the time but were
how its clerics, or anyone else in medieval Bosnia, interpreted and repeated mechanically in the way
believJ to be effective, we can hardly
understood the Trinity, we do not know. However, it is likely that few h'rpe to extract from them information
about the doctrines of the
Bosnians meditated on the matter. No doubt, the medieval Bosnian Eosnian Church.
simply felt that it was proper to begin a charter with an invocation to the Now that we have discussed the charters,
incruding one issued at a
Trinity, and that the charter would not be a real charter without such an hila at MoXtre., it might be well to turn to
the second inscription carved
-*
invocation. This feeling was probably shared by the Catholic Ban Kulin, on-the plaque from Kulin's church at near-by Muha5inovi6li;i;
the Orthodox Sankovi6i and Djed Radoslav of the Bosnian Church. This inscription is rudely scrrt&"d across the face
However, the acceptance of the Trinity in orthodox terms does . ,second
plaque' It consists of a list of names,
of the
most of which are indecipherable;
distinguish the Bosnian Churchmen from the Bulgarian Bogomils who, decipherable sentences read: ,.Radohna Kr,stjann,,
if we can believe hostile polemics directed against them, affirmed the F "ntt
Desien'Rat'n'cevit'writes in the days of Ban Stjepan,'coa
writes,
gru" ti-
existence of two distinct trinities or blasphemed against the Trinity.(19) henlth and many years." professor RnaiefiC
who deciphered the above,
The meaning of the initial phrase <lf the ban, "I am Saint Gregory rtrributes it to the reign of Stjepan Kotromanir.
(Gr'gur) and am called Ban Stjepan" is disputed in the scholarly Q5) In addition to these
nlmes, at some time subsequent to the original work
on the plaque,
literature. I think it simply shows that the ban identifies himself with his prtsumably at the same time as the second
iriscription, someone'curued
slaua saint, who happens to be Saint Gregory.(20) l*mall and rude figure of a man, wearing what seems
to be a crown,
The second charter from the 1320's referring to the Bosnian Church rith a raised left hand. He reminds us of tie men with
raised hands that
also begins with an invocation to the Trinity and has the same pairing of rppfirr on the srclciin an orthodox cemetery
of the Miloradovii fa;ily
the ban and Saint Gregory. It states that nothing shall be carried out *t Radimlja near Stolac in Flercegovina, dating from
the second half of
176 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from ca. 1jl5 to I39l
177
the fifteenth century or even the beginning of the sixteenth.(26) We do befound. Of course, every local tradition
not know the significance of the figure at either place. cannot be accepted.(29) But I
suggest that many, if not most, of these churches in Bosnia
The second inscription at Muhatinovidi is further evidence of the have been Bosnian Church churches. ..ria *"il
activity of members of the Bosnian Church in the Visoko area at the hand' whereas a few ruins might haue
I. fr..."gouina, on the other
time of Kotromani6. It is possible that Krstjanin Radohna was a member been "Bosnian,, churches, the
majority were almost certainly orthodox.
of Gost Radoslav's hiZa at Moltre. We also must consider the possibility It is necessary that scholars
make a full study of these churches
that Radohna's name on the slab signifies that the Bosnian Church, in the context of regional history,
migration patterns, forklore, and popular
traditions. l. ir
after its schism with Rome, had taken over Kulin's church for its that such a study will give u, '"'fi.-., l"r" ,o speaka about
i"'iJp"a
purposes. Possibly Krstjanin Radohna was the priest for that church. denominations of at least some of the
these medieval churches.
Scholars have often argued that the Bosnian Church did not have The problem now is
church buildings, because they have considered it a dualist church .no.t
to make categorical statements,for the
present state of our knowledge
about these r-uins and traditions does
which would have rejected material churches and because they aver that enable us to do so. From the data not
there are almost no ruins of medieval churches in Bosnia. If as I believe,
it is only .t"r, tt ut churches did exist;
very rarely can we sav who buirt
however, the weight of the evidence suggests the Bosnian Church was a particular church or when it was
built.
not dualist, the argument that it rejected churches collapses. In fact, we Further excavations of the ruins and
more attention
would expect it to have had churches. Church buildings existed at the *e required' And in calling for further investigation, to the traditions
time of the church schism in the thirteenth century. And, because up to I hope that in the
future scholars wi' be will;g to face
the schism Bosnian Church members most probably had been Catholic ,rr" p"triu'iry that many of these
churches may have belongeJ
monks who already were using the existing churches, one would expect
to the gosnrai ct urch. If schorars wilr
rpproach the problem with minds
that, having elected their own local bishop and gone into schism, they open to that possibilt,;: ;;; ;.,
rssume that a church (if medieval)
had io be catholic o, or,r,"ao*,
would have continued to use the churches they had been using up to that it is possible that eventually we ai"n
time.
will rr.;;";; utt", una".rt".ai"g
the positions held by the difLrent
.onrerrror,rli medieval Bosnia- "r
We know the Bosnian Church had monastic houses (biie),lt is likely
that churches were connected with each monastery. This view is
confirmed by the fact that at almost every village or town where we
know a hiLa existed, there is now either a tradition of or a location II:Continued papal Concern about
named after a church.(27) In addition, in his will of. 1466, the Bosnian Heresy in Bosnia, I32j-I33g
Church leader Gost Radin left money to build a bram ("temple").
Those who do not want to consider the possibility of his leaving money ln the midst
of the ban's political successes, in May pope
to build a church have suggested by "hram" he meant an elaborate XXII sent fra Fabian, a.Fianciscan, ,r-lnq"iriror 1325 John
sepulchre. But since a L472 document refers to money being designated "province of Slavonia,"(30) perhair of heretics to the
by his will for "a sepulchre and a chapel, " it is evident that Radin "province" and not
sr."iri"
,,provinces,,y,'p"rffi (since the pope said
tne South Slav lands in
intended the "hram" to be a burial chapel.(28) grneral. There is no evidence ttrat
The frequently advanced arSument that the absence of church ruins
f,aUian B"r;;;
r:n June the pope wrote both
Ban Stjepan"ueir.a.h"d
.ni-tf," King of "f,ir..*f,
i;;;;;;i"
in Bosnia shows that the Bosnian Church did not have churches is rcmind them to take action against
in" n"."ri.r. The tlne
equally invalid. [n Fact, churches did exist all over Bosnia and Her' plprr
httcr to the ban is friendly anJthere ir.";;;;; "iii.,l
to believe that the pope
cegovina in the Middle Ages. In all parts of Bosnia we find traditions of klieved KotromaniC to be anything o,1,".
,h.n an orthodox christian.
churches, fields or other localities called "church" (crkoica, crkoina, Thc pope informed the Huniari""" kirg:
etc.), medieval cemeteries lying beside ruined foundations or in bcretics
iir.ru, Robert, that many
many and various ,.gionr" *"r" coming
localities called "church", or ruined foundations of buildings whosc
.from to the Bosnian
*ne and were flocking together.in ihe neighborhooa
shape suggests they had once been churches. When we investigate r pincipatum Bosnensem in confinio
lf OurrnrJ" 1;.-O
Drl;;; . . confluxit,,). The
locality called "church" very often foundations of an old building crn nnrstcternent appears in the letter to the
ban with the phrase'about
t78 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from ca, l3l5 to l39I r79
Dalmatia omitted.(3l) Thus we can suggest that the regions near pope called for an investigation.(33) But
no mention of Bosnia appears
Dalmatia did not belong to Kotromanii but lay under the iurisdiction o{ in these two papal letters. And since the Bosnian
church did not exist in
the King of Hungary. Slavonia andZadar, the pope cannot be referring
to it. Thus his letters
The pope's letters suggest a mass migration of heretics into Bosnia. confirm the presence of at least one other heteroJox
religious ,'ou"-u.r,
Where were they coming fromT Would heretics from Italy or femnants on the borders of Bosnia. Despite occasional ref..enc".,
of those from southern France have come in any numbers to Bosnia? It Bosnia in these decadet, pap"r letters to Kotromanid
a rt"."ri i"
**."--"1,*uy,
seems improbable on the face of it, and if many foreigners had come, friendly.For some reason tlLis papal attitude
changed in 1337. We may
why is there no sign of their presence in other sourcesT However, it is suspect that the p^pacy had continually hoped
that the ban himself
likely that something alarmed the pope, Prompting him to write the would resolve religious matters in Bosnia until
finally, in 1337, pope
letters. Perhaps some heretics (probably a relatively small number) did Benedict XII ran out olgallence and calred
upon the princes of Krbava,
{lee from Italy toward the Balkans,and the pope had reason to believe Senj, Bribir (the Subtlij, Knin (the p"*".f,ir
Nelipac, who at the ex_
they might be headed for Bosnia or Dalmatia. Whether they actually pense of the 5ubi6i had acquired
.ontia"rJt" authority in the region to
arrived, and if they did whether they remained there for any length of Bosnia's northwest), and other nobles from
croatia to give"arm.d
time, is unknown; we shall hear nothing more about foreign heretics in support to the Franciscans, who, he said, were
unable to progress with
Bosnia unless, by chance, it should be they who were receiving and their work in Bosnia because the ban and some
other nobles were
teaching doctrine to visiting northern Italian heretics later in the defending and favoring the heretics which thereby
hindered the
century. The trips of these Italians to Bosnia, mentioned in testimony Franciscans' inquisitorial work.(34)
before the inquisition, will be discussed at the end of this chapter. We do not know to what extent the papal letter
was a response to
From 1327 into the early 1330's Dominicans and Franciscans intrigues against Bosnia by the Nelipac family
and by some of the oth".
quarrelled over which had inquisitorial rights in Bosnia' Both based croatian nobles. It is clear, however, that .o.respondence
had taken
their claims on their past achievements in the Slavonic lands the
- place between the pope and Nelipac
and that the count of Knin had
Dominicans on their work in connection with the Hungarian crusades expressed his willingness to march against Kotromanid. How the
and their more long-term activities in Slavonia under the aegis of the Franciscans were hindered is unknown."w" have no evidence that any
Hungarian crown; the Franciscans on the super-human work of the two had yet appeared in Bosnia. The onry Franciscan
{riars.
whom we have
brothers who set off in the 1290's to convert the whole Balkans, heard anything about in this period was Fra
Fabian who had been sent ro
thereafter disappearing from the sources, and also on the assignment to "Slavonia" in 1325.
Fra Fabian of "Slavonia." Both sides misrepresented matters to the However, it seems clear that the quick action
pope and took advantage of his ignorance of Balkan geography' After
of Ban Stjepan
forestalled the crusaders from launching any
aftack. In 133g Bosnian
wavering, he finally awarded to the Franciscans the coveted task of troops crossbd the territory of rrogir .Lut. for Klis, despite the
converting.schismatics and heretics in the Slavic lands. The Dominicans "n of ..heretics.,,13l;
Bishop of Trogir's objections to the passage
were ordered to keep out. This paved the way for the creation of the objections had little effect since it seems thai Bosnia
lti,
Franciscan mission to Bosnia and for the establishment of the Bosnian
was on good i".*,
rrith the town fathers; in fact, in 1339 Ban Stjepan g.un,""d rrogir,s
vicariat in the years following L)39.In 1327 the Pope wrote the King of merchants free entrance and exit for purposes of trade with his
Hungary, praising him for giving the Franciscans a friendly reception, benate'(36) That the Bosnian army was op.r.,ing
here suggest, thut ih"
Thus, at the Hungarian court the active support of the Dominicans and crusaders had not yet launched and it is likelf"that Ban st-
relative hostility toward the Franciscans characteristic of the thirteenth "r,.tt".k,
ip.an had sent troops thither in order to force the crusaders to take the
century had now disappeared. &fensive_and thereby prevent them from organizing
an attack on
References to heretics continue to be found in papal letters through Bosnia. The King of Hungary was also instrumental
the remainder of the 1320's and the 1330's although we learn littlc
in preventing
crusader action, for he-declared that anyone who
attacked Bosnia,
about the heretics themselves. In L327 the pope wrote the Ban ol rhose ban was his friend, was showing himself
to be unfaithful to the
Slavonia urging him to persecute heretics.(32) and after the Arch"
-of Hungary, who was suzerain of most of the wourd-be
xing
bishop of. Zadar jailed an abbot and a monk on charges of heresy, tht susaders'(37) 'f hus we can see the improvement in
Bosnia's position in
180 Medieval Bosnian Church
the fourteenth century over what it had been in the period of the thir-
teenth century crusades.
Interestingly enough, at this time there was some sort of scandal in
Trogir. In the spring of 1338 the pope summoned Lampredius, the
Bishop of Trogir, to Rome to answer charges, most of which concerned
moral matters and matters of church administration. One charge stated
that the bishop favored the Bosnian heretics.(38) The issue seems to
have been complicated and continued on until 1342, and soon led to a
dispute between the bishop and the Trogir Town council. It seems most
probable that the charge of favoring Bosnian heretics is connected with
the passage of Bosnian troops and that the pope was angry at the bishop
for allowing the Bosnians to pass. Yet, as we stated earlier the bishop is
elsewhere said to have opposed their passage. It seems more plausible
that the bishop in fact did oppose the Bomians and the existence of the
charter of 1339 from Kotromanii giving the merchants of Trogir rights
of free trade in Bosnia shows who the ban's allies in Trogir in fact were.
The word for word repetition o{ the 1338 charge against Lampredius in
1342,(39) suggests scribal copying rather than a confirmation of the
accuracy of the accusation.
As a result of the ban's timely action and the support of the King of
Hungary, it seems most probable that Bosnia was never invaded at all.
In 1340 the ban and the King of Hungary planned a joint expedition
against some of the Croatian nobles. Plainly, a war was not going to
realize the pope's aims; he would have to try another tactic. The new
tactic was to be the Franciscan mission.
III: The Establisbment of the Franciscan
Bosnian Vicariot
It is apparent that the idea for the mission already existed in June
1339, when Benedict XII had ordered Franciscans of Hungarian and
Slavic nationality to be sent for general training.(40) In the course of
1339, the General of the Franciscan Order, Gerard Odinis, passed
through Bosnia and Slavonia en route to Hungary.(41) Gerard was well
received by the ban; three papal letters written 28 February 1340, refer
to this reception.(42) Because these letters refer to promises made by the
ban, we may assume that these promises had been made to Gerard when
he stopped in Bosnia during his trip in 1339.
The letter addressed to the ban addressed him as son and extended the
papal blessing, which shows that the pope had abandoned plans for
Bosnia from ca. 131J to 1391 181
military intervention and was satisfied that the ban was neither a heretic
nor a protector of heresy. The pope stated that the ban had promised to
cooperate in the destruction of heresy, the restoration of ruined
churches, and the revival of Catholic services in them.(43)
The letter to Gerard states that the ban had gone out to meet the
Franciscan General on the road, had received him with honor, had
listened to the Catholic teaching of truth and salvation with pleasure,
rnd expressed his desire to exterminate from the principality of Bosnia
dl heretics. To do this, however, he needed the help of the Apostolic
See and the King of Hungary because of the schismarics who lived in
neighboring lands, whom the said heretics would call upon for help, if
they learned that they were going to be driven from the land(of
Bosnia).(44)
The schismatics re{erred to presumably are the Orthodox Serbs under
the powerful Du5an. Du5an, however, was no friend of heresy, and his
lrw code, when written in 7349, would have articles against heresy. We
could expect him to come to the aid only of heretics whose beliefs did not
differ greatly from his own. Thus this may be taken as evidence that the
Bosnian Church, if it might seek aid from Du$an, was a Slavic liturgy
rhurch not differing greatly from the Serbian.
Kotromanii may also have been anticipating a possible attack from
Dulan for other reasons, and feared that if a persecution were to be
lsunched against heretics and /or Bosnian Churchmen, the persecuted,
in the event of a Bosnian-Serbian war, might side with Dulan. Such a
wardid take place in 13j0-51 when Du5an invaded Bosnia; Kotromanid
ruccessfully withstood the attack. We do not know whether any
Ilosnians supported the Serbian invaders.
lVhat were the ban's motives in allowing the Franciscan mission?
Orbini states that the ban was of the Greek rite (i.e., Orthodox) and
thrrefore was not obedient to the pope. He granted the Catholics license
ln preach freely against the heretics and to introduce the Roman faith
because he felt it was better to have Catholics in his lands than heretics
xho were against both the Greeks and the Catholics.(45) Since the ban
srtms to have had cordial relations with the Bosnian Church, it is not
ckar whether by heretics here is meant the Bosnian Church or another
htretical current. If he had another heretical current in mind, possibly
durrlists, this may be evidence that this movement was gaining an in-
srcased following which the ban believed to be dangerous to the state. It
ir not likely that he would have considered the Bosnian Church a
drnger, unless he was reasoning that its presence, since it annoyed
&reign powers, increased the likelihood of foreign invasion. Most
p.rntrably, however, the ban simply wanted to end plans for crusades
782 Medieval Bosnian Church
against his realm. If allowing the Franciscans to come to Bosnia to
preach would end such plans, then why not agree to this compromise2
One other factor that may have had a part in Kotromanid's allowing
the Franciscans to come and preach in Bosnia was his own attitude
toward the Catholic faith. It seems the ban in 1340 was still Orthodox,
since we have no evidence that he had accepted Catholicism prior to that
date. However, in 1339 he was clearly friendly toward Catholicism,
since he received the Franciscan general with such warmth. In addition
the pope says that he listened to the Catholic teaching of truth and
salvation with pleasure. This cannot be taken to mean that he accepted
Catholicism and was baptized at their meeting in 1339, but it does show
him as sympathetic toward and interested in Catholic teaching. The
earliest Franciscan chronicle ("Chronica Generalium Ordinis
Minorum," written in I374) states that Gerard converted the ban to
Catholicism.(46) Since Gerard had dealings with the South Slav world
only until 1342 (when he accepted another post), if he did convert the
ban, he would have to have done so between L)39 and 1342. Orbini
confirms the approximate date for the ban's conversion but attributes it
to the influence of a Ragusan canon Domagna di Volzo Bobali, who was
a close associate of the ban and who greatly aided the Franciscan
mission.(47) Orbini's account is based on charters and privileges found
in the Bobali family archive in Dubrovnik. Thus if these no-longer
extant documents are authentic, and not later fabrications to glorify an
ancestor, Orbini's story, being based upon contemporary documents
would be more reliable. In any case, the ban in 1340, not yet a Catholic,
seems to have warmly received the Franciscans. At about the same time
Bobali arrived and assisted the Franciscans. [n the course of the 1340's,
and most probably before 1347 (owing to the contents of a letter, we
shall discuss presently, written by the ban in that year),the ban, under
the influence of the Franciscans and/or Bobali, accepted Catholicism.
The l)74 chronicle also reveals that Gerard summoned brothers
from many lands to preach against heretics. The vicariat was founded,
many churches were built, and many were converted.(48) Gerard was
General of the Franciscan Order until 1342, at which time he was
appointed "Patriarch of Antioch" (an office which enabled him to
reside in Sicily). All Franciscan accounts agree that Peregrin Saxon was
installed as the first vicar. His installation almost certainly occurred
between Gerard's return to Bosnia in 1340 and his acceptance of the
Antioch post in 1342. The first time we find Peregrin as vicar in
contemporary documents is 7344, and it is clear from the context that
he had not just been installed.(49) Thus it is safe to date the founding of
the Bosnian vicariat and the installation of Peregrin Saxon as the first
Bosnia from ca. L3Ii to I39j 183
vicar to the two year period 1340-42.
The vicariat covered a region much vaster than the Banate of Bosnia.
ln the course of the fourteenth century, the area in which its members
could be found at work was expanded. The vicariat started with little
more than the good will of the ban, almost no money, and very few
Fnnciscans. The claims of Franciscan annals that many friars came to
the vicariat are quite exaggerated, as shown by a letter of Pope Gregory
Xl in 1372 which states that the Franciscans were not permitted to have
over sixty brothers in the vicariat.(50) In I378 they were permitted to
rxeive thirty more brothers, though in 1380 the vicar noted that they
hrdtaken only twenty. Six more were added in 1395.(51) We do not
Lnow whether these new recruits were filling vacancies in the quota of
rixty or if that quota had been increased. If Sidak is correct in assuming
that the quota had been increased, then these two new enlistments, not
uking into account probable deaths and departures, brings the number
cf hiars in the vicariat to eighty-six. Of course, we can suppose that
{ithers came, whose arrivals were not noted in the limited number of
rurviving sources. However, even so, it is clear that the Franciscan
mission was a small-scale operation and intended to be such by the pope
*ho set strict limits on its numbers,
ln addition, we know that the Franciscans operated from monasteries,
*nd that it was not permitted them to have more than twelve brothers to
r monastery.(52) Although letters of papal permission to build Fran-
ciscan monasteries exist from the fourteenth century for a variety of
places near Bosnia, no such letters have survived for Bosnia itself. Thus
ne do not know exactly when any of the Bosnian monasteries were built.
.{ll we have is a list from 1385 of the thirty-five monasteries that then
rristed in the vicariat. From this list, we know that by 1385 only four
monasteries existed in Bosnia proper. They were located at; Curia bani
iKraljeva Sutjeska), Saint Nicholas (probably referring ro the monastery
*{ that name at Visoko), Lascrova (Lalva), and Plumbum (Olovo).(53) If
rtrtre had been the maximum number of friars in each monastery Bosnia
pmper would have had forty-eight Franciscans in 138i. Yet since there
*rre a relatively large number of other monasteries elsewhere in the
vxariat which had to be staffed, it is unlikely that forty-eight Fran-
dxans (out of a total of roughly a hundred) could have been spared for
Bosnia. To have staffed each monastery evenly, from an assumed
hundred friars, would have meant roughly three to a monastery. This
rould have given Bosnia roughly twelve brothers in 1385; and since
Sorrria might have been considered a critical area, we might be justified
m rncreasing that number to about twenty for Bosnia. It immediately
balmes apparent that such a small number of friars would have had
 r84 Medieval Bosnian Church
limited success in converting a large area with poor communications Iike
Bosnia.
In addition, the establishment of monasteries in a mining town rike
olovo, or a trading center rike Visoko, with significant forei"gn colonies
of merchants and miners, wourd have meant that the Fraiciscans in
these places would have had to spend considerabre time serving
the
needs of these foreign cathorics, which would have reduced
the time
they would have had to devote to teaching the heathen. of course,
by
choosing these towns with foreign coloniei, the Franciscans
secured for
themselves a strong base of support. They crearry would not
have been
driven out of such places; thus they gained secure centers from
which
they could spread their teaching into the surrounding area.
Presumably then, this is the way in which the Franciscans
operated.
And since considerable numbers of peasants in these u."u, *ould huu"
been without priests of any confession, they were unlikely
to have been
convinced believers in any other religion. Thus we can
that the
Franciscans made steady but slow progress. By 13gI, "*p".t
if the four
monasteries had been erected nearer to 1340 than 13g5, it is probable
that the majority of villages near these monasteries would have
been
won over at least nominalry to cathoricism. In the relativery
smalr area
of the Visoko-Laxva-sutjeska triangle, roughry the center of ,h"
,,0,",
three of the fo'r monasteries had been erected. Thus the Franciscans
by
concentrating their limited numbers in this key central core could
utilize
their small corps to maximum effectiveness. H"." they surely made
especially good progress. And as
it was the center of the siate, it was, of
course, the key area.
It was also convenient for the ban, for hither would come foreign
legates, who seeing catholicisrn here might be more easily persuaded
that the issue of heresy was dead and Bosnia was now a catholic land.
f{owever, as this region was the center of the state, the Bosnian church
also had its people here. whether the hila remained at Mo$tre
we ilo not
know' but in 1404 we shalr find the djed issuing a retter from
Janji6i,
which lay not far north of Laxva. However, we may suppose that with
the support of the rulers, (Kotromanic, a catholic from about 1340,
and his nephew and successor Tvrtko, a catholic all his life, who ruled
to 1391), the three Franciscan monasteries, located in relatively close
proximity ro one another, by the end of rvrtko's reign probably had
succeeded in winning over the majority of people in this cent.al t.iungle
to catholicism. In areas further afield, other than olovo (with
rnonastery and significant foreign catholic colony) it is to be doubted
that the populace even heard about Catholicism.
Another factor which must have contributed to the catholicizing of
Bosnia from ca. 1315 to I39I 1g,
the center was the development of mines, begun during the reign of
Kotromanic', which increased the influx of foreigners (particularly
balmatians but also some Saxon miners) to the area in the second hatf of
tht fourteenth century. Taking advantage of the increase in commerce
resulting from the mining, these Dalmatian merchants enlarged their
*kl colonies and established new ones in other towns near mining
crnters. These new colonies brought Cath<llic influences into new towns
nnd also provided secure centers for future Franciscan monasteries; it
wari not long after 1385 that the Franciscans would erect monasteries in
three such towns -- KreYevo, DeYevica and Fojnica.
Quite naturally a shortage of money would hinder any religious
nrganization that tried to function in Bosnia. Thus, almost immediately
$er the foundation of the Bosnian vicariat the Franciscans, lacking any
real iinancial support and prohibited from seeking alms within Bosnia
proper, began to claim the right to tithes raised in the "land and diocese
*l lJosnia." The bishop in Djakovo immediately wrote the pope to
mruplain that he had long had the right to tithes paid by certain subjects
of Ban Stiepan (we do not learn which subiects and in what regions of
Bosnia); now the Franciscans had begun to assert their rights to tithes
trom those people they converted to Catholicism, falsely claiming that
tllt ban had agreed to this. The bishop also claimed that the Franciscans
*r:re usurping his authority. The Pope decided the case in favor of the
hishop in Diakovo.(54)
Since we do not know where the tithes being disputed were collected,
*? {jannot use the above material to demonstrate that the bishop's
\rrgdnization had actually been having some roie up to then within the
brnate. In fact, since the report of the tithe collector of I3I7 complained
thlt the Bosnian diocese was almost destroyed, we may suspect that the
huhop was claiming tithes which he had title to, yet which prior to the
l3.1tl's owing to the chaotic situation in Bosnia had not actually been
rotlt'cted. Thus if the bishop was arguing on de iure rights, we cannot
u* this to demonstrate that the bishop had had some authority within
llcr*niaprior to 1340. And it is possible that the people of Ban Stjepan
ruhrred to were in such border regions as Sol, Usora, and the Donji
lrrii, which were under his suzerainty but not his direct rule and which
tlrrrughout, despite the existence of heresy, always had Catholic
rhurches functioning.
It is almost certainly true that the Franciscans were usurping the
ruthority of the bishop. Since as far as we can tell the bishop had not set
hnt in Bosnia for over a century, now that the Franciscans had appeared
is Bosnia, it is hardly surpri.sing that they had achieved some influence
**druthority there. In fact, Peregrin Saxon, the Franciscan friend of the
186 Medieval Bosnian Church
ban, who would be elected bishop in 1349, would become the first
bishop to have been in Bosnia since the 7230's. The pope's decision on
behalf of the bishop was presumably made on the basis of de jure rights
as opposed to the de Jaclosituation. This surely was a serious blow to the
work of the Franciscans, the only Catholics who were active in Bosnia
itself. The dispute between Franciscans and bishop was to be the first
stage of a long term quarrel that was to continue through the next
century, paralleling quarrels of the Bosnians against the Hungarians,
the Dominicans and Djakovo a century earlier. The only difference
between the two situations lay in the fact that the Franciscans were
trusted by the pope and had his blessing, though not always his active
support.
With their small numbers and limited finances, the Franciscans, had
they not had the support of the state would have failed completely.
Kotromani6's support of their mission and his distress at the mission's
lackof success is shown by a letter the ban sent in 1347 to Venice to be
transmitted to the pope. The ban praised the work of Peregrin on behalf
of Catholicism, and complained that there was an insufficient number of
Franciscans for the considerable task that they had undertaken. He
requested that more friars be sent to the vicariat and stressed the
necessity of the newcomers knowing Slavic, or at least having the ap-
titude to learn it. This implies that some of those already there did not
know it; except for one Hungarian, all of the known fourteenth-century
Franciscans in Bosnia were ltalians.(51) Foreigners, not knowing
Slavic, could not have had much success with the Bosnians; thus the
number of effective Franciscans in Bosnia may have been even smaller
than we suggested before. The ban suggested that the vicar be allowed to
summon more Franciscans from abroad as well as friars from other
orders, that monasteries be established near-by where neophytes could
learn Latin and theology, and that the vicar be allowed to summon to
Bosnia secular priests who could administer the sacraments to people
who although excommunicated might be able to be brought back into
communion, or that the Franciscans might be granted by the Holy See
the privilege to administer the sacraments.(56) The need for men
eligible to administer the sacraments was continually a pressing problem
owing to the shortage of priests. Finally in the last quarter of the century
the pope had to allow the Franciscans to administer the sacraments
themselves. The excommunicates, whom the ban hoped might be
restored to communion, presumably referred to both heretics and
Bosnian Church members.
The ban's interest in the religious affairs of his realm, as well as his
goodwill toward Catholicism, is also illustrated by a second request he
Bo.snia from ca. 1315 to 1391 lg7
made to Venice in 7)tag, to ask the pope to appoint Peregrin as the new
llishop of Bosnia.(57) We know that up to this time the Bosnian bishop
had resided outside of Bosnia and had had nothing to do with Bosnian
atlairs. With the establishrnent of the Franciscan mission in Bosnia, a
quarrel had immediately broken out between rhe absentee bishop and
the friars over the income from tithes. The obvious solution for the good
of Catholicism would be to unite the foreign bishopric with the mission,
und this was what the ban airned to do. In addition we know that he
knew and trusted Peregrin, having worked with him for almost a decade.
1-he pope wisely accepted this suggestion.
Stjepan Kotromani6 diecl late in l3)3. Orbini incorrectly dates his
dtarh in 1357 , and claims that he was buried in the Franciscan
monastery of St. Nicholas at "Milescevo, "(58) an unknown monastery
not to be confused with the famous Orthodox monastery of MileYevo.
On the 1381 list of Franciscan monasteries for the vicariar, three of the
tr;ur crected in Bosnia proper are easily identifiable. T'he fourth is called
unly St. Nicholas. A monastery of St. Nicholas at Visoko is referred to in
u Ragusan document from I 367 .(59) Since Visoko was both the
ccrnrmercial center of Bosnia as well as the ban's first city, and since the
ban supported the Franciscans, we would expect a monastery to have
ixren erected here in the 1340's. Thus we can be fairly certain that the
5t. Nicholas on the 1385 list refers to the noted Visoko monastery, and
dnct'this town was more or less Kotromani6's capital, a monastery here
s'oulcl have been a likely final resting place for him.
IV: 'I-urtko Establishes Himself in Power:
Relations Witb the Different !'aiths
Stlepan KotromaniC seems to have left no sons; he was succeeded by
his ncphew Tvrtko. the son of Vladislav Kotromanii and Jelena
SubrC.160) Tvrtko was certainly brought up as a Catholic. His mother
*lsCatholic, and just shortly after hisbirth his uncle, the ban, became
trnr. T'vrtko gave proof of his Catholicism shortly a{ter his succession
nhrn he issued in February 1 3 5 5 from D jakovo a letter confirming trade
privile ges to Dubrovnik, in which he called Bishop Peregrin Saxon "our
ryiritual father."(61) Prior to L349 when on the recommendation of
llu Stjepan, the pope had made Peregrin Bishop of Bosnia, such a visit
by a ban to the episcopal headquarters in Slavonia would have been
$xonceivable. But since the pope had made the leader of the Bosnian
Frrnciscans, since ca. 1340-42 the de facto head of Catholicism in
tfurnia, de jure head as well by appointing him Bishop of Bosnia, he
uude it possible for Bosnian bans actually to deal with the bishop in
 188 Medieval Bosnian Church
Dlakovo for the first time. However, the union of the two offices was
temporary. After Peregrin's death in 1355 they were separated again as
the pope replaced Peregrin with Peter, a Djakovo cleric.(62) Relations
between the state and the bishop deteriorated, and once again we find a
titular and inactive bishop outside the borders of Bosnia and an active
Franciscan mission inside, each at odds with the other. Tvrtko was to
have some dealings with Peregrin's successor, Peter, but after peter,s
death, the Bishop of Bosnia in Djakovo again had absolutely no role or
influence within the Bosnian state.
KotromaniC's srate had been built on alliances and by his own
military strength, as a result of which he obtained the loyalty of in-
dependent nobles in the vicinity of his holdings. He then had used this
increased power to annex other lands, like Hum. However, he had
never created much of a state apparatus, and had been satisfied to let his
vassals administer their own territories and simply render specific duties
to the state.
On Stjepan's death in 7353, his successor, Tvrtko, was a boy of
about fifteen; thus, very few of Stjepan's vassals felt obliged to serve
Tvrtko. Tvrtko found himself holding only the central part of Bosnia,
his personal lands, with the task of acquiring the loyalty of the nobles
whose territories iay all about him and who were waiting to see what
new balance of forces would develop. Thus the great .,state" of
Kotromani6 had been an artificial and temporary creation, that split into
its separate units and now would have to be re-assembled again. The
nobles considered themselves independent lords of their own lands and
had little loyalty for abstractions such as a Bosnian state.
Tvrtko's task was made more difficult by the King of Hungary, Louis.
The king was bidding for the loyalty of many of Kotromani6's former
vassals in the north, particularly of the now disunited Hrvatinii family
who ruled in the Donji kraji. In addition, just prior to Kotromanic's
death, Louis had married the ban's daughter, Jelisaveta. Now he
demanded that Tvrtko give him Hum as the girl's dowry. Tvrtko, not
having won support from enough nobles, was forced to agree. ln l3j7
he went to Hungary, accepted Louis' overlordship, surrendered to him
the western part of Hum, and in turn was confirmed as ruler of the
Banate of Bosnia and Usora. This confirmation was given on the
condition that Tvrtko take action against the heretics and that his
brother Vuk live at the Hungarian court.
ominous thunder from Rome about the need to take action against
heretics, which now probably would find Hungary agreeable, increased
Tvrtko's danger. Peregrin, who might have defended Bosnia, was dead
and in his place sat a Hungarian cleric. Once again, papal and
Bosnia from ca. 1315 to 1391 Ig9
llurrgarian letter refer to heretics, Bosnian heretics, and "Patarins." In
1358 Louis mentioned "heretics and Patarins in our Kingdom of
Bosnia."(63) It is probable that Louis was distinguishing heretics from
the Patarins (the Bosnian Church).
In 1358 Tvrtko seems to have reverted to the methods usual for the
weaker side in a power struggle and to have tried to organiz-e some sort
of a plot. Peter, the Bosnian bishop in Djakovo, apparently intercepted a
letter from Tvrtko to a lector in the Djakovo church named John, who
confessed at the hearing that he hated his bishop and had been working
with Tvrtko, the rival of King Louis, the open "favorer" of heretics,
and the secret enemy of the Bosnian bishop. Tvrtko had spoken various
words against Christianity, as well as against the honor of the king and
of the bishop.((r4) Vague as this is, it is all we have. And, of course,
even this is the testimony of one man before a hostile court.
We now have a gap in our sources for the vital years that preceded a
Bosnian'Hungarian war which broke out in 1363. The specific cause for
the war is not known, nor are'lvrtko's machinations that preceded it
among the nobles to his north.(6)) In 1360, a brief warning rhar
$mething may have been about to happen was contained in Pope In-
nuent VI's letter to the Bishop o{ Bosnia, Peter, which told him that he
was free to call on the secular arm against heretics and to make use of all
church punishmenrs against them.(6(r)
lhen, in 13(r3, l{ungarian armies struck the territory to the north of
llosnia in two waves. The first wave attacked the region of the Donji
kraji , whose lords (the Flrvatiniii) were clivided among themselves,
yrme for Tvrtko and some for l{r.rngary. Both rulers had been actively
trying to win over these nobles for years. Now the crucial test came.
l.oyalties already promised were not firm commitments, and we find
Vlarko Vukoslavii, loyal to Tvrtko up to this point, surrendering the
inrportant fortrers of KljuE to Louis. However, Tvrtko's side emerged
victorious as vlkac Hrvatinil ably and successfully defended the fortress
of Sokograd in the Plivska Eupa, and the Hungarian army was forced ro
turn back to Hungary. Vlkac was given the whole"zupa by Tvrtko as a
rtward a couple of years larer. Presumably that had been his price. The
*eund Hungarian wave, a month later than the first, hit Usora; once
lgrin the Bosnian de{enders were successful, this time by a key defense
It Srebrnik fortress in Usora (not to be confused with Srebrnica, and its
Itrtress Srebrnik, on rhe Drina).((r7)
Somehow between 1358 and 1363 Tvrtko had become power{ul
r*ough to resist the Hungarian attack. Unfortunately the sources are
ulrnt on the subject of how he had managed to achieve this strength.
"l'rrtko was fortunate
that the Hungarian attacks had come when they
190 Medieval Bosnian Church
did, for in February 1366 a revolt of local nobles forced him to abandon
his throne and flee to the court of the King of Hungary, where the king
welcomed his recent adversary. In Bosnia, the nobles placed Tvrtko's
brother, Vuk, on the throne. Was Vuk an initiator of the plot or a
figure-head for the conspirators? We do not know; in any event, once on
the throne Vuk took up his new role with enthusiasm. But having
quickly recognized the suzerainty of the Hungarian king again and
acquired some aid of unspecified sort (troopsZ) from the Hungarian
monarch, Tvrtko was back in Bosnia by the end of March and had
regained some, but not all, of Bosnia. He also had the support of the
lords of the Donji kraji. A variety of nobles took part in this affair,
shifting sides as things seemed best to them. By the end of 1367 , Tvrtko
had regained his banate and Vuk was in exile. Now Vuk began to seek
outside help, and, knowing that there was no better issue to capitalize
on than ''the heresy, " he wrote to Pope Urban V.
Urban then wrote the King of Hungary in January 1369, reporting
that Vuk had stated that the majority of bans up to the present had been
schismatics or heretics, and had received and defended heretics, while
he (Vuk) was a good Catholic, who hated heretics and only longed to
persecute them. The senior ban, his brother (Tvrtko), however, favored
and defended heretics, who came to his realm from various places. The
pope asked the King of Hungary to help restore Vuk to power.(68) The
King of Hungary, however, did not seem to be interested, and nothing
more came of it. Eventually, by I37 4, Y uk and Tvrtko were reconciled
and are found endorsing charters as senior and junior bans.
In the 1360's the pope continued to write letters to the Hungarian
king and high clerics on the coast about the need for action against
heretics and schismatics. Finally in I3(>9, Urban V wrote the Ar-
chbishops of Dubrovnik and Split. He complained that in parts of Bosnia
not far irom their dioceses were found many heretics who freeiy came
into their dioceses and cities for purposes of trade, and once there,
spread heresy. The pope ordered the archbishops neither to allow such
heretics to enter their dioceses nor to allow trade with them. He also said
that merchants from their cities should not be allowed to go to Bosnia,
lest they become infected.(69) It is very doubtful that this letter had any
practical effect; it certainly could not have had any on Dubrovnik whose
economy was based on trade, much of which went overland to or
through fJosnia.
At this time, with peace re-established at home, and his relations
goor.l with the lords to the north, Tvrtko began to involve himself in the
feuds and rivalries among the leading families to the south, in what is
Bosnia from ca. 131) to 1391 I9I
now lJercegovina. The neighboring states of Serbia and Zeta were also
involved. Religion played no part in these quarrels. As far as we can tell
from the sources, these nclbles were Orthodox. Nikola Altomanovid,
the most powerful nobleman in this region at the start of the struggle,
whose holdings were totally lost asa result of the failure of his aggressive
and self'seeking policy toward his neighbors, was almost certainly
Orthodox.(70) FIe was also friendly roward the Franciscans and allowed
them to build two monasteries in his territories around Rudnik.(71) The
powerful family of Sanko Miltenovid (and his sons Beljak and RadiE
SankoviC), who after the fall of Altomanovi6 became the leading family
hr:re were also Orthodox. Sanko had been Kaz-nac (treasurer) for Tvrtko,
but never had lost sight of what he thought were his own interests.
Twice he had joined'fvrtko's opponents in crucial conflicts and twice he
h;rd managed to restore himself to favor afterwards. His estates lay in the
region of Nevesinje from which he and his sons expanded their holdings
west to the coast and north toward Konjic.(72) In the Koniic atea at
$iskup near Glavatidevo, the family erected an Orthodox church which
rrrvcd as the burial chapel and cemetery for most of the family.(73)
Sanko's sister Rada[a married a member of the powerful tihoriC family,
who ruled Popovo polje, and later in life became an Orthodox nun under
the name of Polihrana. F{er gravestone with inscription can be seen at
tk Orthodox cemetery at Velitani.(74) Thus, we see that the leading
{rrnilies of what is now Hercegovina in the fourteenth century were
()rthodox. The sources do not mention a single noble in Hercegovina
hcin11 connected with heresy or with the Bosnian Church.
Tvrtko was able to play a dominant role in these quarrels and as a
r$ult was able to expand his state to the east, where he annexed land t r
tht [-irn region and on to the Drina.(75) In this territory that he acquired
ntrr several {amous Orthodox churches: Mile,'sevo (where St. Sava's
rtlics were), Dobrun (built in 1343 or 1353 by a protovestijar at
$u\an's court),(7(r) the llanja Monastery and the Church of St. Peter
*nd 5t. Paul on the Lim. Thus he acquired lands with a loyal Orthodox
prpulation, one or two bishops, and a relatively large number of priests
**d monks. In this way a large number of Orthodox were incorporated
*nto Tvrtko's state. However, we have no reason to believe that this led
t* any significant Orthodox influence in Bosnia itself. Nor is there
midcnce that there were any transfers or migrations of people from this
utwly annexed region to the other parts of the state.
'l'hr extinction of the Nemanjit family in Serbia, together with
Ttrtko's Serbian conquests and the fact that he was the great grandson
u* Stcfan Dragutin (through Dragutin's daughter's marriage to
l{*.rtroman), provided a basis for Tvrtko's claims to the Serbian kingship.
 192 Medieval Bosnian Church
In 1377 f'vrtko was crowned King of Ralka and Bosnia at MileXevo by
an Orthodox metropolitan. Thus Tvrtko had active and friendly
relations with the orthodox as well as with catholics. His religious
policies seem to have been based on political expediency.(77) ln I374
Tvrtko married an Orthodox girl, Dorothea, daughter of the Bulgar
Knez of Vidin, in a Catholic ceremony performed by his old enemy,
Peter, the Bishop of Bosnia, at Djakovo. Tvrtko awarded peter a large
land grant in the area of Djakovo. His brother Vuk also attended the
wedding, and, restored tograce, placedhis signature on the grant to the
bishop in Djakovo. Tvrtko clearly was one who bore no grudges.(7g)
V : Papal Letters about Bosnia in the 1 370's
ln 131 2 and 1373 Pope Gregory XI issued a series of letters about the
Franciscan mission. I-Ic gave permission to build several monasteries in
the vicariat (two in Altomanovit's territory around Rudnik, one in
GlaY", and other new ones in unspecified locations in Bosnia and Ra!ka,)
He allowed the vicariat to have a maximum of sixty friars, and taking
into consicleration the shortage of priests, he gave the Franciscans the
right to administer all ecclesiastical sacraments.(79) In a second letter he
cornplained that in parts of Bosnia (presumably referring to the vicariat)
all the inhabitants, excluding those who had been converted
Catholicism, were schismatics or heretics. In many places there were no
parochial churches and no priests to administer to the spiritual needs of
the populace; such conditions existed even in regions, such as "Glacs"
(probably referring to Glal, lying on the Ukrina river bevond the
northern borders of Tvrtko's banate) where the ruling nobles were
Catholic. In such places were to be found mixed populations of
Catholics, schismatics and heretics; there were neither fixed parishes
nor parish prie.sts. lf a nan sought a priest he often had to travel two or
three days to find one. Hence the inhabitants of such places lived
without doctrine and Christian rites.(80)
Most important is Gregory's long letter to Vicar Bartholomaeus,
answering twenty-three questions that the vicar had put to the pope
about problems the Franciscans had had in the course of their work in
the vicariat.(81) One point about these twenty-three answersi
frequently overlooked by scholars, is that they concern the whole
vicariat rather than just the Bosnian banate.
The letter gives us a picture of the great ignorance found in the area.
It mcntions the igneirance among the "Greeks" (i.e., Orthodox) whcl
were not aware of the existence o{ a schism between the Eastern and
Bosnia from ca. l3lj to I39I 193
Western churches and who did not know even the basic matters of
hith.(82) The pope is told that there were some semi-priests there
not real priests but rustics and schismatics not canonically ordained but
-
rnstituted by the custom of the land(83)
- and hc is asked what func-
tr(rns these rustics could be permitted to carry out. The shortage of
priests was so great that the Franciscans could use their help. Whether
these rustic priests were to be found in Bosnia or elsewhere in the
vicariat is not stated. If these priests were found in Bosnia, were they
{)rthodox, or Bosnian-Church? Or might they not have simply been
ignorant peasant-priests, nominally Christian, whose position went
irom father to son, who may originally have been Catholic generations
crlieri It is noteworthy that they were not spoken of as heretical. We
(m rellrct that wc are given no details about the manner in which they
rere instituted "according to the custom of the land." However, it
dxs show that a local practice for instituting priests that deviated from
church canons trad been developed.
'l'he letter also refers to areas with no priests and no parishes with
tircd boundaries.(ttz:l; This suggests that in these areas the Catholic
tirSaniz-ation had completcly broken down, which is hardly surprising,
rrrnsidcring the century between ca. I24O an<l 1140 without any
Crtholic administration in the land. Without Catholic priests and
p,lrisht's, the population would either have had contact with schismatic
to
rr hcrctical priests or none at all.
Relcrcnce is made to Greeks and schismatics having lost all Catholic
nttt;rncl learning.(85) If "Greeks" refers to Orthodox, does schismatic
thn rcfcr to a second group other than the Orthodox? Could it refer to
L'llowrrs of the Bosnian Church 7 Elsewhere in the document
xhisrnatics are also mentioned, sometimes these schismatics may be
(krhotkrx
- for the vicariat, of course, did include Serbian and
ilulg;rrian territory *- but must they always be? We do not know if the
lrrncisrans considcred the Bosnian Church as schismatic or heretical,
but ii they did consider it schismatic, then quite possibly at times this
tfim rt,fers to Bosnian Church followers.
A variety of questions were asked about re-baptism, administration of
u{rarncnts, eligibility for rites, etc. It is in this letter that we learn that
rlx Bosnians clid not consider marriage a sacrament but took women on
threontlition that they promise to be good wives to their husbands, with
tln. intcntion of dismissing them when they chose. We are told that
urrctly one man in a htrndred lived with his original wife.(86) The
p4r told the Franciscans to withhold baptism until church marriages
rtrr arccpted. Complaint was made about thc keeping of concubines. In
llur rare it was foreign Catholic merchants (spoken of as Latins and
 194 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from ca. Ljl5 to l39l 195

Germans) who were criticized for keeping them. These merchants muld be explained in only one way. Besides, how these people adored
presumably lived
in the mining and commercial towns of Bosnia and brretics is not described; thus we cannot be sure that their adoration
Serbia. *rs carried out in the same way that the Cathar adoration was.
only three questions in the letter make any reference to heresy; and lVe noted in our discussion of traditions in Chapter II the extreme
two of these show only that some distinction was made between
those fffermce shown the elders around Krupa until late in the last century.
people considered schismatics and those considered
heretics. yet we are Swh a rite as the tradition describes might well have seemed heretical to
not told whether those considered to be heretics were members
of a hnnciscans. As we recall in Krupa, family elders (rather than clerics)
specific sect or whether they had simply deviated into various
-three errors t*crived the adulation o{ the different households and extended their
through ignorance. The first of the questions asked whether b,&srings to these homes. A French traveller at the beginning of the
Franciscans should serve the mass before those who had
aided heretics; *d*eteenth century also notes the unlimited veneration, confidence and
the second questioned the wisdom of ailowing laymen to
dispute about mbrnission to priests by Catholic Bosnian peasants. He states that when
matters of faith in the presence of heretics.(g7) In both cases
we have no Srsepeasants meet a priest they kiss his hands, and fall on their knees
way of knowing whether these heretics rived in Bosnia itserf; mling for his blessing.(89) In addition at the Council of Basel in 1435
the
number of references in other sources to heretics in Bosnia, however,
Sr Trrbipolensis (?) bishop stated that when he had visited Bosnia he
makes it quite possible that they did live in the banate.
*ru received with such humble veneration that it was all that he could
The third reference to heresy is the only one which courd be dmtoprevent the Bosnians from kissing his feet.(9O) To do everything
con-
strued in a dualist sense. Question twenty-6ne asks, what should
Franciscans do about those converted to catholicism who
the *on of kissing a bishop's feet might accurately be described as
continued to '**doring" him. It is possible that what the bishop described was a
"adore heretics" and to openly observe heretical rites while
keeping hrrl practice of honoring clerics; and that what was shown him was the
their catholicism secretly? Shourd the friars give them secret penance
f*ntr practice that the Franciscans had objected to rn I373. Thus while
because they would not want to perform r pubri. penance!
or shourd it ir quite possible that the "adoration" does reflect the existence of a
they perhaps remain in (i.e., be ailowed io p,,rir.ty observe) their
&rrlirt practice in Bosnia, it is possible that it may not. Finally, it should
heresy, though they have been recently .onu.rt.d.1ASj fnis
shows that be grointed out that the document never suggests that the heretics
there was some religious sect somewhere in the vicariat which the q',t&,revJ"
had any connection with the Bosnian Church.
Franciscans considered heretical. This sect evidently had its
own service Kniewald believes that Gregory Xtr's letter supports the theory that
which differed from the Catholic. It also, at least in some places,
had ,Srre were dualists in Bosnia.(9l) What, however, is striking to me
considerable following with a leadership hostile to the Franciscans
which Ssut the letter is that it does just the opposite. With the one possible
caused converts to catholicism to fear to admit publicly their
conversion ffirption of the mention of adoring heretics, there is nothing in the
and caused them to continue to publicly perform the heretical
rites. dmument to suggest that there wcre dualists (or heretics of any specific
The adoring of heretics, mentioned in connection with these heretics,
sounds very much like the cathar practice by which the berievers
k*y) in Bosnia. Had there been a significant heretical movement, we
,dord .
'ffuld expect some of the Franciscans' questions to have been concerned
the perfecti.If so, it shows that dualist heretics or peasants influenced ,,
gr*h how to deal with specific practices and beliefs connected with it.
thcn or at some earlier time by dualists - live in the vicariat.
However, since this is the only suggestion - ofdiddualism in the
i Fkrrrver, this is not the nature of the question. Instead of depicting a
,,li
&*rctical land, the twenty-three questions mainly reveal the extreme
d.cument, the sect may not haue been important in the vicarir,"ntiro * i r $*xrrance about religious matters found in the whole area of the Bosnian
whole. In addition, since we have had.so few references to speci{ic ',1
w$xri*t. That all sorts of variant beliefs and practices with no intention
practices that might be dualist in any document about Bosnia
,o no*, .!i d &viating and with no dogmatic base could grow up in such an en-
it seems dangerous to insist that dualism is the only explanation "p
for thi* ,i f*onrnent is obvious. And when these deviations become associated
practice. It is always possible that there existed some local
custom d *,$h a man's Christianity, who can say if he is a heretic or not, and who
paying extreme reverence to priests, which had a different
and non- **m **y whether there would have been agreement among the Western
dualist origin. Extreme reverence shown ro a man of God by
an ignorant fuaqxan clerics who visited Bosnia as to where to draw the line? Each
populace does not strike me as being so unique a phenomenon"that
it *#e *e re a source like the 1 3 73 letter. we must wonder whether most
196 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosn ia from ca. 131 ) to I 39 I Ig7

*h,rrm rhe ban protected, sornetimes appeared, and the ban received
of the "heretics" in Bosnia that so disturbed the popes were really part
qt*m and allowed thenr to participate. Because of this, the brothers
of any movement.
**tht.lrew from the celebration, refusing to say the mass before such
In the years that followed, Gregory continued to be troubled by the
situation in the vicariat. In July 1374 the pope gave permission to the {txnpany. By so doing, they hoped to discourage the ban from spon-
Franciscans who had been converting heretics and schismatics frorn *xmg and receiving heretics. However, since the ban did not dare be
error and schism to Catholicism in Timini (Timisoara?), Wilkrike (tht &prived of clivine rites, thc secuiar priests sent thither by the pope or
Vukovska Yupainslavonia?), Vrbas and Sava to build churches in thoss &am r:lse where (i.e., clearly Catholic secular priests) arrived and
localities.(92) If Timini is Timisoara and Wilkrike a Yupa in Slavonia, ruldrrated the mass for him. Thus the ban was able to hear the mass,
qpuore the brothers, and perservere in his stubborness. The pope wanted
then only the last two places are in the vicinity of Bosnia; and whiie the
Vrbas River does extend into Tvrtko's banate, most of its course as well ffi q*d this evil and thr.rs threatened with excommunication any priest
*hu crlebrated the mass before the ban or any other protector of heretics
as the entire course of the Sava River lie well to its north. If Vrbas refers
totheYupaof that name, rather than the river, most of its territory also w shirmatics after the brothers have withdrawn from serving it"(94)
Tlris letter shows that 'fvrtko attendecl Catholic Church services and
lay to the north of Tvrtko's state. Thus the letter has little direct
reference to Bosnia proper and shows that much of the papal concern fof k{t it inrportant to heal thr- mass ; thus he cleariy considered hirnself a
the vicariat was directed at regions within it that lay beyond the borderr
C*hllic. At the same time it also shows his tolerance of the heretics and
Fxtrrins and provides evidence that he maintained cordial relations with
clf the Bosnian banate. What sort of heretics were believed to |e living in
*fuetn^"I'hus the ban saw nothing terrible about their "errors." It also
these northern regions is unknown; we also do not know whether by
$*dn'alcs that the heretics themselves found nothing distasteful about
schismatics he meant Orthodox in the vicinity of Timisoara or whether
by them he also included people from Vrbas who might have been *t*nr.hng Catholic Church services, which suggests that their beliefs
adherents of the Bosnian Church. **d Jrractices did not diffcr greatly fronr the Catholic and certainly that
n&ey did not find anything in Catholic practice so damning and sinful as
ln IjT6Pope Gregory approved a donation by Johannes Horvat, Bas
of Madva, to the Franciscans to help them in their work to convert {lr $danger their own salvation as the inquisition tracts against
"l&rrnian Patarins" wor-rld have us believe. We cannot draw any
schismatics and Patarins who lived in those parts.(93) Since most of
MaEva lies to the Serbian side of the northern reaches of the Drina, it ir d*ffirlulions about the behavior of the secular Catholic clerics who were
evident that the schismatics are Orthodox. However, if the pope wn* xllmg to perform the mass when the Franciscans withdrew; perhaps
accurate when he mentioned Patarins, and if he used the term according { y saw nothing damning about the Bosnian heretics and simply
would be likely in a reply to the Ban of Ma[vs s#lsrdrred them ignorant yokels, or perhaps, as foreigners they were
to Slavic usage
then this
- which evidence
constitutes that the Bosnian Church had somr q{ffirdnt o{ the Slavic tonSue and thus did not realiz-e that they were
-- {f{'vin.q mass before heretics. Ilowever, in the latter case, we would
following in this area. We may recall that Danilo's biography of Stefra
(who ruled Mafva from 1282 to 1316) stated that Dragudn #f,Frtt the tranciscans to have clarified matters for thern. "Ihe statement
Dragutin
from the Bosnian land, some of whom mighr i cd *rir presence also shows that, despite occasional claims to the
conuerted many heretics
have been adherents of the Bosnian Church. In Chapter V we sha$ {wrtr{ry, there were by now at least a few Catholic secular priests in
referring to Bosnian Church cleric from &nsnia I perhaps they were all connected with the court.
discuss one tomb inscription a
Bogutovo, a village near Bijeljina in the north. Thus we are abie ts
gather a little evidence to suggest that the Bosnian Church may well
have hacl some adherents in regions, which were not directly part d l/l: 'lbrtko's Inuolaement in tbe Hungarian Ciuil War
Tvrtko's banate, north of the banate and on both sides of the Drina.
Of particular interest is Gregory's letter to the bishops and Fra$. Frnm 1377 until his dcath in 1391, Tvrtko bore the title King of
ciscans of the western Balkans from 8 August 1377 . The pope had be*l k&k* and Ilosnia. He took aclvantage of a civil war between Sigismund
notified that when the Franciscan vicar and brothers in the presence d *d L*rxrmburg ancl Ladislas of Naples for the Hungarian throne to oppose

the Ban of Bosnia (i.e., Tvrtko) were celebrating mass and the divint S6iEmund and to expand his influence along the Dalmatian coast, where
offices, as well as administering the sacraments, heretics and Patarin$* &r txtrmt overlord of most of the ma jor towns excep t Zadar . In 1390
",
 Bosnia from ca. I1l1 to l39l r99
r98 Medieval Bosnian Church
from
llow are we to interpret theterm ManicheeZ There is no reason
the Archbishop of Split came to Sutjeska to receive from his new Bosnia than with Hungary' Dalmatia'
overlord Tvrtko a promise to respect the property of the Church of Split. the text to associate it more with
th" dualists' whom weobtain,brief glimpses
Among the witnesses to this charter was Pavle Kl8sii,(95) who, a or Croatia. It is possible thot
Sigismund's enemies in the war
af'arnst
decade later, would appear in the sources as a supporter of the Bosnian of from time to time, hacl ioined the term.
the pope had introduced
Church. His presence does not seem to have troubled the Archbishop. him. Flowever, it is atsopossible tilat dualist
'lhe inquisition i., T."itihua i" t387 held inquiries about some
Tvrtko also spread his influence into the Croatian lands to the nor- of the investigation one con-
thwest. All the lords of the Donii kraji were under his suzerainty and heretics from Chieri, ancl in the course had
that various Italian dualists
the branch of the Hrvatinid family which came to dominate in this victedheretic, Jacob il;;' ;t; claimed
gone to Bosnia to .t,,dy dottrine'
Thus the pope could easily have used
region was that which had supported Tvrtko in the 1363 war with about Bosnia'
the term Manichec tt itit't that containecl a complaint
I{ungary, namely that of Vlkac HrvatiniC, whose son Hrvoje Vuktid in 'n
1380 received the title of Great Vojvoda of Bosnia. Hrvoje had good
relations with Tvrtko and in the 1380's amassed tremendous influence
not only in the Donii kraji, but also in Bosnia itself, where after
VII; ltali(ln Documents Ahout Dualists in Bosnia
Tvrtko's death he was to become the most powerful figure in the realm that the two late fourteenth
and would assume the role of king-maker. Hrvoje also achieved great ln the chapter on sources' I have argued
by ltalian Franciscans) about
influence in the Dalmatian lands and in Croatia; and after Tvrtko's ccrltury tracts from ft^fV tpt"Utt'ly.*'itttn
on the beliefs of Italian dualists who
death, Hrvoje was to become Ladislas' viceroy for the Slavic lands and Bosnian heretics.u, uJ"iit'" bu'"d
*iii-tlt""io (Slavonia' Dalmatia)' And since these
had some sort of link
Herceg of Split. Western dualists from whom thcy
Tvrtko sent a detachment to Kosovo (1389) and after the sultan was Italian heretics also had cofltacts with
nrost probably acquired beliefs and
practices' it wor'rld be dangerous to
slain, he proclaimed a great victory and sent embassies to Italy to spread (in the nature of specific beliefs
word of his success. In Florence he was proclaimed a savior of rssurne that anvthing in tt'o'" t"toid'
f"-- pt"itttnt to Bosnia' Thus I am ignoring
the
und practices) need
Christendom.
contents of the ,*o ancl the doctrinal material in Jacob's
During these last years, we hear nothing about heresy in Bosnia, "utt' however' can be used-as evidence
except for the references to infidels, schismatics, and heretics in the tcrtirnony.(97) I'hese documcnts'
dualists in Bosnia' But we must
angry letters of Tvrtko's enemy, Sigismund. Llowever, just after that there were almost certainly some
$ress that there is nothing in the
two tracts or the records of the Turin
Tvrtko's death, but still in relation to these events, we encounter the with the Bosnian
trial to identify ,n" nt"i"n heretics
they
term "Manichee" referring to certain of Sigismund's enemies. lt .mention and which we
so far
occurs in a letter of Pope Boniface IX of 18 December 1391, written in Chrrrch.ln addition, the clata we have examined -
depict the Bosnian
continue ,o in the next two chapters--
response to a letter by Sigismund; thus the pope's terms may repeat shlll
"*unlint
Church as a non-duafiti f-ay' Thus
I conclude these documents relate
those of Sigismund's preceding letter, and must be taken in the context from the Bosnian Church' And
of the war Sigismund was waging against Ladislas, Tvrtko (recently tc r second toue*.nt io*ily '"po'ut"
not mention Bosnian dualists'I think
deceased) and various Croatian nobles including Hrvoje. The pope's rince local and Ragusan sources do
movement which at-
letter in speaking of Sigismund's many enemies mentions: Turks, and rt lre safe in conclucling that theirs was a smallthe ltalian heretics the
links-with
besides them, Manichees, heretics, and other Christians in the before tril(ted attentio.t in rtoiu i"tlause it hacl
rnquisition was investigating in. the
1380's'
mentioned lands (i.e., the Kingdom of Hungary, Dalmatia, and other of the beliefs he
lands under Sigismund's subjection) . . . and also "schismatics in parts ll Jacob can be b;i;:;; ?ttd a{ter all one article
was no sin to lie before the inquisition)
of Bosnia."(96) It is clear that Manichees, if they existed, were not the rl.rims to have helcl was that it
had come to Bosnia to learn doctrine'
only sort of heretic in the region. It is not stated where in this large thcn several of the ltalian heretics
as follows: Rabellator de
-l-ht
names,na uppto*i-ate dates he gives are
rcgion Manichees supposedly existed nor if they were in Bosnia proper. Narro and Granonus Bencius (ca'
ll,rlbis of Chieri (ca' 1147)' lohannes
In fact, what is stressed for Bosnia proper is the presence of schismatics, Bernardus Rascherius (ca' 138tJ)'
whether Orthodox from Hum and the east, or supporters of the Bosnian l1()()). Petru, t'^,.i,ii (ca' 1311)' No Slavic source
Patritii tit"tn"' of Peter ca' 1382)'(98)
Church, or both, is not stated. Jrtobinr.rs
 200 Medieval Bosnian Church
hints at anything about this. As we have stated before,it seems hard to
believe that these Italian urbanites had anything to learn about doctrine
from a Bosnian. That they may have come to visit an ltalian heresiarch
in exile (in Bosnia or more likely Dalmatia, part of which was Bosnian
and where Italian was spoken) is quite possible.(p!) Jacob Bech testified
that about 1377 he had set out for, but had not reached owing to bad
weather, Boxena (i.e.., Bosnia), whose ruler was called the Albanus of
Boxena and is subject to the King of Rassene (RaIka).(100) Albanus
means "Ban," and it is clear that he had set out after Tvrtko's
coronation in 7377 as King of Ralka. That Jacob has taken Tvrtko's two
titles and made them into two different rulers merely shows his
ignorance of the true state of things in Bosnia. Since he never reached
IJosnia, this ignorance probably is not at all surprising. The traveling
that Jacob mentioned was not entirely one-way. Jacob attributed his
own conversion at some time around 1378 to the influence of two
Italians (whom he names) and one man from "Sclavonia."(l0l)
Since Jacob attributed his conversion to a man from "Slavonia,, and
then tried to go to "Bosnia" to learn doctrine, it seems possible that by
the 1380's some Westerners were using the word ..Bosnia" as a
synonym for "Slavonia" to describe the general region inhabited by the
more western of the South Slavs. we have already noted that Anselm of
Alexandria in his tract of ca. 127o against heretics had used the two
names as synonyms. And now particularly after the creation of the
Bosnian vicariar in the 1340's, which included all the territory that was
covered by the old term "Slavonia," it would not be at all strange for
foreigners to use the word "Bosnia" for the whole vicariat or any part
of it. And ltalians, who heard of a Ban of Bosnia, could well have
believed that this ban ruled over all the territorv of the vicariat.
VIIL' Tartho, Catbolicisrn and tbe Bosnian Churcb
There was never any question about Tvrtko's Catholicism. The
Franciscan mission progressed during his reign; Tvrtko built at reast
one church, that of St. Gregory at Trstivnica (from which he issued a
charter in 1378).(102) His protouestijar ("chief chamberlainn') was a
Ragusan priest named Ratko.(103) On occasions he even had dealings
with the bishop in Djakovo and gave that bishop lands for his church.
No Slavic source connects Tvrtko with the Bosnian Church. None of
his charters (excluding the suspect 1370 Rajkovii charter)(104) was
witnessed by its clerics. Even Pope Gregory's letrer of August 1377.
which accuses Tvnko of protecting heretics, clearly depicts the tran as a
IJosnia from ca. 1315 to 1391 20I
Catholic, attending Cathcllic services and fearful of the consequences
when the Franciscans refused to perform mass before him. Thus Tvrtko
isshown to be both a practicing Catholic and a tolerant ruler, unwilling
1rrdictate on the religious beliefs of his subjects and seeking to maintain
cordial relations with mentbers of all faiths. There is no evidence that
J"vrtko took any action against the Bosnian Church; and the Batalo
hirrarchy list -- to be discussed in Chapter V -- will show that the djeds
rucceeded one another in unbroken succession throughout his reign. In
rddition, since the Bosnian Church will appear in so many sources in
the beginning of the fifteenth century, clearly in a position of some
in{lucnce, it is probable that it had maintained its position in society
under its own hierarchy throughout Tvrtko's reign.
None of the Bosnian nobles apPears in any source from Tvrtko's reign
rith llosnian Church connections. f{owever, as we shall see in Chapter
V, certain nobles prorninent in the last decade of Tvrtko's reign will be
lound in the beg,inning of the fifteenth century to have such a con-
nrction. Presumably, some of them were already members of the
Sosnian Church in Tvrtko's lifetime.
}IOO'|NOI-ES 1-O CFIAP-['ER IV
l. After Mladen SubiC was killed by "Bosnian heretics" (see Chapter III), his
*lder brother Pavle assunred the title of "Lord of all Bosnia"; then sometime
lxlore 1308 Pavle assigned flosnia to his son Mladen II who began to be called
Siln o{ Bosnia. Pavle died in l3l2 and Mladen became the head of the Subi6
funilv. {For the historv of the Subidi, see V. KlzLi(, Bribirski hnezoui od
ptr*'ro) {uhila tto gorline 1347, Zagreb, 1897.) Klaid believes that Kotroman
&rri heen force<i to'accept the posilion of vassal to the Subiii (ibid,, p.97).
Unkrrtunately the sources give no information about Kotroman.,in the first
dxlrjr of the fourteenth ..nrury. We do not know whether the 5ubi6i really
rtsunrd control of all Bosnra as their titles suggest; if they did not,,then
Krxroman may well have retained a part of Bosnia as his own state. If the Subifi
did rubdue all of Bosnia, then we m ust assume that either Kotroman did become
th*ir vassal, or else he was driven out of Bosnia across the Drina into Stefan
hrlLrtin's Mafva lands. We do not know when Kotroman died. After his death
ftbini reports (on the basis of an unknown source) that the leading barons of the
*rlm tose up against Kotroman's son and heir Stiepan Kotromani6, {orcing
hEn and his nrother to flee to f)ubrovnik. (That the two were in exile in
llr.rhrr:vnik is confirmed by a document found by V. CoroviC in the Dubrovnik
{*rhrvc, see his tlistorija Bosne, p. (r11.) According to Orbini (p, 311)
f,utomanidwas later a[.le to return to Bosnia as a result of the consent of all the
k*nr. Why the barons had opposecl him, and why they later agreed to his
ttturn and assumption of power, is unknown.
202 Medieval Bosnian Church
2. Orbini, p. J53 and K. Draganovid, "IzvjelCe apostolskog vizitatora Petra
Masarechiia o prilikama katoliEkih naroda u Bugarskoj, Srbiji, Srijemu,
Slavoniji i Bcisni g. 1623, 1624," Starine, 39, 1938, p. 44.
3. CD, VIII, p. 50t3.
Most scholars believe that Kotromani{ luas allowed to rcturn because he
1t.
consented to accept vassalage undcr the Subi6l il, as K-laif believes,
Kotromani6 foughi along sije the Hungarian king and thc Subidi against
Milutin of Serbia in 1319. wc have confirmation of this view. The 1J18 letter,
thcn, should be taken as an overlord's assistance to his vassal. 6irkovi6 (lstoija
.
; ,pp.84 88) agrees and believcs that Kotromanid remained a vassal under
SubiC protection frorn 1318 to 1322..- Thus he does not believe that
KotromaniC's return marked a decline in 5ubi6 authority during these years. In
lJ22 civil war broke out between Pavle II Subid and Mladen II; KoiromaniC
sided with Pavle who defeated Mladen. Mladen was then taken-prisoner by the
King of I-lungary. This civil war initiated a rapid decline for the Subi6i, who lost
wharcver dominance they had had over Bosnia. Most scholars agree that
Kotromanid's rise to independence and a position of real authority followed the
events of 1322.
). Orbini, pp. )53 t4. See discussion on Orbini's sources in Chapter II.
Orbini describes Bobali's role in converting the ban, and since he (or Pietro
Livio) mentions seeing privileges granted to Bobali by the ban in the Bobali
archive in Dubrovnik, Orbini's account and dating of the ban's conversion
probably should be accepted.
(t. Itineraria Slmonis Simeonis et Willelmi de WorceslrelEd. by J. Nasmith),
Cambridge, 1778, p. 13.
7. CD, VIll, p. 473; see also, Monumenta Vaticana, Histoiam Regni
Ilungariae illustr. ser.I, Vol. I (Rationes collectorum Pontificorum in Hungaria
(128i 1375)), Budapest, 1887, p. 37.
8. CD, VIII, p. )08.
9. CD, VIII, pp. ,3t-36.
10. For similar neglect in eighteenth-century non-heretical Montenegro, see
Chapter I, note 22.
L1. Monu.menta Ragusina;Libri reformationum, I, MSHSM, lO, Zagreb,
1879, p. li5.
12. L. Thalloczy, "Istraiivanja o postanku bosanske banovine sa naroiitim
obzirom na povelje k6rmendskog arhiva," GZMS, XVIII, 1906, pp. 404 05.
13. "To renrain Bosnian," of course, means that the local lords acceptcd the
Ilosnian ban as their overlord. Presumably through most of the following pcriod
they continued to manage their own affairs as they had previously done. Also, in
the course of the followinB century on occasions certain parts of this annexed
territory were to be lost to Bosnia for brief periods of time: e.g., Zavrlie and the
Krajina in 1317 when Tvrtko had to yield them to the King of Hungary as part
of his cousin's dowry; both regions were recovered by Tvrtko after thirty years'
14. CD, XI, pp. 160 62.
l). V. Trpkovi6, "Kad je Stjepan II Kotromani6 prvi put prodro u Hum,"
lstoriski glasnik, 1-2, 1960, pp. 151-54. See also his, "Branivojevi6i,"
I.ttoriski glasnik,3"zt, 19(r0, pp.5t-84. Hum is the wesrern part of what is now
Hercegovina. (See V, Trpkovii "Humska Zemlia," Zbornik Fitozo/shoX
-Her.
fakulteta (Beograd), Vlll, 1964, pp. 2T-2)9). The easrern parts of
Bosnia from ca. l3l5 to I39I 203
ctgovina including the regions of the Drina and Lim Rivers as well as Gacko and
rhe land borderingon Zeia remained under the Serbian state which still reached
rll the way to the sea in southern Dalmatia. These lands wefe to be annexed by
Br.rsnia only under Tvrtko.
16. The population of Ston and environs was evidently chiefly,orthodox. In
february 1344 Popc Clement VI describes the difficulties of Marinus, the
C*holic Bishop oi Ston, who had been prevented {rom preaching and ad-
ministering thssacraments by the local populace who were Rascian schismatics
of heretics.
{gismateRassiencium, i.e., ScrbianOrthodox);nomentionismade
ilishop Marinus was forccd to leave Ston. (CD, XI, pp' 118 19) Dubrovnik
*hortly thereafter scnt in the Franciscans who, after much labor, won the
ppulace over to Catholicism.
' il. f-. Thalloczy, "Istr#ivania . . .," GZMS, XVIII, 190(r' Texts of these
6rst six charters are given, pp. 403-08.
18. Ihid., pp. 404'05. manaiC, Bogomilska crkua ' '' pp' 214 216, 2I9
bdievcs that^ii is significant that the gost referred to in this charter is called
"veliki gost" (greaigost), and suggests that "great gost" was a rank.higher
rhrn gosi. Ho*euer tiis seems indefensible since our charter also says "veliki
tlir:d': and thus we would have to have a "great djed" as a higher rank than the
did. 'l'he term "veliki " (great) used here simply is intended to exalt the bishops
6ring referred to, and to ihow them added respect, in the same way that it is
culromary to refer to the great ban or great king, ctc. To say "great ban'' does
ntrt increase the ban's aciual status. Wh"n , medieval Bosnian wanted to dif-
krtntiate between the degree of status between two bans (e.g., under Tvrtko I
tti5i 9l), when his younger brother vuk also received the title ban), the terms
i':rni,.,r" and
"iunior" were used. However, though the terms salior and
lunior.rppeared in the in connection with
secular world, we never find them
lluinian Church offi ces.
19. On Bogomil views about the Trinity see, A. )aillant, "Un Apocryphe
ptrrdi-Bogomile: La Vision d'lsaie," Reuue des Etudes Slaues, XLII (l 4)'
lXr],p. ll9, and particularly H-C Puech's commentary in H'C Puech and A'
Vritlarit, l.e;froiri contre lei Bogomiles de Cosmas le pr?tre (lravaux publi'es
;ur l'lnstitut d'Etudes Slavcs, XXI), Paris' 194),
pp' 178-81
)(1. solovjev tries to connect this phrase with Manichee concepts of re-
lnrnrnation. ("Saint Gr6goire, Patron de Bosnie, " Bitzantion, XIX, 1949, pp'
i?1 7!t.)',Ihis view cannot be accepted because, regardless of what doctrine the
$rrrnr,rn church might have hcld, Ban stjepan was no Manichee. The wording
r$flcirs in three of these 1322'2) charters, one of which was not witnessed by
lhu So,tniru Church. J'hen in 1331 we find the wording "I am Ban Stjepan and
*En ialk:d the slave of St. Gregory." It seems likely that the earlier phrase was
mtended ro convey this meaning as well. Probably st. Gregory was Ban St-
rorrr'r Patron Saint, and hence his -rlaua sainl, although Professor Milenko
lrl,n,ui.{,rrsucs that at this timc rht, slut,aas we know it did not cxist in Bosnia.
i":i *,r'i" o'.lavi, .luibi ili krsnonr imenu, " Zbornik (r1
za dru{tuene nauke
Vol. XXXVIII, Novi Sad, 1964, pp. 61). He that the
itlrrica srpska) .notes
att,Jrr:val documents do not use the term slauabrtt "krsno ime " (a term that
intt rlearly was synonymous with slaua)an<l argues that krtno ime also referred
ts rhe church name one received at baptism. He sugg('sts that this traptismal
arrne is what was rneant by krsno imein medieval Bosnia. To support his view
k;r,ints our rhar a 1391 charter of the SankoviC brothers reveals the two
204 Medieval Bosnian Church
brcrthers swearing by their "kr'stnemi imeni" of Saint George and the Ar-
changcl Michael. (For this charter, see Miklosich, p. 219) Two brothers,
Filipovic'rightly points out, would never under regular circumstances, have had
two different slaur\s). The Sankovid brothers bore the popular names Beliak and
RadiX and lxrth were Orthodox. Clearly at baptism they had received church-
approved names. Thus Filipovi6's interpretation about them is surely correct.
I-lowever, Ban St jepan already had a church-approved name of Stiepan and did
not need to add ()regory, as Ban Ninoslav may well have needed to add Matel.
In addition. the term used in the Sankovid charter is "kr'stno ime" which
certainly is derived from the term for baptism. This does not mean that it must
be cquivalent to the term "krsno ime" {ound in other medieval documents, {or
cxample Gost Radin's will from l1t(i(r. And in fact I do not think the two terms
are synonyms. I think krsno ime does refer to the patron saint of one's slaua, as
it docs a {ew centuries later. That Saint Gregory was Ban Stjepan's krsno ime
(slat'u)is confirmed by the fact that his nephew and sucessor Tvrtko in a charter
of l3(r(r also called himself the slave of Saint Gregory (AB,pp.34-3r). Since it is
less likely that both men would have received the same baptismal name, it
suggests that St. Gregory was the ruling family's slaua. This would also explain
h<rw St. Gregory came to be the patron saint of Bosnia in 1461. (AR, p- 244).
f'hus we conclude that at least some Bosnians celebrated a family saint, the
slut,u, and alsr some, like the Sankovi{i, honored the saints, whose names they
received at baptism. In either case, be it a baptismal link or a slaualink with a
saint, Stjepan's expression about Saint Gregory probably refers to a saint in the
role of a protector.
21. Thalloczy, "lstraY.ivania ., " p. 1t0(r.
22. Ibid., p. 406.
23. bor discussion of these spells , see above Chapter I.
211.'[he plaque and its first inscription is discussed above in Chapter III.
21. P. AndjeliC, "Revizija litanja Kulinove plote,'' GZMS, 1) I6. l9(r0"
(rl. Inscription given p.299; see p. 305 for his dating. A photograph of the
plaque which shows the rude- form of the later writing and also the little figure of
, ,rr-on ..r, be founcl in S. iirkoviC, Istorija sredniouekoune bosanske Trlaue,
facing P. 119.
26. A. Benac, R,tdiml7a, Saraievo. 1950.
27.We have information about very few specific hiYas. These are listed below,
with reference to where each is discussed in this study. I also givc what in.
formation '*,e have about chr.rrches in the same villages.
a) Jlloltre, 1322 bpp.l74 76. There is a local tradition rhar prior to thr
arrival of the Turks a church existed at the location Svibama at Mottre. (M.
Filipovii, Visolhu nabija(SKA, SEZ vol. XLIII, Naselia i poreklo stanovniltva.
vol. XXV) f3cograd, 1928. p. 207.
b) Jan jiii 1401t p. 227 . The local inhabitants claim that an old church had
cxisted thcre at the site of a medieval grave yard (Bosanska aila,lX, 1894, p.
I0.'r).
c) l-jubskovo. 1412-16 pp. 25(r-57. We do not know exactlv wherc
Ljubskovo was so we cannot trace old traditions. However, there wcre various
churches in the izprof Osat in which Ljubskovo lay.
d) Ilradina. l4ltl p. 217. Here there exisrs a local tradition that a "Grcek'
church 1i.e., Orthodox) used to stand near.the medieval cemetery. Prof. And-
jelil could find no sigrrs of ruins (P. AndjeliS, "sredn jevjekouna kultna miesra u
iit
lli
to 205
Bosnia from ca. 1315 1391
l9l).
oholini Kon jica ," GZMS,n.s. XII (arh)' 1917' p.
e)Between Goraide and Borat, in the 1440's pp. 218-60. Unfortunately
rhererhis hiYa was located is not known; thus we cannot try to connect it with
rny local rraditions or ruins. In this general area though sevefal old churches did
eri$.
f) Zgunie pp. 261-62. We do not know that a hila existed here; however,
r{sce we have a mid fifteenth century cemetery with two stones referring to
$ornian Church clerics, it is quite likely that rhere was a hiY.a here. We do not
in
lno* of a medieval church L4,unie,
8)On theNeretva below Biogr aa|Aqgpp'311 .
371 . Andjelii has suggested that
th; hila lay on the Neretva a couple of kilometers above Konjic. In the vicinity
oi Knnlic there are numerous traditions as well as several medieval church ruins.
h) Ssonica, | 1t6(t, p. 366. Reference was made to a Gost Radin Seonitan' We
&r nor know whether SeoniEan re{ers to his birthplace or to a Possible hila under
hsn. Wehaveno other evidence to suggest that a hiYa existed in Smnica. Both
Cgholics and Moslems of present day Seonica have an active tradition that the
an earlier
F$€nr mosque there (in Seonilka donjoj mahali) sits on the site of
Surchl there is also a story that the former church's bells are buried under a
tnrner o{ the mosque. Since the mosque is built near a medieval cemetery, the
'"
rr.dition could well be true (P. Andteli6' "srednievjekovna kultna miesta ' '
CZ;tl"S. n.s. XII (arh), l9)7,
p. 190)'
r) Llskoplje, 1466, p. 369. A church of Saint John is referred-to here
n King Bela's charter of tZ/t/+ ( CD, IV, pp' 239-40)' This church was Catholic
{ thc tim e it was referred to does not mean , however, that it could not
; but this
in the fifteenth century.
h*c been a Bosnian church
i) Bricla, 1467, p. 372. At Biiela near Koniic there are numerous church
mrnr rnd rraditioni of churches: l) On the hill "Dieva" there is a locality
trltcd "crkvina" and a medieval cemetery; cemeteries often are contemporary
*uh churches (P. Andielid, "srednieviekovni gradovi u Neretvi," GZMS' n's'
f,ul (,rrh), l9)8, p. 189). 2) In Gornia Biiela at a medieval cemetery there are
*firt ruins which popular tradition claims were once a "Greek" (i'e', Or-
tborlox)churc.h (l;id.",p. 189) 3) On a rise at the location Pievteva glavica in
{iornia t}iiela at rhe present orthodox cemetefy (where there are also.some
anoLvrl itrlc) people believe there was once a church ' (lbid'' p' 189) 4) M'
Tqo rt'scribes somechurch ruins in Gornia Biiela which he dates thirteenth or
&rll1c*nrh century. It is not clear whether he is describi;rg one of the.above
r*rnrionedorafourthchurchhere(M. Vego,reviewof S.cirkovi6, Istorija. , ,,
* C?",llS, n.s. XX (arh.), 19(15, p.301).
t8. lrt Dinid, Iz dubroua\kog urhiua,lll, p. 216, no. 82'
19. Andwhen investigation of a tradition fails to unearth a foundation, it does
rrt nxessarily mean ttrat the tradition was incorfect. We know that wooden
dlgrher were not uncommon in Bosnia. From my reading and conversations
rrch xholars who have worked in the field, I have come to the conclusion that a
F!{rrl tradirion (e"g., there was a church in that place) iswith fairly reliable,
ib6lrhe specific pans of a specific tradition must be treated scepticism.
tbur..rhere was a church here built by Kulin," cannot be relied upon. Very
p*blblv rhere had been a church, but there is no reason to believe it had really
*u bu,1 by Kulin. Kulin as a result of limited schooling has entered the
pdrr idiom to signify "long ago."
$1. (D, tX. a. 234.
 206 Medieval Bosnian Church ljosn ia from ca. 13 I5 to 1 391 207

31. (D, IX, pp. 241 44. nunrhrr ofaclual Franciscans working in the vicariat had fallen well below sixty,
32" CD, IX, p. 32tt. l the pope called for thirty volunteers to meet the old quota, of which by 1380
43. LD, IX, pp 493-94. lhry had obtained twenty which would give us a total of about fifty Franciscans
rri
)rJ X, pp.,326
pp..326 27. Though called upon to participate,
parti it is unlikely *t,rhing in the vicariat.
, )uDrcr would have been interested in
tnc
!..?.,X,
:,.? that
this crusade since thev
hey seem t.-to havt'
havt )J lt is possiblc rhat sonrc of thesc Bosnian Franciscans, dcspite regulatio's,
long since patched up their relations with Kotr,omanid. In fact'nr"
irl"prn,, l*rsd outside of nronastt'ries. In thc l1+30's Jacob de Marchia, endeavoring to
brother Vladislav at this time (133g) married a Subii girt. In
^laui"",
crusade would have only served to acruance tt,.;nt.r"rir'or
i" frr". mhrce disciplinc anrong the Franciscans, expelled them from Jajce whert, thry
f"llid,rhis
)ubrar s most powerf ul rival, the Nelipac family.
tr,* h,rd bccn living in private homes (see below, Chapter V). Since we have n<l
tfrtdm<e of Franciscans living oLrtside of monasteries prior to that, we do not
J). L.ucius, Memorie de Trau, p.234 (A sevenreenth century history
based xrxLru whrther this breach in ciiscipline had begun shortly before Jacob's ap-
on .riginal documenrs some of which have by now disappearecl).
i r,r""".ir"a ,n*
passagc ftom, Potriest I|.osn_e i Llercegouine,Saraievo, iit+2,p.'Zei. ' '- fairrncc in Ilosnra or rvhethcr it dated back much fr.rrthcr.
11. "Dr: confornritate vitae Beati Francisci ad vitam Domini Iesu," written
\t,. (, I), X. pp /r9,t.95. br ha llarthok>nraeus of Pisa, vicar of Bosnia, published in Anarecta Fran-
{7. Cirk.rvrC. Is!,ttiju. , p. ll0.
crroaa, lV, 190(r, pp. 555 5(r. In acldition to thc four monasreries noted for
18. (;D, X, pp. 3U3 B(r. lf*rnia propcr, lJirrtholonracus lists scveral other monasteries near its borders
39. aD, X, pp. 661-70.
,10. L'D, X, pp. 469,70. {m trrritories mnre of which were held by the []osnian ruler) at Imota, Glamo(
,(1. FermendYin. "Chronicon . . .," Starine,
ShI, Grt,hcn iKrupa on thc Vrbas), ModriCa, Vrbica, Bileljina, Srebrnica, and
tt2. LD, X, pp. 52t 29.
22, 1g90, pp. 6 7. ItrIvr. lo keep thc Bosnian bishop company a monastery also existed at the
u*n o{ his seat in Djakovo. since the Franciscans had not been in Bosnia prior
43. (D, X, p. 525. in 1J10, except possibly on brief visits by the rwo in the 1290's and Fabian in
44. (D, X, p. 526. shr lJ20's, it is clear that these for,rr Bosnian monasteries were all erected after
Orbini, p. 353. Orbini erroneously dates the mission I3l+9 instead l i10.
^41. p.3)2.
l3-39
ol
on Possibly orbini's statement about the ban's motives is drawn t. (./-),
lrom something he found in the Bobali archive. see discussion
tr Xl, pp. 137 119. A nrisprint in the book has the letter datcd 13113
on orbini,s mur,rtl ol I l1t,i.
-s0urccs above in Chapter II. It. jcvalka 'Dubia'
1r(r. Chronica XXIV Generalium ^J. lirlat< ,' 'Fran iz- g. I 37 21 3 kao rzvcsr z-a povijest
ordinis Minorum. Anarecta Franciscom, hrmr:," lrtorijrki Ytsopis, V, i9t4 5t, p. 215.
III' 1897,.p .129. The same text given in the Bosnian ."-prr.,i.".'8.'l-.r" 16. d /i, pp 28-29,
rnend2rn. "Chronicon . . .," Starine, XXII, 1890, p. 7.
/tT orbini, p 313. For texr of the Bobali story, ancr 1?. l..iubid, Liyine, iII, p. 107.
a discussion o{ thir tri, Orbini, p. 3t4
tradition, see above in Chapter Il.
48. Analecta f;runciscana, III, 1S97, p. 129: Fermendi-in, Starine, XXil, 19, fol, Vego, Naselia bosunshe srednieu,jekot,oe drl,aue, Sarajevo, 1957, p.
lll90, p.7. !Jtr lli: cites an unpuhlished document frorr the [)ubrovnik archive (Minus
49. (D, XI, p. 138. {inrrliunr, 2t. Vl, ll67).
5t). Thciner . All l, ll. pp I l7 I lS. ti{i
l(eg1,,r',,n,,1.{ hnd hn,l a son lrut wc do not know whcther he survived
5.1. G. cremo(nik, "ostaci arhiva bosanske franjeva[ke vikariie,' ' Sotr*rnranrcl; even though Kotronianil's brother Vladislav was alive at the timc
(NDBH), III, sarajevo, l9)), p. r9, cites rwo notations wri*enln Radod, *#Kttronianii's death it was l-vnko rather than Vladislav who succeecled. (See
the llTl i{ Dinrc, DrYauni subor srednfeasft,':7,7yat I}o-rne, Beorgrad, i915, p- 24.) lNhy
papal bull cited ahrve in nore )0 which set the figure
of (r0 as the *a*imum lkt ruicession wrnt thc way it did is unknown.
number of friars allowed to work in the vicariat.
vicarius predicte vicarie Bosn^e, "tEgo fr(ater) ri^r,r",or#."r. {rl (./), Xll, p. 270.
virtute presentis tuit" xx r*,.., ."..pi'un,*
annum istum s(citicet) MCCCLXXX -ex
." Berow t$is is written ;;ii urqu ttl (.[), XIl, pp. 13213.
Vm(1395) lr1 1.1.1, XII, p. (r70.
191g9simum credo quod tm (Tanturn C t l" tbid., pi,. u J.iies r {'l l'halkrczy, ,StuJien zur Geschicltte IJosniens,pp.337-14.
I178 bull which permits 30 Franciscan volunteers 1...

"triginta fratres vestri ordinis sponte venire volentesto

go to work in Bosnil
ex suis mediatis vel im.
mediatis superioribus licentia precipimus recipi.endi et dinam vicariacl
ducendi harum serie concedimus facultatem . . . ." J.5ia.t, .,o autentitnostii
g{e1ig jedne isprave bosanskog 'djeda' (142D,;, Slouo, b f O, f Sij, p
293, believes this means that in I 378 the quota had been raised from 60 to g6,
and that the 1380 noration shows that of the desired increase of 30, only ld,
werereceived, giving them a total of 80. while this is a reasonable ur*u.np,ioo, ,
it seems equally plausible that the quota had not ever been increased. but rtrt
fi1 'l'hr King of Hungary was later, in 1370. ro srarc that he had invaded
fti*nta to destrtiy the many heretics and Patarins thcre ( CD, XII, pp. 670 7 1).
kr'hahiy ncarer the truth than Louis' rationalization is the statement of onc of
{*,run"strrt(aries that I-guis had sent troops to Bgsnia to punish certain rebels
tir " J'vrtko and any []osniarr nobles who were trying to assert their in.
*ng'tt&nct). (Cited by I'cro jevid, Pouie.rt UIL . ., p. 300.i
t,h (,[), XIII, pp. l8 19. v
$? On thiswar, in addition ro rhe general histories, see, F. SiTil, "Studiie iz"
fipsdn$le historije," 6ZMS, XV, 1903, pp. 719-21 .
 208 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from ca. 1315 to 1391 209

68. Theiner, MH,lI, p. 9l; A. Tautu (ed.), Acta Ilrbani V , pp. 299' 19,18, arguesthat for one to be crowned in an Orthodox church it is necessary
300. defend Orthodoxy'
C9: XIV, pp. 219-20; A. Tautu (ed.), Acta Urbani V. , ., pp. 2gj
69; 2g4.
rhlone be Orthodox
- for the king-to-be must promise to
Thus he concludr:s that Tvrtko. to have been crowned at MileYevo, had to be
^Perojevi{ believes this information is all tendentious and based upon
the letters Onhodrx. Since'fvrtko's past and {uture associations and activities do not make
the pope was rhen receiving from Vuk who was hoping to excitC the pope into bxn irppcar Orthoclox, t" .on.,ot accept Radoi[id's categorical assertion. In
intervening on his behalf (Pguiest BH, p. 306). ttgly. we may suggest the following possibilities: a) The particular metropolitan
70. On Nikola AltomanoviC, see M. Dinic, O Niholi Altomanouilu, Beograd lho crowned Tvrtko did not know this rule, did not care about it, or felt that the
(sKA), 1932. rdrmrages to be gained by crowning him were more important than the letter of
7r. AB, p. 38. *rc lrw; b) Tvrtko, having become rulcr of MileXevo and its environs, possibly
^
7
?.O* th-efamily of
^Sanko,
see J. Mijutkovii, ..Humska vlasteoska porodicr hrrcd the metropolitan to crown him by threatening the Orthodox Church
Sankoviii." Istorijshi tasopis, XI, I960, Beograd, 196l, pp. 17 -54. rhrre or the metropolitan's own person ; c) possibly Tvrtko promised to (or even
__73:M. Vego, "Nadgrobni spomenici porodice SankoviCi u selu Biskupu kod qtdtrnent the rites to) convcrt to Orthodoxy but never fulfilled his promise' In
Konjica," GZMS, X, 19tt, pp.l57-6), andXII, 1957,pp.t27-39. st! rase, we suspect that Tvrtko, despite being a Catholic, must have at least
74. M. Yego, Zbornih srednjeujekounih natpisa B i H, Vol. II, Saraieve, *lrn an oath to defend the Onhodox Church, its possessions and its adherents
1964, pp. 48 49. t hrr lands; most probably such an oath would have been sufficient to satisfy the
7). Into the 1360's, as noted above, part of what is now Hercegovina was e{topolitan.
serbian; after Du{an's death most of this Serbian rand, the territoiy from the ?ll A. Tautu (ed.), Acta Gregorii XL . ,,pp.336'378.
upper Drina, running southwest along the border of Zeta, including Gacko, on ?1) A.Jautu, op. cit,,pp.64 69, AB,pp.38-40.
through rrebinle to the Adriatic south of Dubrovnik was held bylhe serbian flt) r\.'l'autu, of. cit.,pp. 106 07; CD,XIV, p.494.
nobleman Voislav Voinovii, who was called by the Ragusans the C'ount of Hurn Itl The complete text of this long papal letter is found in D. Kniewald,
(comes chelmi). voislav died in 1363 and was iucceded by his widow, "Vlerodostojnost ...," Rad,270,1949,pp. 156 63; also in Tautu, op. cit.,
Goislava, who seems to have maintained cordial relations with rvrtko, allowing pp. 7t 77.
him to pass through her lands to Dubrovnik in 1367. Voislav also Ieft a brotha 8: lhi.l., p. l)7.
Altoman who died in
1367 leaving his lands which were in the vicinity of E\ Ihid ,p. 157.
Rudnik to his son Nikola AltomanoviC. Nikola soon declared war on his aunt, 8l lhid ,p. 119.
made himself ma$er of territory all the way to the sea and became involved in r 8\ Ihil , p. 117.
war with Dubrovnik. Tremendously ambitious, Nikola had made himself en- t|lt lbid., p. 1 18.
tirely independent in his own territory and prior to Tsar uro"-s' death he wrr *i lhid., pp. 1(r0-(rl
already minting his own coins at Rudnik. ln l37L King Vuka5in , Knez Laut fli /lirl., p. 162.
and the Bal'si6 of Zeta, with Tvrtko's blessing, had formed an alliance againn SV i\'1. A.'Chaumette-cles-Foss6s, Volage en Bosnie dans les ann/es 1807 et
Nikola. Before the allies could go into action, though, the Turkish danger led llrt,r, Paris, l8ltr. p. 71.
Vukaiin to march against the Ottomans; the disastir on the Marica, intwhich $tl l\{onumenta conciliorum Generalium XV, Concilium Basileense, II,
Vukalin was killed, followed. Two months later Tsar [Jro's was dead. Thc tmna, 1873, Joannis de Segovia, Historia gestoram Generalis Slnodi
Serbian lands were up for grabs between Nikola (who had obtained more land iLrrlrars(ed. E. Birk) lib. ix, Chap. ), p.7t0. This source is also discussed in
after the Marica battle)_, ,Lazar, the Baltiii and Tvrtko. Briefly Nikola allied {lrritcrs Il and V.
himsetf with Diuraj Bal(id; Tvrtko andLazar also formedan alliance. According 9l Kniewald, "Vjerodostojnost . .," Rad,270,1949, pp.144'16.
to Orbini, Nikola then tried to poison Lazar; as a result Lazar and Tvrtko ioind $J. A. 'fautu, op. cit., pp. 211) 15.
together in a campaign against him. Nikola fled to his town of UYice in Serbir. qt lhid, pp. 184-81.
where in l)73he was captured and blinded; he then disappears from the pagct gl lhid., p. /trc).
of history. FIis lands were divided between Tvrtko and Lazar, with Tvnko 91 tB, p. 49.
receiving the western portion including the upper Drina and Lim regions (witb ftr. l\lonumenta Vaticana Hungariae I ser. Vol. 3, Budapest, 1888; Bulhe
Mile5evo and Prijeplje) as well as Gacko, and Lazar obtaining the easrero &rrprr IX (1389'96), pp. 178-79.
rerritory. The Balliii briefly obtained Trebinje and Konavli, but this territory 9l On the texts of these Italian sources, and why I believe we cannot use
was soon acquired by Tvrtko. On the above see, M. Dini/, O NiAoll $nr tontents to demonstrate specific beliefs existing in Bosnia, see the
Altomanouitu, Beograd, 1932. *xurlon in Chapter II.
76. For this new interpretation, which I am convinced is correct, of the drtr 9i{ Amati, "Processus . . .," Archiaio Storico ltaliano,l8(r5, ser. III, Vol.
and circumstances of the building of this church, see the excellent article by z. $" pr I, p. ti.
K-ajmakovii. "Zivopis u Dobrunu," Starinar,l3-14 n.s. (1962-63), pp. ilt" 99. lt is possibly the arrival of such a heresiarch and some of his followers that
60. &r pof,t was re{erring to in June l)2J in the puz-zling letters that referred to
77. N. Radoilid, Obred krunisanja bosanskoga hralja Turtka I, Beogrrd. *arry heraics from many and various regions coming to Bosnia (see note 3l ftrr
 2LO Medieval Bosnian Church
thischapter). I am certain the pope exaggerated the numbers involved but it is
possible that he was then concerned about the flight of some leading ltalian
hcretics to (or near to) Bosnia. Possibly, if they really came, these heretics and
their successors remaincd in exile in the Balkans for the next 110 years and
nraintained contact with their followers back in Italy.
100. Amati, p. t3.
l0l. Amati, pp. )0 51.
102. Miklosich, pp. 1B(r 90.
103. we fi-nd references to "Presbyterus Ratcho" as Tvrtko's protouestijtr
in 1381. V. 6orouiC, Kralj 'furth.o I koro.orit, B"og.ud, l92 ,,'pp.l02 01,
gives.thc text of a docur'ent in which Ratko collects the mogorii tribute for
Tvrtko. (Novenrl:er l381) 1'wo Ragusan council records also refer to Ratko
(July and September 1381), see M. Dini6 @d.), Otlluke- ue/a Dubroua/le
rcpublihe,l, Beograd, 1911, pp. l49,16l . According to iorovic., op. cit.,p.
42, Ratko began as a court chaplain for Tvrtko (found as such in 1371) and
bccamc pro touesr ijur in I 37u. could he have been one of the secular priests who
strved mass frrr Tvnko in 1377 after the Franciscans withdrew in proiestZ Ratko
was later to bec'ome Ilishop of rrebinje. Thus the catholic.hierarchrcal
atrthorities, by making him a bishop, showed that they found nothing wicked in
his l.ng association with rvrtko. Resides Ratko, wc find a Ragu.san named
Mihail writing Latin charters for Tvrtko n r390: he was larer to'i.,e chosen as
Bishop crf Knin icorovic, op. cit.,p.92).ln addition a priest named Marin, who
had servcd Dubrovnik as an envoy to the Bosnian .ouit in 1380, had rendered
sufficiently valuable services to Tvrtko to be awardecl land in the village o{
U-skoplje in Konavli by him. Marin later in r 39J became Archbishop of Bar
ion
Marin see, M. Dinid. "Dubrov[ani kao feudalci u srbiji iBosni," Isrorrjili
f usopis, IX X, 19t9, p. 1zr0).
104. On this charter, see rhe discussion in Appendix A of Chapter II.
CHAPTIlR V
BOsNrA IiROM 1191't'O 1441
L (.burac-tcr o/'tbc IJosnian State, 1391 1443
l'vrtko dicd in l39l ancl rvas succeedcd by an ohscure figure,
qomchou'relatecl to him, narnecl Stcfan DabiYa.(l) Professors M. Dinid
lnd S. CirkclviC argue that this tirnc the []osnian state not only did not
trll apart [rut in fact rernainc<l unitccl sinc:e by thcn a fceling for a Bosnian
mrity had conrc into bcing.'l-his unity, thcy argue, is illustrated by the
m*itution of a statc council (.rabor)of nobles,(2) which had its greatest
ffillucncc in thc last decade of the lburteenth and in the first two decades
qrl the fiftecnth century. 6irtovii stresses the council's role in choosing
lings and in deciding on important matters of internal and foreign
pnlicy, and hc concluclcs, "But above all, the sabor did not lose its
{hrracter as a unified bodv which represented thc Bosnian state as a
shole." ['le then goes on to dcscribe thc crown of Bosnia as a symbol of
tlut r.rnity and states that, although thc nobles might makc war against
l}t king, they remained true to the crown and to the entity it
rupresented.( 3 )
I h.n'c previously expressecl my doubts about the acceptability of such
* vrcw ol Bosnian rcality.(zr) I hclicvc that thc sabor reflects nclt unity
brt the ueakncss of thc r.'cntral state; thus the king, too weak to assert
hrs authority, had no othcr t hoice but to summon the leading nobles to a
nfi.'tin,i to ohtain lheir lgrt,t.ment ()n important qucstions, and by rhis
tnrrn5 guarantee that a particular course of action was acceptable to
tlrnr and would not cause a revolt. The king also could not enforce a
*rcrrion unless he had aid in e nforcing it {rom at least one or two of these
pcwrr{ul noblcs. The .rahorwas not a regular institution, and there is ncr
rtrdt'nce that it had regular mcrhbership. However, when a major
Src{ion needing resolution did arise (and many such questions arose
&ring thcse thirty years) the king summoned those men who had the
!ral{ in{luence ancl power in the state to discrrss it.
'l'hus it is not strange that at most of thc meetings the samc figures
*cre in attendance'. DiniC speaks of the nobles acquiring the "right" to
dn't and dethrone the king.(5) l{owever, this was not a matter of
 212 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1391 to L443 213

''rights' ' in a juridicar sense , but of the de compilation of Serbian Orthodox Church anathemas, which seem to
facto balance of power. If two
or three of the most powerful nobles ugr."i to cooperate in hrve been composed in the last quarter of the fourteenth century, and
removing a
king, they had the power to overthrow him. If ever there was tno entries found in Bosnian Gospel manuscripts, one written in L)93
a state
where "rights" and "contracts" counted for little and raw srd the other in 1404.(8)
power and
actual strength counted for everything, it was medieval The compilation of anathemas against heretics and heresies con-
Bosnia, and
particularly Bosnia in the period after Tvrtko's death. The &mned at church councils over the preceding centuries survive in three
nobles, when
they felt it was in their interests to do so, courd and did work dightly different manuscript copies of the sinodik to be read in the
together.
Yet each was out for himself, and anything he did that might &thodox Church for the Week of Orthodoxy. Having translated the
,!".n ,o
have been in the interests of the Bosnian siate was purely tcrts into Slavic from the Greek, the Serbs then reworked the material to
coincidental.
Thus' on 'fvrtko's death the state did not go to pieces because certain rome extent and added to the original texts. Dating the texts is a
powerful nobles felt it was in their interests to cooperate. complicated matter since names to be anathematized were often added in
Thus the
"state" remained but its unity and strength wereillusory, for it was not tlE course of an otherwise unimportant recopying, so that a thirteenth
the king's (or any other central apparatus') authority that held {entury text may appear in its original form in a fourteenth or fifteenth-
the
separate counties together. And if instead of cooperating, cfitury copy, differing only in that it has added a handful of names to
several of the
nobles had decided to secede or withdraw their loyarty rrJm
th" king, the *n original. Here I concern myself only with dating the sections
king could not have prevented them from doing so. rchrring to Bosnian heretics, which, as the Iatest part of the sinodiks,
As Professor A. Babii_emphasizes, regionalism remained strong mable us to date the copying. From the names mentioned, we may
in
Bosnia throughout the Middre Ages, aiding the nobles' conclude that all three copies should be dated between I37 O-7400 . The
separatist it
aspirations and preventing the development of a feeling lr best editions of the texts have been published Uy Moiin.(9) He has also
for state unity or
a tradition of "Bosnia." The ban was the ruler ill
of t\te yupaof Bosnia li rritten a study of the texts, as has Solovjev.(10) My conclusions dif{er
(the central region), and at times through strength romewhat from theirs.
he was ,bl" to urr.r,
his authority over other regions. But each of these other ln the Troicki manuscript, we have four articles that damn the
region, ."oin.a
its own traditions, which always remained more important Brbuny, who falsely call themselves Christians, scorn the true faith,
than con-
cepts about a unified state. And each time there .egio.rs (Donji ute the words from the holy books and alter them to their false faith, are
kraji,
Hum , Sol, Usora) and their rulers had a chance to bieak
away from the ryostates from thechurch of right belief , and scorn saints, the cross and
central state they did so. The mountainous geography iruns, refusing to bow before them. They are anathematized as is anyone
aided roiarism and
local traditions' And the fact that there *"i. thr"" religious *ho accepts their teaching, reveres their teachers or gives shelter to any
confessions
instead of a single national religion, which could have served lnown babun. The term Babun here, following the usual Serbian usage,
the in-
terests of cohesion among the separate entities, contributed to merns Bogomil. T'hen follows a section of Eternal Memories to certain
separatism.(6) tmly figures, after which comes: "Cursed be Rastudije bosanski, and
For this period after Tvrtko's death in 1391we have f;rdomir, and Tolko, and Tvrdko and TvrdoX and all calling themselves
a much larger
number of sources, particularly from Dubrovnik but tntiani and krstjanice who do not worship the holy icons and the
also from
Hungary, which enable us to trace the careers of these bonored cross.''(11)
serf-seeking
nobles and their relations and connections with the The Zagreb text says: "Beliz'men'c, Rastudije, DraX,ilo, TvrdoY,
Bosnian church.(7)
we find little about the Bosnian church's rore as a religious hbrko, Radosim, Rastina gost, pop Drug, Tvr'dko, pop Braten,
body.
however, since this subject was not important to the foreigi HoteT, and all Bosnian and Hl'mscii (Hum) heretics be cursed." The
authors o{
these sources. i*lowing article lists more names: "Voihna, Prijezda, Nelep'c,
Sog'!ii, Boroje, Leplin and all believing in them and witnessing to
IL. Tbree Religious Sources; Tbe Serbian **m, be cursed." The document then brings in material from the
Anat.hemas, the Batalo Gospel, tbe fynod of 843, presents the anathema against the Babuny and then has
Gospel of Hual Krstjanin ,

sme more names ' 'Vl'Eko, Grubeta's father and his mother
From this period we have three important Hahslava, and Neradova, the grandmother of Gradislav be cursed. Ban
religious sources; thr
214 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1391 to 1441 215

Stefan, Protomara his "snaha" (sister-in-1aw or daughter,in-law) be mr:ss changed. Since we have references to rejection of the cross in
cursed. Prvoslav, BregoE, Stoglin, Voihna, Rastudije be cursed. 1103, 1319, andnow late in the fourteenth century, and since we shall
Vlahinja Voljavica be cursed. " find rrosses used in 111()4 and in a couple of other instances after that
The third manuscript, the DeEanski text published in lg64 but ,fute, we must conclude that if the Bosnian Church had had a generally
subsequently lost ha*s a shofter list than zagreb and a few variants. The *tepted tenet against crosses, this tcnet seems to have been dropped
variants are as follows: Rastima Gost (instead of Rastina), pop Tvrdo's Sout 1400.
(instead of iust Tvrdox), Stognix (for Stoglii), and Stogni! again later (for The anathemas have nothing dcictrinal against the Bosnians and do
Zagreb's Stoglin), and finally rhree new names: Vlah DoUiovojevi6 and xx speak of the llosnians in the same terms as they do the Babuny
the brothers Vlah and Belo5 Op'n'kovi6. q$ergomils). The Babuny are called false Christians who alter the faith
Ina1lcases,thearticlesabouttheBosniansareSeparatefromthe nnd change holy texts. Because the Bosnians are not accused of such
articles about the Babuny; thus, other than the common rejection of things, it is probable that they only cleviated from the Orthodox in
icclnsandCrosSeS'thereisnothingtoindicatethatthetwogroupswere rrrtain nratters of practicc. Pcrhaps political differences betwcen Bosnia
considered the same heresy by the Serbs. In addition, nothing in the text lnd Serbia made it expedienr ro damn rhe Bosnians as heretics.(12)
indicates that the Babuny had any connection with Bosnia. Both groups, ,i 1}r nrost important name on the anathemas since he appears first on
however, were damned as enemies of the Serbian Church. The Bosnians lh"l'roicki manuscript, and though second on the other two he is
calledthemselveskrstjanianddidnotworshipiconsorthecross.The tsmcd twice in both of them, is Rastudije bosanski. Since we have other
mention of krstjani (the name used by ordained members of the Bosnian ,
information about him in the 1390's, he becomes the key figure that
Church, as well as by the monks at Bilino polje in 1203), and the hils to clur dating the manuscripts to this period. And since the other
mention of Rastudije (whom we shall meet shortly in a Bosnian Church , nlsnes anathematized, exc:ept for possibly Radomir whorn we shall speak
document) both shclw that the Bosnians damned here were those d lrter (and the names discussed in note 12), are not orherwise
connected with the Bosnian church. Because the Serbian church : hrx;r*n,(13) let r,rs now turn to our second source and learn more about
anathematized them and called them heretics, it is clear that the S*rtudiie. Our seccind source is the entries writren in thc extaq; pages
Bosnian Church clid differ rcmewhat from the Orthodox Church. Snnr r (iospel manuscript which now is iound in thc Saltykov.sEedrin
'I'he only charges
leveled against the heretics were of an iconoclastic l&rarv in I-eningrad.(tzl) All that has survivcd of the Gospels them.
nature refusal to worship icons ancl the cross. These objects had been xivrs is the end of John (Chap. XXI, verscs 21 25). On thc verso of
noted as being absent in Bosnian churches back in 1203, and pope afut page is an inscription from an Orthodox monastery (of Skr'batno)
John
XXII had stated in 1319 that the cross was not respecre<i. Thus it is , *ritt(n in 1701 which shows that the Gospel was later utiliz.ed by an
l.rossible that in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries at least certain , tlrthodox church. On the second surviving page appears the following:
BosnianChurchmenhadcometorejectthem.Itisquitepossiblethat trtu rcttnd colurnn of twelve names, we shall show, is a list of Bosnian
during most of this period even the majority of Bosnian churchmen had ':, (hurrh dreds):
this attitucle about religious pictures and the cross, and the serbian l
\'' inre o(t')ca i s(i)na i
anathemas may well demonstrate this. 'l
qvc)tago d(ou)h'
However, these anathemas, composed probably in the last quarter of , i s(ve)tago d(ou)h'
the {ourteenth century, conflict with two almost contemporary .sourcesr r l. liremis' 1. C(rspodi)n' Rastud'e
we shall discuss shonly, both from r404.The Gospel manuscripr copied J. Ar-arie 2. Iladoc
by Krstjanin [Jval is beautifully illustrated, showing the i Kouk'let' J. Ratlovan'
Bosnian 4 lvan' 11. Radovarr'
church did not reject religious pictures. However, it is Jrossible that the 1. Godin' 5. Illapoc
Bosnian church did not ttorship icons. As for the cross; we have a letter ,
l). I rE(Tnrr' (r. Drago!'
written by Died Radomer. quite possibly the Radomir anathematiz-ecl in i 7l)id>drac' / . l'\)V( /,en
the Troicki rnanuscript, which begins with the sign of the cross. Thus , ti li , uJin ' fl. Racloslav'
we must suggcst that either there was no generally accepted opinion : I KraI' 9. Radoslav'
lrl Brati!' l(). Mrroslav'
about crosses within the church or else that the church's views on the ,,
I I lferudislav' I 1 . []olcslav'
216 Medieval Bosnian Church
12. Drago!' 12. Ratko
13. Dragi['
14. Loubin'
11. DraYeta
16. TomiY'
^,v
)e plsou predrecenle
redove ki sou se
narekli u red'
crkve prie g(osPodi)na
nalego Rastou-
die. Se pibu v'
ime o(t')ca i s(i)na
Translation: In the name of the Father, the Son, and Holy Ghost
followed by a list of sixteen names. I write these before mentioned
- {wer the span of nearly seventy years, and the time between Miroslav,
"redove" (in the plural, meaning rows, series, lists, orders) who are
named in the "red" (order) of the church before our lord Rastudije. I
write this in the name of the Father, the Son (then the writer moves over
to the top of column two), and Holy Ghost followed by a list of twelve
names.
- rnew order. Assuming our writer was accurate about the list of names,
The next page states: In the name of the Father and Son and Holy
Ghost. This book was made for Teptija Batalo by his dijak Stan'ko
Kromirijenin, having worked in silver and gold, to present to Starac
Radin, and the book was written in the days of King Dabi(a from the
birth of the Son of God in 1393, the second year after the death of King
Tvrtko. This book was made for Tep[ija Batalo, who was much
renowned, who held Tori[an and LaYva and with him was Gospojr
Resa, Vojvoda Vukac's daughter. And one of his brother-in-laws was
Vojvoda of Bosnia, and the-second was Knez of Bosnia and the third was
Ban of Croatia. And then Tep[iia Batalo held Sana, and wine was
brought to him from Kremen to ToriEan. And he was very good to good
people, and much praised by good krstjani and therefore God be
bountiful toward him forever, amen.(15)
A full discussion can be forrnd in my article on Rastudije.(16)
Rastudije alone is called"our lord" and since the expression is not often
found for deceased figures other than Jesus Christ, it is probable that
Ratudije was alive in 1393 when the list was compiled. At the bottom of
the page, but more or less under column one, it states that the before"
mentioned "redove" (plural; series, rows, orders, lists) lived before
Bosnia from l39I ro 1443 217
Rertudiie. The use of the plural shows that both columns of names were
lirs of predecessors of Rastudiie. Since it would make little sense to
mrke two lists of ancient church figures wi:hout bringing the list up to
thepresent (I393) and including the present leader, and since Rastudije
is the latest figure on either list, Rastudiie rnust have been alive, and as
*e shall see djed, in 1393. Since the two names of djeds that we already
Lnow from the fourteenth century (Radoslav from ca. 1325 and
Miroslav from 130)) appear on the second list it is clear that the second
lin is the list of djeds of the church. Since Miroslav, the earlier djed,
fppears below Radoslav it is clear that the list should be read from the
top down starting with Rastudije, the present died in 1393, back
rhrough numbers eight and nine Radoslav (and we recall the charter of
cr. l-121 which Djed Radoslav witnessed at the hiYa of Gost Radoslav.
Hence we can conclude that Gost Radoslav succeeded his namesake as
did, thus eight is the Gost Radoslav of 1325 and nine, the Djed
ftdoslav of that date) to number ten Miroslav. The seven names bet-
rrm Radoslav number nine and Rastudije are a reasonable number to
mof{iceca. 1305-07, and Radoslav who was in of{ice in 1325 is also
pcrhctly reasonable. Thus column two is a list of djeds from 1393 when
Rrstudiie was d jed which reaches back into the thirteenth century, with
Srtko either the earliest known name, or the first djed, or the founder of
ryr are able to leam the names of all the fourteenth century djeds and see
that the hierarchy existed through Tvrtko's reign even though we heard
rwhing about it then. It also suggests that the anathema articles were
&rwn up ca. 1390. They clearly could not have been written before
trutudiie came into prominence and we can assume that the reason
R*rudiie received particular emphasis in these anathemas was owing to
rhr frct that he was the leader of the Bosnian Church at the time the
f,irthema articles were composed. Thus Solovjev's theory that Rastudije
t*r the same individual as the goldsmith Aristodios (mentioned in the
bqinning of the thirteenth century by Thomas Archdeacon of Split)
rxtnot be accepted.(17)
On the other list (sixteen names) three of the names are the same as
tlvcr of the seven priors at Bilino polje in 1201 (numbers 13-15,
kai[, Loubin and DraYeta). And we must assume the list refers to
thrm for the coincidence would be too great to try to find another ex-
phnrtion. This confirms our theory that the Bosnian Church was a
fiiltinuation of the Catholic monastic order. The other names on the list
rt unknown unless Boudislav is meant to refer to the Bladosius, also
amtbned at Bilino polje. This first list does not provide the names of
f;ato's predecessors, for if it did we would expect Eremis or TomiY
2r8 Medieval Bosnian Church
(depending which way the other list would read) to appear as number
thirteen below Ratko. Wc also would expect to see Rastudiie's name
appearing on the upper left instead of heading column two. In addition,
if these three priors of the Bosnian monkish organization had become
bishops (presumably o{ a church that was still Catholic since the local
Cathcrlic hierarchy existed until 1233) we would also expect to see
among the sixteen names the names of the local Catholic bishops whom
Resti, Orbini, and others mention. l:k:wever, none of these narnes are
there. Thus we can conclude that the sixteen names were not earlier
bishops, but most likely were simply figures of importance in the
previous history of the Bosnian Church who had not achieved bishop's
rank, and about whom data or tradition existed in I393.
In the entries to the Batalo Gospel manuscript, we again see in-
vocations to the f'rinity. Except for Ivan, all the names mentioned are
popular names. This follows the tradition of the early thirteenth'century
Bosnian Catholic bishops and is not surprising. Batalo was clearly a
supporter of the Bosnian Church; he made a Gospel for one member and
the inscription states that he was good to good people and praised by the
krstjani. Presumably, he gave donations to these Bosnian Church
nronks.
We see that the church used at least the Gospel o{ John (elsewhere we
shall see that they used the whole New Testament), that they had
nothing against decorating the Gospels luxuriously with silver and gold,
and that they dated by thc birth of Christ. We cannot say whether there
was a theological reason to date this way or whether they .simply em-
plclyed the dating system used by the state (which we would expect the
dijak who copied the Clospel to do) which was borrowed from Dalmatia.
We shall return to this text when we discuss Batalo's position in the
state. Here, it is sufficient to point out that this source shows that the
church was supported by one very powerful nobleman.
Our third source is an entry in a beautifully illustrated Gospel
(manuscript now found in Bologna), known as rhe Gospel of Hval
Krstjanin. This is a complete New Testament, which shows that the
whole book was "canonical" for the Bosnian Church. In addition,
because it is illustrated and has a complimentary picture of John the
Baptist, it shows the Bosnian Church was not opposed to religious art
and was not opposed to John the Baptist. It also has a picture of Christ
on the Cross, showing Hval did not reject the cross. It contains the Ten
Comnrandnrents, the Psalms, and some old Testament songs. Thus the
Bosnian Church did not reject the Old Testarnent outright. This Gospel
in the margin of the text has "zatete" (beginning) and "kon'c" (end)
at the places where in Orthodox Church services the readings begin and
Bosnia from 1391 to 1441 2tg
that
mdduringthe courseoia year.(18) These marginal notations show
rhr Gospel was most probabiy subsequently used by an orthodox
Bosnian Church had an
church, unless we *^na,o argue that the
rdrntical service with identical readings throughout
the year to. the
were no significant
Onhodox Church. In either case, it shows that
there
and Orthodox Church New
dit{erences between the Bosnian Church
Testaments.
(hly the entry written on a leaf of this Gospel manuscript gives us
un, ,.rron to associate it with the Bosnian Church:
"Uram (a
tlungarian title nleaninS'my lord')(19) I{rvoie, Great
renowned
V,rivotla of Bosnia. In the name of the Father and Son and
t{oly Ghost'
Thlsbook was written bv the han<i of Hval Kr'stienin in
honor for the
glorious lord llrvoie, Ilcrceg of Split and Knez' of the Donji
kraii and
rnuny oth., lands." FIe asks the reader's forgiveness
for mistakes he
nr.v have matle in copying. "The writing was completed
in the year of
Chiist's hirth 11104 ln ihe clays of the Bishop and instructor and
'r'vr'Xyrela' (accomplisheci onc or bringer to per{ection) of the
&rsnian Church, thc lord Died Radomer"'(20)
I'his highly important cntry not only links this orthoclox-appearing
{r,.p.l ,rnurcripi with the Bosnian Church, but it also shows that the
prrurr{ul nobleman I'lrvoje Vuki-ii was a patron of that church' Later
we
*rsll fintl him called a Patari n, giving us evidence that 'Pertarin' ' meant
'
lfircnrber oi the Bosnian church. The entry shows that mcmbers of the
rhurch dated by christ's birth. lt also proves that Dfed does mean
$nhop of the l]clsnian Church ancl gives us the name of the man who
r*r Died in 11t()4, Raclomcr. We may speculate that this Radomer is the
r{nt 0s Radontir, refcrre<l to right after Rastudiie in the Troicki
ilrnuscript anathema.
III.' Politicul Euents 1391 1421 and Role
of llosnian Cburclt
Now we can turn to the chaotic political events. Upon Tvrtko's
{grh, his relative l)abiYa was accepted as king. The circumstances
iurrounding this choice are unknown. Klaii, noting Bclsnia's failure tcr
srirblish a law of succcssion by the eldest son. argues that in theory the
skl slavic sturelina sysrem. (i.e., succession for thc eldest male in the
hurily. o(tcn a br<lthcr or cousin of the clcceascd) was retainccl.(21)
H*wever. in fact, such a system left matters vague and the successicln in
Srpute. This permittecl thc grcat nobles, through thcir support of the
*elkest candidate or of thc candidate promising them the most, to
*quire in thcr vears mofc alrtonomy ancl lreater powcr for thernselves'
220 Medieval Bosnian Church
Thus the 1390's were marked by succession crises, weak rulers, and
ever increasing power to the great nobles.
We do not know to what faith Dabi3a belonged; we know only that a
charter he issued 6 March 1392 relers to "our hrnorable chaplain pop
Milac'."(22) This suggests that Dabiia kept this cleric regularly at
court, and most probably DabiIa and Milac' were of the same faith.
Though "pop" usually refers to an Orthodox priest, I believe that in
this case the term denotes a Catholic priest. At this period we shall also
meet a Catholic priest called pop Butko who copied a Gospel for Hrvoje
Vukt16.(23)
DabiSa presumably had as his direct holdings the central regions
around Visoko, Zenica and Sutjeska. Great power also belonged to a
handful of noble families.
Hrvoie VukEiS was lord of the Donji kraji. His lands extended from
this extensive region toward Dalmatia. As deputy for Ladislas of Naples,
Sigismund's rival for the throne of Hungary, Hrvoje was able in
Ladislas'name to extmd his own power into Dalmatia, and to become
lord of many of the Dalmatian towns. In addition, his holdings along the
Vrbas River would extend down into Bosnia at least as far as Jajce.(24)
Teptija Batalo, as we learn from the Gospel manuscript entry, held
La'sva and ToriEan (mid-way between Lalva and Travnik). Since his
mausoleum with a brief inscription was found at Turbe on the other side
of Travnik, we can assume that his lands extended at least that far.(21)
Thus Batalo controlled this great stretch of relatively fertile land along
the Laiva River. As the Gospel entry tells us, he married Resa, the
daughter of Vojvoda Vukac, and hence the sister of Hrvoje VukEid;
thus Batalo was allied with the most powerful nobleman of all.(26) He
probably acquired the iupa of Sana(mentioned in the inscription) from
Hrvoje's family as Resa's dowry.
Pavle Kle3i6's lands lay to the west of central Bosnia around Duvno
and GlamoE. We may suspect that, to maintain himself, he would have
had to become a protog€ of Hrvoje. To his east, of course, lay central
Bosnia the holding of the king. And then to the king's east lay the lands
of Raden Jablani( and his son Pavle Radenovi6 (from whom would be
descended the Pavlovidi).(27) They were the most powerful nobles in
eastern Bosnia: they held the region between the Bosna and Drina
Rivers with their center inthe \apaof BoraE with the fortresses of Borat
and PraEa. Their lands extended as far as Olovo, Srebrnica, Dobrun and
Ustikolina. Possibly they already at this time held Vrhbosna.
South of them in what is now Hercegovina (in the region of the upper
Drina, the Tara and Piva Rivers and in Hum) were the holdings of the
KosaEa family, then led by Vojvoda Vlatko Vukovii; his nephew
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 227
sandali Hranic succeeded him
in L392.ln 1396 Sandali rna$ied Hr-
ili" , ni".. Jelena. After Hrvoie's &ath ia 141'6, the KoeaEeb*arne
family in the land(28)
- most powerful
the ,
,ln ttru years that follow sources shovr.all these ifdmiliee hevlng:ties
Church'
'l the Bosnian
with
in ttt. 1390's, the chid political issue wes the wi&spreed civil war ln
Hungary between Ladislas of Naples' *nd Sigismuhd of
l'utembtrrg,
foug[t all over Croatia and Dalmatia drg well ,as in Bosnia,(29) After
iuiko'r death, Hrvoje became Ladislas' deputy in that region, until
1393, when Sigisrnund forced Hrvoie to submit to him. The following
year Sigismund got King Dabisa to recognize him not only as overload,
iut .t* as heir to the Bosnian throne. Whether Sigismund had
th,reatened Dabila with invasion, or whether Dabila, insecure among
his own nobles, sought an outside prop to his throne is unknown.'
Certainly, Dabila's decision to leave his throne to Sigismund would not
have been popular with the Bosnian nobility, who disliked all forms of
foreign interference.
In September 1395, King DabiYa died; Sigismund, probably hoping
to claim his inheritance, appeared in near-by Srern with troops' The
Bosnian nobles, unwilling to let him obtain the Bosnian throne, im-
mediately rallied, convoked a sabor, and elected Dabfia's widow Jelena
as queen. Sigismund, presumably lacking an army strong enough to face
the united forces of the Bosnian nobility, returned to Buda. But now
with Sigismund posing a thfeat to Bosnia, many of the Bosnian nobility,
including Hrvoie, returned to Ladislas' camp. In 1396 Sigismund was
crushingly defeated by the Turks at Nicopolis. Thus for several years his
military position was weakened and he was unable to meddle in Bosnian
affairs.
Queen Jelena, meanwhile, chosen to thwart Sigismund and, lacking
any real power base, was simply a puppet for the strong nobles, with
whom she consulted before she issued charters. She ruled until 1398
when she was ousted under uncertain circumstances and was replaced
by Ostoja, a member of the ruling family, not mentioned in the sources
prior to his accession. All the powerful nobles remained around Ostoja,
so we may assume that none of them had strongly opposed his election;
though why some or all of them had wanted it, we cannot say. Once in
power, Ostoia declared himself for Ladislas.
In these years we still do not find that Bosnian Church with any sort
of political role. The nobles, whom we shall later find connected with it,
were.enjoying good relations with their Catholic neighbors. Hrvoje
Vukfi6's Bosnian Church ties did not seem to trouble Ladislas of
Naples; nor did they trouble Sigismund whenever he and Hrvoje were at
222 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1391 ro 1443 223

peace.In 1393 Venice granted Venetian citizenship to Hrvoje and his Serbian sinodik would
have us believe his church did not accept. Split
brother Ban Vuk, both of whom swore on a Gospel.(30) In 1399 ,.i"*a to accept Hrvoje and declared-its lo.yalty to Sigismund, and
Dubrovnik granted citizenship to Hrvoie. In 1396 Venice granted ,ii*t"a Hrvoie's town of OmiY. Dubrovnik, though also loyal to
Hrvoje and to maintain these
Venetian citiz.enship to Sandalj , whose ambassador on the occasion was Sigirruna, had had good relations with
Theodore Archdeacon of Scutari.(31) These two Catholic coastal cities to the besieged in Omil. Hrvoie's brother-in-law,
l.'nt gr"in shipments
thus overlooked the ties between these men and the Bosnian Church, (Hrvoie had married his sister Jelena) then moved in on
iurnii N"tiptiC,
and the Catholic cleric was willing to act as ambassador for Sandal j' who Klis near Split. We might point out that Ivanii
i"irfi "f Hi"oie and took
Catholic (as was
is elsewhere found giving a village in his part of Konavli to a local powerful Croatian nobleman, was clearly
NJiptit, a
(probably Orthodox) priest called pop Ratko. Thus Sandalj had cordial je's wife)(36) but had given his sister to Hrvoie and aided
iiu ,i*"t,Hiuo
By the
relations with both Catholics and Orthodox. Hruol"', Dalmatian adventures. Split gave up its resistance-'
In 1400 both Hrvoje and Ostoja complained to Dubrovnik about the of l4oi Hrvoje was in power in Split and clearly had good
,utt.t
saleof "human flesh" (that is, slaves) in Dubrovnik. Since in theory, relations with the Archbishop of Split'
slaves sold in Dubrovnik could not be Catholics, it is probable that many A secretary of Ladislas announced to the city council of Florence in
(Hrvoje), Great Prince
o{ the Bosnians captured as slaves and sold in Dubrovnik were adherents lr'Jy 1402, "The Voivoda of Bosnia Chervoya
of the Bosnian Church (or at least passed off as such). Frequently; the .t.. .ul"r Dalmatia and all parts of Slavonia and is loyal to Lord Ladislas'
records of a slave-sale transaction specifically stated the slave sold was a The man is a Patarin but the order is given that the Lord cardinal
' 'Patarin.' '(32) This usage of the term Patarin in regard to slaves is one (Angelus) confirm him with chrism (the consecrated oil) and bring him
of the few cases where Dubrovnik used the term Patarin for followers of uu.k to the light of the true faith. And he seems to be agreeing to it, in
the Bosnian Church who were not ordained clerics. the hope that the lord king may make him marquis in the regions of
In 1401 Ostoia sent envoys to l)ubrovnik to announce the birth of a Bosnia as his friend and neighbor and my father and friend the Lord
son and to invite Dubrovnik for the baptism. Dubrovnik sent an em- Archbishop of Split tells me."(37)
bassy with expensive gifts.(33) Resti gives no further details. Un- Since an order was given to have Hrvoie confirmed with oil, it is quite
fortunately we do not know his source. No record of this embassy can possible that he had, at some previous time, been baptiz-ed' This
now be found in the Dubrovnik archive.(31r) As we shall see later, the possibility is not at all unlikely when we recall that Hrvoie came from
sum total of material about Ostoja's relations with the different con- the Donii kraii, the territory between catholic croatia, catholic
fessions leads one to believe he adhered to the Bosnian Church. Thus Dalmatia and Bosnia. In addition, his mother may well have been
this brief notice provided Resti had a reliable source suggests that Catholic we do not know who his rnother was but the Hrvatinidi
- - -
frequently married into catholic croatian families -' in which case we
this Church had a rite of baptism which Dubrovnik, by sending
representatives, found in no way heretical or offensive. Moreover, if it would expect her to have baptized her son. However, we cannot be sure
had been a peculiar ceremony, very different from the Catholic, we Hrvoje was baptized from this; such fine distinctions often are not
would have expected the Ragusan records to use some term other thao relevant to Bosnia. In Hercegovina in the first centuries of Turkish rule
baptism to describe it. However, it is not impossible that Ostoia, despite we find both catholics and orthodox re-baptizing converts from the
his cordial relations with the Bosnian Church, gave his son a Catholic other confession, which of course is against canons. It is clear that
baptism. Hrvoie did not make the plunge to Catholicism since in 1413, as we
In 1401 Hrvoje and Ostoja moved to the offensive on behalf of shall see, he wrote the Queen of Hungary expressing his desire to
Ladislas against Sigismund, and began to march into Dalmatia to become a Catholic.(38)
demand that towns there accept Ladislas'overlordship instead of ln a letter of 1402, King Sigismund also referred to Hrvoje as a
Sigismund's. In 1401 Zadar acceptedHrvoje and Hrvoje signed a treaty Patarin, when he spoke of his fortress of Knin being endangered by the
to respect Zadar's rights. Hrvoje swore by the cross and the relics of a Patarin Hrvoie and his cohorts.(39) The usage of "Patarin" for a non-
saint.(35) ordained individual was unusual. We shall, however, from time to time
Thus this man who would be called a "Patarin" had no objection to come across the term used for prominent nobles connected with the
swearing by these two items, which both Catholic sources and the Bosnian church. we have also noted it being used in connection with
 224 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia fiom 1391 to 1443 225

slaves sold in Dubrovnik.

Hrvoje diplomatically did maintain good relations with both religions.
He was a friend of the catholic Archbishop of split and was presented
with a proper Catholic Gosepl manuscript, which has survived and
which has an inscription showing it to have been made for Hrvoje ac-
cording to Roman law by a pop Butko.(40) At the same time in 1404,
he was also presented with the Gospel manuscript from the Bosnian
churchman Hval Krstjanin. As Thalloczy points out, for political
reasons' Hrvoje needed to be on good terms with both faiths. He had to
have a pro-Catholic policy in Split, Dalmatia, and parts of his Donji
kraii , and a pro-Patarin policy in at least some parts of Bosnia. Hrvoje
was wealthy enough to be able to support both faiths and presumably he
awarded gifts to each.(41) That he was successful in this is shown by the
two Gospels made for him. His wife was catholic andin r4r3 she was to
urged Ladislas to make a real bid for the throne and march against
Sigismund. However, Ladislas did not have the courage; he extracted
oaths of allegiance from hls supporters, again named Hrvoje his deputy,
gave him the title of Herceg of Split, and leaving him to rule Dalmatia,
returned in October to Italy. Ladislas' behavior disappointed his
followers, and gave Sigismund a chance to rally support again.
Sigismund now granted amnesties to many Hungarian nobles, who now
probably concluded that Ladislas was never going to march on
Hungary, and therefore they had best make peace with Sigismund, who
after all did hold de factopower there. Thus Sigismund's fortunes began
to improve. Ladislas' timidity, however, also gave Hrvoje a free hand in
his own regions. In addition, as Cirkoviipoints out, by making Hrvoje
deputy for Dalmatia and Slavonia, Ladislas put Hrvoje above the
,

Bosnian king, whose vassal Hrvoje supposedly was.(43)

give a considerable sum of money for the sarcophagus of Saint
Meanwhile, relations between Bosnia and Dubrovnik rapidly
Domnius . However, that Hrvoje was able to carry out a policy of
deteriorated. Dubrovnik, which had maintained correct relations with
having good relations with the two churches shows that the churches
Ostoja and Hrvoje, while recognizing Sigismund as its overlord, had
livecl on terms with one another.
quarrelled with Bosnia over the issue of customs. Various Hum nobles
The papacy, meanwhile, seems to have believed that the Franciscan
had been arbitrarily raising customs duties and tolls, which of course
mission was going well in Bosnia, for in l4o2 Boniface IX issued a letter
primarily hurt the Ragusan merchants. In addition, the dispute over the
saying that no Franciscan could leave the vicariat without the per-
sale of slaves had arisen, and there was the constant problem of bandits
mission of the vicar. The pope went on to state that the Franciscansihad
plundering the ca.ravans which passed through Bosnia and Hum. In
converted 500,000 infidels and those who had fallen away from
1403, Pavle Radiiid, apparently a relative of the royal family, fled from
catholicism.(42) This figure is unbelievable, but in various places in the
Bosnia to Dubrovnik. Probably Ostoja suspected him of being involved
vicariat near their monasteries the Franciscans were no doubt having
in a plot for the throne. Angry that Dubrovnik had granted him asylum,
success in baptizing the local population. It is notable that the pope did
Ostoja wrote Dubrovnik and demanded that the town expel RadiYi6,
not use the term heretic but called them infidels and men *ho haa
give up its recognition of Sigismund as overlord, and accept Ostoja in his
strayed away from the catholic faith (inter infideles et a fide catholica
place. If it did not, then the town had fifteen days to get its merchants
deviantes). This description is quite in keeping with my view of the
out of Bosnia, after which hostilities would begin. Caught completely by
Bosnian church and suggests that the Franciscans were working to
surprise with unprepared defenses, Dubrovnik sent its diplomats to
bring members of that church into the Roman fold. That the pope did
Hrvoje, Pavle RadenoviC, and Sandalj. Presumably a diplomat was also
not use the term heretic may be owing to more accurate information
sent to Ostoja. One question undoubtedly asked of Ostoja now, since it
about Bosnian conditions obtained from the Franciscans.
would be emphatically asked in negotiations the following year, was:
Things went from bad to worse for sigismund in 1402-03; he lost
how could Ostoja object to Dubrovnik's acceptance of Radi$if, when
most of Dalrnatia and Slavonia to Hrvoje and NelipEiC; Bosnia and the
Radiii6's brother, also an enemy of Ostoja, lived safely in Bosnia eating
powerful nobility in the other Slavic regions were supporting his rival
the king's bread in a house of the Patarins.(44) Thus if the Patarins were
Ladislas; in 11+01 Pope Boniface IX, with whom sigismund had been on
allowed to grant asylum within Bosnia, how could Ostoja object so
good terms, declared for Ladislas; and finally early in 1403 Ladislas
strenuously to Dubrovnik doing the sameT
declared his intention of coming to zadar to take over rhe lead of the
Thus once again we hear of a Patarin house (i.e., monastery), and we
campaign for the throne of Hungary. In July of 1403 Ladislas of Naples
learn that it, like a Western church, could give asylum to the pursued.
came in person to zadar, where Hrvoje awaited him. with sigismund's
And at least under Ostoja, who, we shall see, seems to have been closer
fortunes at a low point, many of Ladislas' supporters including Hrvoje
to the Bosnian Church than any other ruler before or after him, this
226 Medieval Bosnian Church
claim and right of the Patarins was respected. we have no other
examples of fugitives seeking shelter with the Patarins (though we have
one case of a fugitive seeking shelter with the Franciscans, also under
ostoja); thus we cannot say thar all rulers respected this right. But it is
clear that Ostoja clid.
I Irvoje seems to trave tried to intervene on behalf of Dubrovnik, q,,116
which he was on cordial terms despite the fact that the town recognized
Sigismund. But Lirvoje's mediation had no effect on Ostoja, and in
July
Ostoia's armies were occupying territory belonging to Dubrovnik,
ravaging property and sending refugees flocking to the town.
ln September 14O3, Ostoja sent as envoy to Dubrovnik, perhaps at
the srrggestion of certain of his nobles, Vlatko Patarin,(45) the first
Patarin to appear in the sources in a diplomatic role. since almost every
work that discusses the Bosnian Church places great emphasis on
Patarins as diplomats, Section XIIof this chapter shall be devoted to the
significance of Patarins in diplomacy. Neither the king nor the great
nobles had professional diplomats; thus when it was necessary to send
an cnvoy, the king
- or nobleman sought out a capable man whom
he trusted. Once a man proved -himself as a diplomat, he might
frequently be used in this function, but he never received any official
title.(216,; 1'he kings were to use Patarins as envoys only twice, Vlatko in
11t03 and two unnamed Patarins in lt+30. The nobles would begin to
use Patarins only in 1419.
Dubrovnik never seems to have minded negotiating with patarins. On
evcry occasion the town council voted to give them gifts. In the case of
Vlatko in September l4O3 it gave him oil and cloth.(47) It has been
:rrgued that the gift of oil shows that Vlatko and the Patarins fasted and
did not eat food cooked with lard. Though it will be apparent larer that
ordairred Patarins did keep fasts, we do not know whether they con-
stantly kept fasts or whether they fasted only at specific times a year.
That thc Ragrrsan giftof oil must beconnected to their custom of fasting
cannot be proved. Oil is a useful gift to anyone, regardless of whether he
fastsor not.
In June 1403, the powerful noble Pavle Kle'si6, who held lancis
around Glamot and I)r.rvno, appearecl in Dubrovnik seeking asylum; he
was accompanied by some Patarins of "the Bosnian sect."
1'he Ragusan council voted to give KletiC a home, and approved gifts
and food for the Patarins who had accoinpanied him.(48) On the sarnc
clay the council also voted unanimously to send gifts to the Dled of the
Bosnian Patarins.(1a!; The only apparent reason for sending gifts to the
d jed was good will; he was a religious leader with influence over Ostoja,
who was about to attack Dubrovnik. In November 7403 more patarins
t
4f--
Bosnia from 1391 to 1447 227
came to Dubrovnik,
accompanied by KleXii's wife.()O) The town
c.ouncil voted to let them buy bread and other necessary items to the
value of twentY'five ducats'(51)
In January 14()/t Ostoia wrote Dubrovnik that he was returning to
Kle{i6 GlamoE and his property in Duvno and Bosnia that had been
confiscated. This property would be placed under the protection of the
died, his stroiniks, and his church. The church would also guarantee the
's
,rf.ty of Kle5if own person. The stroiniks were those Bosnian Church
clerics who composed its governing council. Interestingly, Ostoja's
lerrer was dated the Sunday of the Hallowing of the Waters.()2) Had the
Bosnian Church been dualist such a holiday would almost certainly not
have been recognized because dualists rejected all material objects used
in religious ceremonies; they specifically rejected water.
The dled drafted a letter two days later. He began his letter with the
sign of the cross, showing that the Bosnian Church did not reject that
syrrbol. He wrote Dubrovnik that he was sending thither his stroiniks
and krst jani to bring Kle5ii home; the djed had intervened with the king
roget Kle!i6's property returned because the king had wrongly taken it.
Wc do not know whether Kle{ii was innocent of whatever Ostoja ac-
cused him, or whether Ostoja simply did not have the right to confiscate
thc land. The djed thanked Dubrovnik for receiving and aiding Kle!ic(.
llc called himself ' 'Lord Bishop of the Bosnian Church' ' and signed the
letter "Lord Bishop." Nowhere does he call himself dled, although
Ostoia in his letter had so referred to the bishop. The letter was dated,
Jan ii6i 8 Jan uary 7404 of the vear of Christ 's birth. ( I 3) This shows that
the djed (probably following regular Bosnian usage) dated by the birth of
Christ. Since he sent the letter from Janjili (a small place midway
hcrween LaYva and zenica) he presumably either lived there or else was
visiting a Patarin hiZa there.
A Ilagusan document lists the stroinici and krstjani sent by the djed
rrnd Ostoja: Starac Mi5lien, Starac Belko and five krstjanl (Stojan,
Rrtko, Radosav, Radak and DobraXin).()4) Whether they were really
se.nt jointly by the two leaders, as
the document states, or whether they
.rll camc from the djed, but with Ostoja's
agreement, as seems more
likt'ly, is not known. Nothing is known aboui'u.,y
of the seven Bosnian
clerics unless Starac Mi{ljen shor-rld be
the same as the Gost Misljen
lruried at Puhovac near
Zemca.(55)
he ietterand the presence of Patarins in his
..-l and his wife's entourage
sh'rq'5 th21 Klexif
was a member of the B<isnian church. It also shows
that the Bosnian
Church's guarantee of charters about property, at least
trnd{:r certain
kings, should not be considered a dead letter. We do not
xnuw ifthc Church
had previously been a guarantor of KleYi6's property
228 Medieval Bosnian Church
since no earlier charter about his lands is extant.
We can assume that Kle$6 had previously quarrelled with the king
possibly he had been involved in the Radi(i6 affair.
Ostoja (apparently
illegally) seized Kle"si6's lands and Kletii fled. The djed stated he had
intervened with the king to restore the property. Thus, the died seems
to have had considerable influence on Ostoja. However, it is always
possible that behind the died stood Hrvoje
and almost certainly Kle'sii's overlord
- ina supporter of the Patarins
which case there would
-
have been more than simply church pressure on Ostoja to pardon Kle(ii.
However, both the djed's letter on behalf of Kle(i€ and the fact that
Radilii's brother was able to live undisturbed in a Patarin house in
Bosnia show that, at least under Ostoja, the Bosnian Church did have
strong influence on the king and his actions. I suspect that Ostoja was a
member of that church. This is suggested not only by the fact that he
listened to and respected the Patarins'position on the two above
mentioned matters, but also because he used the Patarin Vlatko as a
diplomat. Thus we can argue that under Ostoja the Bosnian Church
achieved a position ofpolitical influence that it had never had before and
would never have again.
Meanwhile the relationships between Dubrovnik, Ostoja, Hrvoje and
Hungary were changing. Nothing seems to have been settled by
Vlatko's visit. Dubrovnik turned again to Hrvoje and suggested that he
attempt to overthrow Ostoja and put Pavle Radili6 on the throne.
Although the Ragusan embassy that proposed this was en route to
Hrvoje's enemy Sigismund, it was warmly received by Hrvoje, who
expressed his wish for peace but reiected the plan. The embassy was
allowed to continue on to Sigismund. Even though Hrvoje rejected the
plan to overthrow Ostoja, a quarrel had been building up between him
and the king. We can attribute its causes to: Hrvoje's dislike o{ Ostoja's
war against Dubrovnik, Hrvoje's almost certain anger at Ostoja's
actions against KleliC, and finally Hrvoje's own ambitions and
frustrations at the presence of a king he could not dominate.
ostoia was certainly disturbed that his relations with this powerful
nobleman were deteriorating and very likely he was bothered by the
Ragusan embassies to Hrvoje. probably the embassies between
Dubrovnik and Sigismund also worried him. sigismund was making a
recovcry in Hungary and soon might be able to meddle in Bosnia again.
Various nobles who had deserted Sigismund were now returning to his
side; ostoja may even have suspected that Hrvoje had this in mind and
that Dubrovnik might be paving the way for this. And if Hrvoje and
sigismund should make peace, together they could easily have removed
ostoja. But for whatever reasons, late in 1403 ostoja began to make
Bosnia from 1391 to 1441 ))o
advances to Sigismund, and recognized him as his overlord. Thus
-
Ostoia, who had gone to war with Dubrovnik over that town's
recognition of Sigismund as overlord, had six months later, still warring
with Dubrovnik, come himself to recognize Sigismund.(56) Ostoja's
acceptance of Sigismund, of course, caused distrust at home, and this
dissatisfaction may well have been a f.actor in causing ostoja to listen to
the djed and to allow flJsid to return home. Howeu"i, if this was so, he
acted tardily. Already in January l4O4 when Ostoja was permitting
Kletid's return, Dubrovnik and Hrvoje were negotiating to overthrow
Ostoja and put Radi3i6 on the Bosnian throne. Then in March the
picture changed: Hrvoje made peace with Ostoja, Ostoja made peace
with Dubrovnik, and it seemed that even Hrvoje and Sigismund were on
the road to peace.
But this was not to last. In April a saborof. nobles convened, ousted
Ostoia, and elected Tvrtko II TvrtkoviC as king.(57) (If, as his
patronymic suggests and as is generally believed, he was the son of
Tvrtko I, then he probably was illegitimate.) ostoja, whose relations
with Sigismund at that moment were good, fled to the Hungarian court.
Sigismund sent an army and within a matter of months the Hungarians
had recovered Bobovac and installed ostoja there as an anti-king, while
Tvrtko II remained the king recognized by the Bosnians.
In March Dubrovnik had sent an embassy to the king to confirm a
treaty of peace. In the instructions to its ambassador Dubrovnik stated
that the treaty should be sworn to by the queen ancr barons and that the
Patarins should promise according to custom to uphold it.(18) In April,
with the king overthrown, Dubrovnik had to have its ambassadors
reconfirm the peace treaty; the ambassador was told to have the treaty
confirmed in the presence of the Patarins.()9) Evidently, Dubrovnik
believed that the Patarins'church had real influence in the state and that
their presence would help to enforce the treaty. Dubrovnik was practical
and would not have asked for religious sanction (particularly by a foreign
religion) unless it really believed that this religious sanction wourd have
had some actual meaning. In a letter to th. ambassador in May,
Dubrovnik again stated that the treaty should be sworn to by oath by the
barons and the sabor, but with the promise of the patarins, according
to
their custom.(60) Finally, in September, the same statement was made
about the baron.s, with'sandalj being singled out showing the great
influence he must have gained with the n.* ting; as for the prt.iinr,
the ambassador was asked to get them to vertify iiin whatever
way they
want.(61)
The repeated emphasis on the Patarins in these Ragusan letters to its
ambassadors does reflect the political influence they held in the Bosnian
230 Medieval Bosnian Church
state in l401l .ln addition, on each occasion when oaths were called {or,
Dubrovnik wanted oaths extracted {rom the nobility but was satisfied
with promises from the Patarins. At times the envoys were told to let
the Patarins verify the treaty "in whatever way they want," e1 "ac-
corcling to their custom" which suggests that they had some custom
(other than an oath) of giving their word to a document. Thus, it is
evident, as Professor Dinid has convincingly dernonstrated, that
Patarins did not swear oaths.((;2) Unlike the ordained clerics, however,
nobles who supported or belonged to the Bosnian Church did take oaths.
Dinii believes this is strong evidence that the Patarins were dualists,
sincc the dualists rejected oaths. I disagree, because so much other
evidence suggests that the Patarins were not dualist. And refusal to
swear is not a practice limited only to dualists. But, when we seek
specific points of practice and belief of the Bosnian Church the refusal of
thc, churchmen to take oaths is clearly one of them.
When he was ousted Ostoja was accused of violating the rights of the
nobles, and we nrav suspect that this accusation referred to his seizure of
Kldi6's lands (and possibly tlre lands of some others about whom we
lravo no information). This clearly was an excuse to get rid of a head-
strong king who wanted to rule rather than be ruled. We suspect that
Ostoia's newly established relations with Sigismund may have also been
a notivating factor. Ostoia's removal and flight to Sigismund had the
effcct of drawing Sigismund into a war against the new king and the
fJosnian nobility. The appearance of Sigismund's troops in Bosnia
pushed Hrvoie, and with him Tvrtko II, closer to Laclislas. Still loyal to
Sigismund. I)ubrovnik was helpless to prevent this turn of events. In
thc years that followed as Sigismund sent troops into Bosnia, nominally
on hehalf of Ostoja, we can view the struggle as a phase in the war
bctween Ladislas and Sigismund. Laclislas too clearly saw things this way
for in 11105 and 140(r he issued a series of charters to Bosnian noblemen
awarding them lands that were at the time in the hands of Sigismund's
supporters. In 1t+O5 Sigismund spoke of "schismatic Bosnian
rebcls"((r3) and of Hrvoie and "the Bosnian schismatics,"(61t) and
"perfidious Bosnian Patarins, " etc. He does not use the term
"hcretic," which he hacl used in the 1390's about Bosnia. Possibly in
thc 1 390's there had been real heretics opposing him or possibly in the
139()'s Sigismund, having no Bosnian allies to offend, had had no
reason not to exaggerate in damning the Bosnians he hated. F{owever,
in 1401t 05 he was fighting on behalf of Ostoja, a supporter of the
Bosnian Church, who recogniz-ed Sigismund as his overlord. So now
Sigismund calls the Bosnian Church merely schismatic.
Sandalj too had close relations with the Bosnian church. rn r405
Bosnia from I 391 to 11+43 231
Dubrovnik quarrelled with Sandalj about the ownership of some villages
thatlay near their common border. Dubrovnik proposed that the djed
should mediate the problem. It called the djed, "Lord and spiritual
father of your (Sandali's) church of Bosnia."(65) Thus Dubrovnik,
which had constant contact with Sandalj and hence was in a position to
know, spoke of the Bosnian Church as Sandalj's church, thus believing
him to be a member, and believed that the djed would have influence
upon him. Sandalj is the first noble from what is now Hercegovina,
encountered in the sources, who was connected w-ith the Bosnian
Church. That Catholic Dubrovnik would suggest that the leader of the
Bosnian Church mediate a quarrel between itself and a member of that
church shows that Dubrovnik believed it could expect a fair judgment
from the died. This suggests that the died's church was not particularly
hostile to Catholicism, and that Catholic Dubrovnik was not averse to
the died's religion'
Cordial relations between Catholicism and the Bosnian Church are
also shown by the fact, noted previously, that Catholic Venice bestowed
its citizenship upon Sandalj, and on that occasion a Catholic priest had
served as Sandalj's envoy. Venice also had no hesitation in referring to
Sandali as a Christian.((16) In addition, Sandalj's wife Hrvoie's niece
-- Jelena was a Catholic; she gave an expensive -reliquary to the
Catholic church of St. Mary in Zadar.(67)
In May 1405 Dubrovnik sent a treaty to be signed by the King of
Bosnia. Again, Dubrovnik showed its faith in the dled, by suggesting
that the document be left with him for safekeeping until the king signed
it.((rS) In these years, then, the djed was a powerful figure who seems to
have earned the respect not only of his own countrymen but also of his
Catholic neighbor, Dubrovnik. l'his influence lasted beyond Ostoia's
overthrow and continued under Tvrtko II, whose religious allegiance at
this time we cannot identify. Since the Bosnian Church retained its
influenceunder him, Tvrtko II certainly was not hostile to that church.
ln evaluating the political role of the Bosnian Church at this time, we
must keep in mind the possibility that some of its influence may have
been the result of the strength of t'he personality of the particular djed
who held office. He was clearly a strong man since he clid not fear to
oppose the king in political matters and managed to force the king to
change his mind. Unfortunately we have no evidence of how long this
particular died was in office. However, since the church's most active
role occurred in the years lt+O3-7401 we may assume that the office did
,
not change hands during these years. If this is true, then the died in this
period would have been the Radomer referred to in the 11t04 Hval
Gospel inscription.((r9) Unfortunarely, we know nothing about his
232 Medieval Bosnian Church
family and its connectlons.
Intermittent warfare between Sigismund and Bosnia continued frorn
l4O4 to 1408. It is in the context of this war that we must treat a request
of (r June I4O7 by the people of Eger to the pope to appoint them a new
bishop; their bishop, Thomas, having been insulting to Sigismund and
involved in destructive activities against even the church of Eger, four
years ago had deserted the city and church of Eger to go to the region of
the unfaithful Bosnian schismatics.(70) Evidently Thomas had sided
with Ladislas of Naples against Sigismund in their civil war (ca. 1403)
and then, for political reasons, had sought refuge with Ladislas' allies
somewhere in Bosnia, quite likely with Hrvoie. That a Catholic bishop
sought refuge in Bosnia, rather than some place else like Naples, shows
that he did not believe Bosnia was a land populated chiefly by outrageous
heretics; the document itself calls the Bosnians schismatics.
In September 1408, Sigismund won what he proclaimed was a great
victory over Tvrtko II and the Bosnians at a place called Dobor in Usora.
Many tales were told about the aftermaths of the battle; one has
Sigismund's men pitching one hundred and seventy Bosnian nobles over
the town's battlements to their deaths; another claims that Tvrtko II
was captured. But because Tvrtko was asking Dubrovnik for his tribute
in February 11109, we can assume that he had not been captured.
The papacy meanwhile was becoming interested in crusades at this
time and tn l4O7 Gregory XII issued an all inclusive call to fight the
Turks, unfaithful Arians (!), Manichees and other unbelievers in the
kingdom and lands of Constantinople, Romania (i.e., Byzantium),
Hungary, Bosnia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Rama, Serbia, Galicia, among
the Cumans, and Bulgaria.(71) Since a great deal more territory than
just Bosnia was included in this call to arms we do not know where the
pope thought the lVtanichees were to be found. That he mentions
Arians, however, shows that we should not take his labels seriously.
In January 1409 Sigismund announced in Trogir that Hrvoie had
submitted to him. Hrvoje's action presumably was motivated both by
Sigismund's military successes and by the fact that Ladislas was plan-
ning to sell Dalmatia to Venice, which would have removed the legal
basis for Hrvoje's activities there. Now Sigismund could hope to gain
I)almatia through Hrvoie, and Hrvoie could have the Hungarian king's
blessing to continue his activities in Dalmatia. The actual conclusion of
peace may well have occurred early in December 1408 since Hrvofe
may have been in Buda for the festivities connected with the foundation
of the Dragon Order. This order was founded by Sigismund to defend
the Christian faith from pagans and heretics, and the Hungarian royal
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 233
foreign enemies. There were to be two orders
house from domestic and
the first was limited to Hungarians, but the second included
.f knighs,
foreigners as Despot Stefan Lazarevid of Serbia, and a
l".i frf"r"l"us
Slavonian and Croatian bans and nobles.(72) Lucius says that
urriety of
Sandali both came to Buda (presumably in December 1408)
HrvoF and
made Hrvoie a membef of the order and also god-
and that Sigismund
his recently born daughter Elizabeth.(73) Thereafter Hrvoie
Lther for
loyal to Sigismund, until Sigismund turned against him in
rernained
1412.
It is interesting to note, if we can believe Lucius, that Sigismund
allowed the "Patarin" Hrvoie to be a member of the knightly order to
from heretics and pagans' Hrvoje, as we shall see
defend Catholicism
from a letter he wrote in 1413, had clearly not become a Catholic as
Ladislas' secretary and the Archbishop of Split had hoped in 1403. His
standing godfather for the Catholic princess is also noteworthy.
After the reference to Tvrtko II in February 1409 he disappears from
the sources for several years. By the end oI l4O9 Ostoia is master of
Bosnia once again. We do not know how this change was brought
about.(74) In June 11t09 Sandalj sent Archdeacon Theodore (n.b. a
Catholic cleric) to ZadariQ)) thus it seems likely that Sandalj was
aligning himself with Ladislas. Ostoia was clearly opposed to Hrvoje
since in December 1408 he issued a charter to Diurai Radivojevii
awarding him large stretches of land, possessed at the time by Hr-
voje.(76) With Ostoja opposed to Hrvoje, we find Sigismund with-
drawing suppo!'t from Ostoja; and in 1410 Sigismund and Hrvoie
marched against Ostoia and seized Visoko. Ostoia fled; Sigismund then
forced the two leading Bosnian nobles Sandalj and Pavle Radenovid to
recognize him. That winter Ostoja had to go to Diakovo to ask
Sigismund's forgiveness. Sigismund recognized him as king, but Ostola
had to give up Sol and Usora which were to be assigned to a deputy to be
chosen by Sigismund.
While the struggles between Ladislas and Sigismund, and between
Ostoia and Tvrtko lI, *"." going on both Sandali and Pavle Radenovi6
had been steadily increasing their holdings. By 1410 each was in a
position to rival the king.(77) A struggle between these two nobles was
foreseeable. However, Sandalj first had his sights fixed on eliminating
l-lrvoje's (and also Sigismund's) influence in the state. So, in 1411
Sandalj divorced Hrvoje's niece and shortly thereafter married Jelena
the widow of Df urai StracimiroviC Ba(ii of Zeta, who happened also to
be the daughter of Knez Lazar who perished at Kosovo, and the sister of
the Serbian Despot Stefan Lazarevi6. His new marriage alliance reflected
both the deteriorating relations with Hrvoje and the better relations he
 23tt Medieval Bosnian Church
had been building up with the Serbs.(78)
I Irvoje meanwhile built a castle at Jaice which he occupied in l4l l-
12. On the hillside, on whose summit his fortress was perched, Hrvoje
discovered early Christian catacombs. He placed his crest inside these
as
well as on the castle entrance. In the walls of the catacombs he also
hollowed out niches of a size and shape to hold coffins. Thus it seern5
that F{rvoje intended to convert the catacombs into a mausoleum for
himself arrd his family.(79) This plan was never realized, since at the
time of his death he resided elsewhere. Various theories have been
advanced about mysterious rituals (heretical or connected with the
Dragon Order initiations) which might have occurred in the catacombs.
F{owever, there is no evidence for any such thing.
ln I/tl2 peace seemed to reign in Bosnia. In the spring King
Sigisnrund held more festivities. Ostoja, Hrvoje, Sandalj and pavle
Radcnovi6 all attended as invited guests. A Polish chronicler praised the
f rowess of the Bosnians in the knightly games.(80) This may well be a
clue to the various tournament scenes on the stetci. We not only see
that the Bosnians did hold tournaments and practice the kniglitly arts,
but that they excelled at them.
This is the last time we shall see Hrvoje in the king's favor. Shortly
thc.reafter Sigismund called him a renegade and a rebel , accused him of
dealing with the Turks, and withdrew his titles and the power of
authority in his realm.(81) Nowhere in Sigismund's tirade against
Ilrvoie is there reference to heresy or Patarinism. To our surprise
Sigismund's action had effect, and one by one the coastal towns ousted
I'lrvoje's officials. Thus it seems rhat Hrvoje had been unpopular in
I)almatia.
Ilrvoje pleadcd that he was slandered and wrote Queen Barbara of
Flungary asking her to intercede for him with her husband. He
rerninded her "for the love of St. John" that he had stood as godfather
for hcr daughter and that he was a member of the Dragon Order. As a
nrenibcr he was entitled to be judged by his peers. F{e had not been
judged by them. He was willing to stand trial before the order and
if they
found him guilty then let them have his head. He closed his plea by
stating that she should intervene for him and not let him in his old age
die in pagan rite(inpaganismo(!) ritu) and in unbelief for he had with
clifficulty awaited the time to go over from the pagan rite to the Roman
Clatholic faith.(82) This plea had no effect.
Once again llrvoje was playing with religion to serve his own ends.
Wc recall that in 1403 when he had hoped for the title of Marquis fronr
I-aclislas he had expressed the desire to become a Catholic. From this
Bosnia from l39l to 1443 23'
he had not accepted Catholicism then. The use of the
krter we see that
1g1rn,'pagan" strange. Professor R. L. Wolff has suggested that
is
Lucius, when he copied the original
letter in the seventeenth century,
misread the text and wrote "paganismo" for "patarino."(83) This
,heory is plausible for the following reasons: 1) elsewhere we have found
Hrvoje referred to as a Patarin; 2) the two words when handwritten
are vety similar; 3) Whereas there were domestic peasant cere-
monies which we might call pagan now, it is very doubtful that
Hrvoie or anyone else then would have referred to the slaua and other
rites as pag^n. Thus, we have no evidence of any rites practiced then in
Bosnia or environs which a practioner would be likely to call pagan. 4)
t-lowever, the Patarins clearly did have a rite. 5) Finally, since the word
"rite" is used, some specific practices are referred to,,thus it cannot
simply mean that Hrvoje was unbaptized or like a heathen ignored the
church. Against this view there are only two points: 1) Since the term
"paganism.o' ' appears twice in the text, Lucius would have had to make
the same error twice; 2) The tenn "pagan" was used once earlier in
this same milieu. When Sigismund formed his Dragon Order, it was
expressly established to defend Christianity against pagans and heretics.
Thus it is always possible that in Hungarian court circles in the
beginning of the fifteenth century the term "pagan" had some specific
meaning; it is not excluded that it might have been a pejorative term for
members of the Bosnian Church. And if we consider peasant religious
attitudes in Bosnia, such a label may have been a fitting one. However,
we must conclude that we do not know which of the two terms was used
in I-lrvole's plea.
It is generally assumed that Sandalj had machinated Hrvoje's fall from
Sigismund's graces, and that Hrvoje was innocent of the charge of
negotiating with the Turks. However, once in disgrace, deserted by his
former supporters, and in danger of being attacked by Sigismund,
l{rvoje had no choice but to do what he was accused of and turn to the
Turks. Thus Sigismund's accusation became a self'fulfilling prophecy
Sreatly to his own detriment. Hrvole procured Ottoman mercenaries
and foined by Tvrtko II just as mysteriously as he had
- who reappeared
disappeared five years earlier in raiding Bosnia and Croatia.
In 1415 Hrvoje's Turkish leader- indulged
Isak b.g
- who governed the Ot-
toman province centered in Skopje (1414-1439) and who was to play an
active role in leading and supplying mercenaries in Bosnia for most of
ilris period
- mer Sigismunci's forces in a full-scale battle near Doboj.
The Turkish victory was complete, and many Hungarian prisoners were
taken, including some high nobles. The Hungarian Chronicle of
Janos
lhuroczi describes l-lrvoje's magnanimity as a victor as well as his
236 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 237

sterling sense of humor. Among the Hungarian prisoners was a Rrorhef Stephen as a diplomat.(86) (This would be the first mention in
nobleman named Pal Chupor who had previously amused the iu, *u.."t of a Franciscan used as a diplomat.) The day after the
tlungarian court by mocking Hrvoje's stocky stature and hoarse voice; :;r;;r, Vlatko took Pavle RadenoviC's body and returned to Vrhbosna.
he would imitate a bull whenever Hrvoje would enter the room. Hrvoje "'iuul" Radenovit's capable son Radoslav Pavlovid was still at
now had Pal sewn into an ox-hide and then said to him, "if you laree.(87) To avenge
his father and to prevent the division of his lands
bellowed like a bull when in human shape, now you have the shape of an ,mong the murderers he immediately procured a Turkish contingent
ox with which to bellow." He then had him thrown into a river in the by his brother Peter who either escaped or was released
and, ioined
to
- Sandali 's lands. In this whole affair,
ox hide."(84) from prison - proceeded ravage
The Turkish victory marked the end of Sigismund's influence in Hrvoje had played no part, andin 1476 he died. With his death the great
Bosnia. ln triumph, Hrvoie forgot about Tvrtko II and had the Turks innu"n." of the Hrvatinidi in Bosnian affairs ended. He was succeeded
confirm Ostoja as king in the name of the Sultan. Hrvoie's victory, the by his weak son, Bal3a; but real authority in the Donji kraji went to his
result of the first large-scale Turkish force in Bosnia, marked the n.pt"*, Djuraj Vojsali6. Much of Hrvoje's lands ended up in Ostoja's
beginning of the Turkish role in Bosnia politics. In the years that hands, however, for as soon as Hrvoje died, the king divorced his wife
followed, this role was limited to that of mercenaries who fought for the an4 married Hrvoje's widow, who brought with her much territory
Bosnian noblemen who hired them. However, within twenty years Isak including Jajce.(88) We may presume that Ostoja disposed of this wife
beg would begin to have plans for Bosnia that would benefit the Sultan. in the Bosnian manner which the Franciscans had objected to in 1373.
Hrvoje has been blamed for being the first to summon the Turks into Since no source mentions Ostoja having any difficulties from Rome or
Bornia. However, had he not done so, Sandalj or the Pavlovidi would the Franciscans about this divorce, it is most probable that Ostoja was
have; and if no one had invited them, the Turks would eventually have still a member of the Bosnian Church.
come on their own. And can we really find Isak beg more foreign to Having procured these lands that had belonged to Hrvoje, Ostoja now
Bosnia's interests than Sigismund? in 1417 joined the PavloviCi and Turks against Sandali. Their combined
In August 1411 Ostoia and Sandalj convoked a conference at Sut- forces pushed Sandali back toward the sea. Ostoja captured the key
ieska, and invited Pavle RadenoviC, his son Peter and other nobles. customs town of Driieva, where he banned entirely the sale of slaves. As
Shortly after their arrival the hosts suggested a ride in the country; noted earlier, the majority of these slaves seem to have been sold as
RadenoviC and his son accepted. Not far from Sutjeska, the king, Sandalj "Patarins." This act of Ostoja might possibly be seen as a defense of
and some of their retainers turned upon the pair. RadenoviC was killed, hisco-religionists and further confirmation that he was still a member of
allegedly trying to escape; Peter was taken prisoner. Sandali later told that church. Then, suddenly in September 1418, Ostoja died and was
the Ragusan ambassador that this action had been necessary since the succeeded by his son, Stefan Ostojii.
pair were traitors. ln l42O Sandalj procured Turks of his own and attacked the Pavlovidi
Vlatko Tumarlid, the Patarin who in 1403 had been Ostoia's am- and the new king. It was obvious that neither Sandalj nor Radoslav was
bassador to Dubrovnik, had by this time entered Pavle Radenovid's going to gain from his continual warfare and plundering, so late that
service and had accompanied his lord on the fateful trip to Sutjeska. spring a conference was convened, attended by the Pavlovidi, Sandalj
Whether Vlatko had come as chaplain or councillor is not known. and the leader of Sandalj's Turks, Isak beg. In the course of their
Immecliately after the murder he had fled to Gundulid, the Ragusan discussions Isak beg murdered Peter Pavlovi6 because
explained it
- as Sandalj later
ambassador to the court, who gave him shelter in his quarters at the Peter was faithless to the sultan.(89) As a result of the
-
murder, and of course Sandalj's continued alliance with Isak beg,
Franciscan monastery in Sutjeska.(81) That GunduliC resided there
shows that the Franciscan monasteries, like those of the Patarins, took Sandali was able to recover most of the territory he had lost. In July
in travelers. The Franciscans apparently did not object to the Patarin 1420 Stefan Ostoiid was ousted from power, and Tvrtko II, always
ready, became king again. He established himself in Visoko, surrounded
taking refuge with them. But we cannot be sure foom this that Ostoja
by the same nobles who had surrounded his predecessors. Stefan OstojiC
respected the Franciscan right to shelter fugitives since we do not know
fled to the coast, and shortly thereafter he disappeared permanently from
that Ostoja had any intention of arresting Vlatko. Ostoja seems to have
had cordial relations with the Franciscans, for in 1418 he twice used a the sources.
238 Medieval Bosnian Church
The disappearance of Stefan Ostoji6 left only three figures of influence
and authority in Bosnia: Sandalj, Radoslav, and Tvrtko II. In October
1420 Radoslav made peace with Sandalj and accepted Tvrtko II as king.
ln 1421 Radoslav married Sandali's niece, Theodora (the sister of Stefan
VukEii, who was to be Sandalj's successor).
IV ; Patarins in Secular Seraice and Relations
Between Secalar Leaders and the Vaious Failbs
Meanwhile we begin to find Patarins for the first time performing
secular services for certain members of the nobility.
On January 29, 1419, two envoys from Sandalj , Dmitar Krstjanin
and Pribisav Pohvalii, obtained cash for Sandalj in Dubrovnik by
pawning some of his valuables.(90) Pribisav was regularly used by
Sandalj as a diplomat at this time. Dmitar, who accompanied him, is the
first Patarin envoy, noted in the sources, to be sent by a nobleman.(91)
Radoslav Pavlovi6 began to use Patarins as diplomats the following year,
in November 1420.(92)
Radoslav also used a Patarin in an administrative capacity. On June
2l , 1422, Dubrovnik wrote to two of Radoslav's agents, Zupan
Radosav Glavi6 and Radovac Krstjanin, to suggest that people moving
from the territory of one overlord in Konavli to that of the other hen-
ceforth pay taxes to their new overlord.(93) Neither of Radoslav's
agents is known from other sources, but it is evident that they had been
sent by Radoslav to administer his part of Konavli. As Radovac was
probably an administrator sent thither by Radoslav, his presence does
not indicate the existence of popular support for the Bosnian Church in
the region of Konavli.
In October 1422,Radoslav sent to Dubrovnik Brother Stephen, the
same Franciscan whom Ostoja had used as an ambassador in 1418.(94)
Thus we find Radoslav, despite his Patarin connections, willing to use a
Catholic cleric as his envoy, and the Catholic not averse to serving hirn'
We have noted earlier that Sandalj also on occasions used Catholic
clerics as ambassadors.
Meanwhile, at some point during 7422, fighting had again broken
out between Radoslav and Sandalj ; bn January 16, 7423, Dubrovnik
told an envoy being sent to Sandalj that the town approved efforts to
bring about peace between the two noblemen and that Radoslav, for this
purpose, had sent a Patarin and others to Sandalj.(95) A Ragusan envoy
to Sandalj 's court returned on the 25th.(96) He evidently brought the
Bosnia from 1)91 to 1443 239
news noted in a Ragusan letter of the 27th that "conte Volchac and
Miasa Gost" had been sent by Radoslav to negotiate with the Vojvoda
(i.e., Sandali).(97) Presumably, MiaSa Gost was the unnamed Patarin
ieferred to on the 16th; Once again Radoslav was using as envoys a
panrir and a Layman. MiaIa Gost is otherwise unknown; he is the
highest ranking Patarin encountered up to now as an ambassador. We
,ry rogg"tt that he headed a hiYa near Radoslav's capital of Borat.
Miala is the third different Patarin Radoslav had used in the period
l4Z0-23; we note that Radoslav also constantly used different secular
envoys. Thus Radoslav apparently did not have a regular corps
diplomatique.
On February I5, 1423, a charter drafted by Dubrovnik stated that to
Dubrovnik had come from Radoslav "the honorable man Krstjanin lord
@ospodin)Vlatko Tumr'ka (sic), Radin Krstjanin, Knez Budislav and '
Knez VukaXin" and from Sandalj "lord (gospodin) Starac Dmitar and
Knez Radovan Vardid," and that these two embassies had concluded
peacebetween Sandalj and Radoslav,(98) It is possible that the Bosnian
Church as an institution had used its clerics to bring about this peace. It
is interesting to note that in these and other letters written in Slavic,
Dubrovnik calls the envoys by the Slavic word "krstjanin," using the
term "Patarin" for Bosnian Churchmen only when writing in Italian or
Latin. Dubrovnik's good will toward the Patarins is shown by the fact
that it honored both Vlatko and Dmitar with the title lord, which, since
it was not part of their title, Dubrovnik was under no obligation to use.
All the Patarin envoys had been used before; Dmitar had, since 1419,
been promoted to the rank of starac. Both embassies contained laymen
and Patarins.
Thenext day, Starac Dmitar, having concluded his main business, is
found still in Dubrovnik acting on behalf of Sandalj 's Orthodox wife
and her financial affairs, With him were two secular figures, Radohna
PriptiC and Brajan Dijak (i.e., scribe). Dmitar was given a charter
stating that his mistress could collect the money depositied in
Dubrovnik at any time and in any way she chose.(99) The same trio of
envoys on the same day also obtained cash for Sandalj by pawning an
icon.(l00) This will not be the only example we have of icons in the
possession of families connected with the Bosnian Church.(l0l)
Thus, in I4l9 Sandalj and in 1420 Radoslav began to make use of
-Patarins as diplomats. Between I4I9 and 1423 thise two nobles sent
stven embassies (six to Dubrovnik) in which Patarins participated.
I hroughout this period
entirely secular embassies were also sent. And
strangely enough, after the frequent
use of Patarins during these four
years, we shall have
to wait seven years until 1430 before we meet
240 Medieval Bosnian Church
another Patarin ambassador. Both these nobles continued to, send
embassies to Dubrovnik during these years. We have no reason to
believe that the Patarin envoys fell from favor, since in the 1430's a's
shall meet both Radin and Dmitar again.(102) However, since the bulk
of our sources are Ragusan, it is highly possible that between 1423 and
1430 Sandalj and Radoslav did use Patarin envoys within Bosnia, whose
missions are not mentioned in the Ragusan documents.
Yet despite his Patarin connections, Sandalj had good relations with
Catholic cities. In 1424,he once again, his brother and nephew Stefan
Vuktid were granted the status of nobles of Venice.(l0l) In 1426
Dubrovnik made formal plans to receive Sandalj. If he should visit on the
Day of Our Lady he would be invited for mass with the rector, both for
matins and,vespers. If he should visit on the Day of St. Blasius (patron
Saint of Dubrovnik), he would be asked to participate at vespers and to
choose one of the nobles who would guard the relics of the saint during
the ceremony. He would also march in the procession to the church
with the rector and would carry a special taper.(104) We do not know if
Sandalj actually did participate. Resti reports that he did, but it is likely
that Resti simply assumed that the plans were carried out.(10))
However, it is worth stressing that Dubrovnik
consent of its archbishop
- presumably with the
was eager to invite this member of the
-
Bosnian Church to participate in Catholic Church services. Presumably,
Sandalj was no dualist; for had he been, Dubrovnik, wishing to honor
him, would not have associated his visit with relics and churches, both
of which any dualist would have rejected.
Now, it could be argued with considerable validity that Sandalj here
and the Bosnian nobles whom we have met from time to time par-
ticpating in Catholic rites were basically indifferent to these religious
matters; thus if they had anything to gain by attending a Catholic mass
or kissing a cross they would do so, whether they were dualists or not.
And I would agree with that argument. However, one must then ask,
"if Sandalj were a dualist opposed to churches and services in them,
why would Dubrovnik choose this particular way to honor him?"
Previously in 1401, for example, we found Hrvoje swearing by a cross
and relics to respect the rights of. Zadar.(IO6) Hrvoje, almost certainly,
would have sworn by anything to get what he wanted. But why would
the town of. Zadar, which of course wanted its rights respected, have
extracted an oath in this manner fronl a dualist? For if Hrvoje were a
dualist then he would have had no respect for either cross or relics and
therefore his oath would have been a meaningless act giving no
guarantee at all for the town's rights.
Thus, in all these cases, greater emphasis should be placed on the
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 24t
behavior of the Catholic towns or clerics - who called for Bosnians to
Darticipate in these - than on the actions of the in-
orthodox acts
diffr.*t Bosnian nobles. And since in many cases the Christian
ceremonies the nobles were included in were honorary and the Catholics
were not obliged to invite the Bosnians to avoid insulting them, we must
conclude that the invitations were not abhorent to the Catholics and
oaths sworn by the Bosnians were not {elt to be meaningless. Thus we
may conclude that the participating Bosnians were not dualists.
ln Ragusan archival documents lrom 1426, 1428 and 1429 JireEek
bund references to a customs house located at a church in Glasinac (at
the crossroads for routes to Olovo, Borat and to Vrhbosna).(107)
Jirelek claims that the church lay in Sandali's territory. If so, Sandalj
had presumably usurped a large piece of Radoslav's land
- a usurpation
not mentioned in any source known to me. It seems probable that it still
layon Radoslav's lands, but by some agreement Sandalj was allowed a
certain share of the customs receipts. But in any case, one or both of
these nobles, despite Patarin ties, not only allowed the church to exist,
but also had good enough relations with it to ask the church to play a
part in the administration by serving as customs agent or at least to let
the noble's customs agents work in the church. We do not know what
confession this church represented. We know there was a Franciscan
monastery near-by at Olovo, but Glasinac also was near enough the
Drina for the church to have been Orthodox. We cannot exclude the
possibility that the church was Bosnian; however, since in no Ragusan
document is a Patarin religious building called a church, I think it
unlikely that this was a Patarin church.
Sandalj also had good relations with the Orthodox. His second wife as
we have noted was Orthodox, and possibly the icon he pawned in
Dubrovnik in 1423 was hers.(108) Sandalj also had a dijak (scribe),
Pribisav, serving him who was the son of a priest (hence Orthodox)
named pop Milaja.(l09) Shortly, we shall find Sandalj involved in
building at least one church that was almost certainly Orthodox.
Radoslav, too, had cordial relations with the Orthodox. In 1424 the
Serbian despot visitedhim for celebrations connected with the birth of a
son to Radoslav.(l10)
Tvrtko II ruled through the 1420's without any serious challenge. In
142) he was given the title of nobleman of Venice.(111) In 1425 he
became involved in a war with Serbia over the rich mining town of
Srebrnica, which he failed to capture. It is about this town at ap-
proximately this time that we have the one possible reference to
Bogomils in the vicinity of Bosnia. Despot Stefan Lazarevid of Serbia
convoked an Orthodox Church Council here, and one manuscript (of
242 Medieval Bosnian Church
uncertain date) of Konstantin Filozof 's biography of the despot, written
in 1431, having described the council adds that everyone in the town
was Bogomil.( I I 2) Perhaps there were some Bogomils in Srebrnica , but
there was also a Franciscan monastery and a thriving Ragusan
colony.( I 1 3) And would the despot have convened an Orthodox Church
Council in a town whose whole populace was hereticalT
ln 1426 Tvrtko II patched up his relations with Hungary. This caused
a Turkish attack that swept through Bosnia devastating many villages.
At the end of the raids, the Turks withdrew again beyond the Bosnian
borders. Tvrtko, however, was forced to recognize Ottoman suzerainty
and agreed to pay the sultan annual tribute.
Tvrtko seems to have been friendly toward both Catholics and
Patarins. If he had not treen Catholic previously, Tvrtko had become one
prior to 1428, when he decided to marry Dorothy, daughter of the
former Ban Ivan Gorjanski (Johannes Garai), a loyal servitor of
Sigismund. The Catholic Church expressed doubts about the marriage
because the religious allegiances of Tvrtko were in doubt. Tvrtko wrote
the pope admitting that he ruled a land of schismatics and unbelievers.
Although his enemies accused him of being an unbeliever, he asserted,
he was a good Catholic. He asked the pope to investigate the matter and
clear his reputation so that the marriage might take place. Because the
marriage did take place in 1428, we can assume that Tvrtko had proved
his Catholicism to the satisfaction of the investigators.(l14)
However, it is a fact that the died had influence on Tvrtko and even
was often at court. ln 1428 Dubrovnik instructed its ambassadors to
greet the died and give him a letter if they found him at court. It was
hoped that the djed would intervene on Dubrovnik's behalf. The envoy
was asked to show the treaty to the djed and other courtiers, who were
known to be friendly toward Dubrovnik and who would work in the
town's behalf.(1 15) Thus it is clear that Dubrovnik regarded the djed as
both an influential personage at Tvrtko's court and also as its friend. It is
worth noting that in no Ragusan letter written prior to 1430 were
members of the Bosnian Church spoken of in hostile terms. The
Bosnians were never called heretics, and nothing was said that might
even have suggested that the Bosnian Church could be considered
heretical.
Dubrovnik, however, could
- and did -- express hostility toward
followers of the Bosnian Church for polltical reasons. This is seen for the
first time in late 1429, when friction developed between the town and
Radoslav Pavlovi6. Radoslav thought Dubrovnik owed him money'
and when the town refused to pay he seized a Ragusan caravan. The next
year (1430) Radoslav attacked Konavli, part of which had been turned
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 243
over to Dubrovnik by Sandalj in l4l9 and part by Radoslav ln 1427.
Dubrovnik was not prepared for a war and immediately sent diplomats to
Tvrtko, and the sultan.
Hungary, Sandalj, Because Radoslav had by
now become a vassal of the sultan, it was hoped that he would intervene.
The sultan, however, preferred to remain neutral;he neither intervened
with Radoslav, nor did he supply troops when Radoslav requested them.
Dubrovnik also sent boxes of sweets to the djed and gosti, presumably in
hopes that they would exert some influence,on Radoslav.(l16) Sandali
immediately seized the chance to grab some of Radoslav's lands and
attacked him. Conversations followed in which a league against Radoslav
including Sandalj, Dubrovnik and Tvrtko was projected.
In June two unnamed Patarin ambassadors accompanied by someone
named Juanis (Ivanii) went between the king and iadoslav.ittZy fn"
same month also saw an embassy of unnamed Patarins including a starac
sent by Radoslav to sandalj.(118) our sources tell us nothing about
their purpose or their result. After these June embassies, no more is
heard of the proposed league, and Truhelka, quite reasonably,
speculates that the djed had opposed a war between the two leading
supporters of his church, particularly if one (sandali) were to align
himself with catholics against a fellow Bosnian churchman, and had
sent envoys who had successfully convinced Sandalj not to join such a
league.(l l9) This is the second time that the Bosnian churcir may have
had a role in making peace between these two nobles; we recall ihat in
1423 when war broke out between Radoslav and sandalj, Gost Mia"sa
had passed between Radoslav and Sandalj, and then a month later, when
the two men made peace, Patarins were prominent among negotiators
on both sides. Maybe MiaXa, a high-ranking churchman *ho
u,
a diplomat only this one time in 1423 , had been sent, not by"fp"u.,
iiadosrav
but, by the djed, from Radoslav to Sandalj to bring about peace.
It is interesting to note the frequent use of patarins as diplomats in the
negotiations between warring parties. A major reason for this possibly
was their desire as churchmen to end wars and killing. Also,
their
religious habit and status would have allowed them to p--ass unharmed
through warring lands.
In Dubrovnik's letters of complaint about Radoslav, the town
stated
that the catholic faith in these regions did not
have a greater enemy than
the Patarin Radoslav. In these letters he was
fidjous Patarin, and even a heretical patarin.(120)
calleJ a patarin,'a per-
Excluding the
references to Patarin slaves, this
is the first time Dubrovnik has sioken
of non ordained people being Patarins. (Of
course, Sigismund and
Ladislas's envoy had earlier referred
to Hrvoje as a patariri). Dubrovnik
would subsequently call other nobles
who supported the Bosnian
244 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia 6rom l39l to l44j 24t

Church by this name. However, it is worth noting that this label was ,",o tasks throughout his stay in the vicariat with unflagging energy
of strict discipline for members
-
of his order, and the
used by Dubrovnik to describe a layman only when Dubrovnik was at tie establishment
war with the layman. This is the first time that the term was used in a of all heresies from the vicariat.
pejorative sense by Dubrovnik, and it should be noted that at the same "limination
The proiect to reform the way of life of the Franciscans led to a quamel
time the town was calling Radoslav a perfidious Patarin heretic, it was between Jacob and
Tvrtko. Jacob found that among the Franciscans
referring to ordained Patarins in friendly terms and sending gifts to the rnorals were dissolute
and discipline was scandalously lax.(I25) When
died. he began to use his full power to discipline the brothers, Tvrtko im-
Shortly thereafter, Radoslav made peace with Tvrtko and sent his son mediately rose to their defense and tried to prevent Jacob from enforcing
Ivanil to the king's court. In 71132 peace was negotiated between his reforms. In Jajce Jacob discovered that the Franciscans did not live in
Racloslav and Dubrovnik. A key role in the peacemaking was played by monasteries but in private homes and in villages; presumably, then, the
Krstjanin Radin. This man, still in the early phase of the diplomatic Jajce monastery
had not yet been built. Jacob apparently did not realize
career which was later to bring him wealth and renown (as Herceg ihat the Franciscans might have been more effective in Catholicizing the
Stefan's Gost Radin), always seems to have had good will toward area if they actually did live and work with the villagers. He also found
Dubrovnik. Years later, in the service of the herceg, he frequently was that the Franciscans did not live on alms, but had incomes; perhaps they
able to maintain peace with Dubrovnik and consistently would play a were working as craftsmen or farmers. Since the Franciscans had been
major part in ending hostilities. Radin was one of four envoys * the forbidden to collect alms in Bosnia for fear that they would alienate new
converts, they were not receiving any support
- and Dubrovnik always listed his name
other three were laymen and potential and since
first.(121) from the hostile bishop in Djakovo, or from the Franciscan order itself ,
One custom in the region of Bosnia, Zeta, and Serbia was to seal we may wonder how Jacob expected them to live.
peace between two former enemies with the act of kumstao (god- Tvrtko rose to the defense of the Franciscans and wrote Jacob. The
fathership). Thus on this occasion Dubrovnik stood kurn for Radoslav's letter published by Wadding (dated 1435 and redated by tremotnik
son Iuani!. Since the two were of different faiths, it could not have been a 1432) states that when Jacob asked the king for permission to come to
regular godfathership, but must have been theiiiano kumstao (or hair- Bosnia, Tvrtko had written him so that he could come freely and safely
cutting kumstur). This is simply the act of cutting for the first time the thither topreach the faith of God, just as his predecessors had. Tvrtko
god-child's hair. Luccari states that Radoslav, following the custom of states that he wishes to hold and treat Jacob as a friend, but word has
his nation, derived from the Greeks (most probably meaning Orthodox), come to him that Jacob wants to expel from the purlieus and environs of
offered the hair of his daughter ( ! ) to the Queen of Heaven and invited to the castle of Jajce certain clerics of our realm (i.e., Bosnian Franciscans).
the ceremony Dubrovnik.(122) In a letter of 1434 Radoslav calls The King begs Jacob not to do this, stating that "piously and with
Dubrovnik, "Old and new friend and heart-felt kum (god- humility the faith and word of God is being preached" by the friars. He
father),"(123) showing that this actof kumstuohad. occurred; since in states that if Jacob takes this action a4inst them then he will "disfigure
1447 lvanil calls Dubrovnrk kumthe ceremony evidently involved him the honor of our lord Gracomus (2 CremoTnik simply states Wadding
and not his sister.(124)Luccari clearly was referring to such an event erroneously copied the name. The vicar at the time was Johannes of
but he refers to a daughter instead of a son and does not seem to have Korlula.) and us. " And in Jajce there are only a few whom Jacob would
understood the purpose of the ceremony nor Dubrovnik's role in it. expel. And Tvrtko concludes that in other parts of the kingdom where
the Franciscans are esteemed, you could not otherwise enter or preach
V: Jacob de Marchia and the faith. "Thus because of this, dearest one, you ought not to begin to
do such things nor (allow) them to happen through you.' '(126)
tb e Franc i sc an, M is si on
This letter shows Tvrtko to be a Catholic interested in the faith's
In these years the Franciscan mission acquired new energy from the propagation in Bosnia, who supported the Bosnian Franciscans because
presence of Jacob de Marchia, who appeared in the Bosnian vicariat as a he felt they were effectively preaching Catholicism. We find that there
were few Francirans around
special visitor in 14)2-)3, and then returned in 1435 to become vicar, a Jalce. We also find that the Franciscans in
post he held until 1439. Jacob was a most dynamic figure, who pursued other pafts of the kingdom were respected by the populace, which
 246 Medieval Bosnian Church
suggests that they were making converts. When Tvrtko states that in
these other parts of the kingdom "otherwise you could not enter or
preach the faith," we may assume that by "otherwise" Tvrtko means
in a way other than that which the Franciscans had been following
around Jajce. Thus we may assume that in various other parts of Bosnial
Franciscans were also living outside of monasteries in communities
amidst the populace. And it is evident that Tvrtko felt this is the only
way they could effectively reach the people.
Despite Tvrtko's plea, Jacob expelled the friars- from the private
homes, and thus in effect from Jajce, where there was as yet no
monastery, since they would have had to go to other places where there
were monasteries (e.g., Visoko, Sutjeska). Tvrtko then restored them to
the private homes from which they had been expelled. Jacob, as we shall
gge from Tvrtko's second letter, lost his temper and left Bosnia.
tremoYnik states, without giving a reference, that Jacob went to
Hungary.(127)
On April I,1433 Tvrtko again wrote Jacob. He greets him warmly
but with a touch of reproach, ". . . to the most reverend father in christ
Lord Jacob ' . . our dearest friend in the Holy Spirit, all salutations with
friendly affection, not returning evil for evil.,' Having told Jacob, that
as Jacob well knew, his arrival in Bosnia had not been displeasing to the
king, Tvrtko states; "then, when you had passed some days in our
kingdom, we having been informed through certain teachers of your
faith, were led (!) to speak seriously to your worship lest those things be
begun through you in our kingdom which so far have not arisen through
your previous holy brothers. On account of this, perhaps, urged on
more by our enemies, you in anger departed from our kingdom.
"Now, however, holy father, and we feel as displeased as possible,
you so very wickedly decided to spread ill reports through christianity
(sic Christendom) by considering us not a Christian man but a pagan
which let (even such a thought) be far from (our mind). " Tvrtko invites -
Jacob to retum. He states that he does not object to Jacob preaching the
Roman faith in his kingdom. In fact he wants to help it and Jacob whom
he wants to consider a valued . ... (FermendYin fills in the lacuna with
vicar, but Jacob was not yet vicar.) He closes by stating that he intends
to send some of his men to the pope to clear himself of such
charges.(1 28)
Thus it seems that Tvrtko, acting on ln appeal by some teachers of
Jacob's faith (i.e., Franciscans), had intervened with Jacob, and as a
result Jacob had left. Tvrtko suggests that the quarrel may have been
exacerbated by his enemies. We do not know who these enemies were;
Jacob then spread word about abroad that Tvrtko was not a Christian
Bosnia from l39I to 1443 247
hut a pagan. Thus once
again we find the word pagan, though here it
is no more than a pejorative term for a man, who, by his
"robably in
lehavior, Jacob's opinion, is not worthy of being called a Christian.
Tvrtko, however, called this all slander, and intended to send a mission
pope. That Tvrtko was really a good Catholic is
to iustify himself to the
shown by the cordial relations he had with the pope at this time. In 1433
Tvrtko from Church fasts provided his confessor and
the pope released
it best for his health.(l29) Th'at Tvrtko had written the
doctor thought
nope about the matter shows that he took his Catholic practices
Lrioutty; the pope's granting Tvrtko's petition shows that he had no
fault to lind with the king's Catholicism'
In the Franciscan sources the quarrel took on legendary aspects:
Wadding, linking Tvrtko's opposition to Jacob to the influence of
heretics (whom this later editor calls Manichees), describes how
Tvrtko, surrounded by Manichees, feared that Jacob's activities might
cause him to lose his throne. Therefore he sent an evil magician,
skilled in incantations to cause death and madness; against Jacob. Jacob,
however, confounded this wizard and struck him dumb for life. The
Franciscans were not satisfied to simply attack Tvrtko but they also
depicted his wife as an evil woman who was a great enemy of Jacob. She
once invited Jacob to Bobovac. On the way four robbers ambushed him
to kill him. He said, "do as you want with me, for I am not afraid to die
for the true faith. I know who sent you and why she sent you. If God
wills it, fulfill the command of that evil woman." The four robbers
immediately became rigid, unable to move their arms. Then making the
sign of the cross, the saint freed them from this state. The four fell to the
ground and begged {or forgiveness, and he blessed them. Then he
continued on to Bobovac where he found the queen much surprised to
see him. She made various other attempts to kill him, and each time he
was saved by a miracle, until finally she grew tired of the game and made
peace with him.(130)
Since Tvrtko's wife was Dorothy Gorjanski, whom he was allowed to
marry only after the pope satisfied himself about Tvrtko's Catholicism,
it is clear that the queen was a good Catholic. We can hardly imagine her
trying to murder Jacob. But these stories may signify that she had been
the instrumental figure behind Tvrtko's opposition to Jacob's in-
terference in the lives of the Bosnian Franciscans.
. )acob was an unflagging enemy of heresy, and the documents
lrequently mention his work against heretics in the Bosnian vicariat.
However, the bulk of these refeiences speak of his war on the Hussites,
who did not exist in Bosnia proper but in Bohemia and Moldavia, both
of which were part of the Bosnian vicariat. If our sources are accurate
248 Medieval Bosnian Church
there were no Hussites nearer to Bosnia than Srem. As for Bosnia
proper, the general Franciscan Chronicle edited by Wadding; i1
describing Jacob's disciplining the Jajce Franciscans, states that in Jajce
the friars had lived among people infected with "various
heresies."(131) Probably Jacob had encountered there a variety of
heterodox practices, varying from village to village, among ignorant
peasants practicing Christianity as they saw fit.
ln 1437 Jacob was working against heretics in Srem. A Srem cleric
wrote a letter which mentioned Jacob's work among Bosnian heretics
(Patarins? a real heresy?) and Hussites in Srem and other regions near
the Danube.(132) In 1438 the cleric re-wrote the same text but omitted
the phrase about Bosnian heretics, and mentioned only Hussites.(131)
It is possible, ofcourse, that in copying the older text he inadvertently
omitted the expression ' 'Bosnian heretics.' ' However, it is also possible
that Jacob had concluded that he had been in error the.previous year
when he had called some people of Srem "Bosnian heretics." Later, a
Srem bishop, referring to Jacob's mission, spoke of the mixture of faiths
between the Sava and the Danube; he named Bosnian, Rascian (Or-
thodox), and Catholic faiths, as well as heretics of a variety of heresies
and particularly the Hussites.(l34) It seems here that Jacob or the
bishop was trying to distinguish the Bosnian Church (i.e., Bosnian faith)
from the heresies. In addition to these three faiths which were
distinguished from the heresies, he noted the existence of more than one
heretical current besides that of Jacob's b7te noire, the Hussites.
Because he does name the Hussites but only them, we can suspect that
the other heresies were not part of clear-cut movements, specific enough
to be named. Possibly some of the Bosnians noted in these northern
regions had fled thither to escape the civil war
- to be discussed shortly
that seems to have raged in Bosnia between 1433 and 1437.
- Church as heretical.
VL Bosnia and the Churcb Council at Basel
ln 1433 Dubrovnik was invited to summon representatives from the
Serbian Despot George Brankovid, Sandalj , Radoslav, and Tvrtko to
attend the Church Council at Basel. Dubrovnik wrote that owing to
wars it could not get envoys through to them and concluded: "The
clergy of the Kingdom of Bosnia are called Patarins by the Bosnians
themselves although they may more trulf be called without faith, order
or rule. The first among them is called djed; the second, gost; the third,
starac, and the fourth, stroinich. These four are the 'maiores' (leaders)
in heresy and in the infidelity of the Bosnians themselves."(135)
This is the only source (unless Hrvoie in fact said "Patarin rite"
Medieval Bosnian Church 249
:nc,read of "Pagan rite") that says the Bosnians used the term Patarin
,n"it ordained people; the Bosnians generally called them Christians
",
i"qtiani). Patarin was a label attached to Bosnian clerics by Dalmatian
[rif,"fi.r. Possibly, however, because the Dalmatians called the krstjani
ii rrinr, the Bosnians in communicating with Dalmatian towns at
,ir"s ..tt.d their clerics by the Dalrnatian term. The remark that the
prtrrint were without faith, order, or rule is obvious slander designed
ti nrr"t; however, it
is certain that the Bomian Church lacked order
,na tut" comparable to that of the
Catholic organization' The first three
,rntu of their hierarchy were accurately named, but the term
ilstroinik" is misunderstood. Ordained clerics below the rank of
..starac" were simply called krstjani. We have already met Sandali's
envoy Dmitar, who was a krstjanin in
1419 and a starac in1423.We
have also met Kfstianin Radin, whom we strall soon meet as a starac.
,,stroinik" is generally considered to be a member of the
The term
died's administrative council. Thus in 1404 the died sent stroiniks
and
krstiani to Dubrovnik to bring Klelic home. In the 1450's we shall find
Radin, then holding the rank of gost, being made a stroinik; and we
shall find the Pavlovi6i sending two stroiniks - a gost and a starac -
to
Dubrovnik to negotiate. Thus clearly stroinik was not a rank below the
other three ranks, but was an additional function held by people who
were at the same time also a stafac or a gost. The final sentence in the
Rasusan letter is notable for, excluding war-time polemics against
Raioslav pavlovi| (and in the l4J0's against Herceg Stefan), this is the
first and only time Dubrovnik called Bosnian churchmen heretical.
However, because the letter was designed for Basel, we may assume
that the Ragusans spoke of the Patarins not as they regarded them, but
as they thought the clerics at Basel would. Thus this letter is evidence
that the papacy and other foreign catholics did regard the Bosnian
Bosnia was twice mentioned in the minutes of the council of Basel:
First in February 1435 when it was noted that Tvrtko had submitted to
the Hungarian king and was converted from error;(136) second, also in
1431 when the Terbipolensis (?) bishop spoke of the reverence with
which the Bosnians had received him; it was all he could do to prevent
their kissing his feet. He claimed they were all Manichees and a mission
should be sent to them.(137) It is evident that if the Bosnians really had
been good Manichees, they would not have shown such esteem to a
Catholic cleric. We can attribute his reception to the ignorant peasants'
awe of the lordly man of God and to the South Slavs' hospitality toward
the stranger. While there is evidence that dualists existed in Bosnia, our
sources give no indication that all or even most Bosnians were
 2to Medieval Bosnian Church
"Manichees. "
The statement of Februaty 1435 about Tvrtko submitting to the
Hungarian king and being converted from error is puzzling, since we
have Tvrtko's letter of 7428 stating he was a Catholic, which seems to
have been confirmed by the pope's investigators who then allowed his
marriage to Dorothy. Perhaps the errors Tvrtko was converted from
were not errors akin to heresy, but instead concerned his dispute with
Jacob de Marchia. Jacob after his quarrel with Tvrtko had gone to the
Hungarian court and complained that Tvrtko was not a Christian. Since
Tvrtko, as far as we can tell, had only been defending some laxly living
Catholic clergy, we are given no reason to doubt his actual Catholicism.
Perhaps the King of Hungary had pressured Tvrtko into admitting he
had been at fault in his dispute with Jacob and thereby had reconciled
Tvrtko with Jacob, and it was this reconciliation that was announced at
Basel in February 1431. This hypothesis is made more plausible because
in 1435 Jacob returned to Bosnia as vicar.
There were also political reasons that might have led Tvrtko to move
closer to the King of Hungary. In these years from L433, a son of Ostoja
named Radivoj began to make a bid for the Bosnian throne. He had the
support of the Turks, who proclaimed him king, and he soon received
recognition and aid from Sandalj. Thus Tvrtko was deprived of what had
been little more than nominal suzerainty over the vast KosaEa holdings.
Radivoj, not recognized in the banate, resided at Sandalj's court from
1433 and was still there in I43) at the time of Sandalj's death. Adding
to Tvrtko's difficulties were an increase in Turkish raids
which were nominally supporting Radivoj - some of
and increased pressure
- Eventually the Serbs
along the Drina from Sandalj's allies the Serbs.
took Zvornik. With these developments it is not surprising that Tvrtko
II moved cioser to Hungary. And it is possible that it was this rap-
prochement that was referred to when it was announced at Basel that
Tvrtko had submitted to Sigismund. By 1437, in any case, Tvrtko had
again been forced to become a vassal of the sultan paying an increased
annual tribute.
VIL Roman Catholic Gains in Bosnia
In these years after Jacob's return, Catholicism made rapid gains in
Bosnia. ln 1436 Tvrtko granted the Franciscans freedom to teach in
Bosnia and took them under his protection. It is interesting to note that
one of the witnesses to the charter to them was Vladislav Kle*siC, the
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 2t1
son of Pavle Klesi6 who had been so closely linked with the Bosnian
church h r4o4'(l)8) Presumably by 1436, Vladislav had accepted
catholicism. The same year Pope Eugene lV, noting the shortage of
priests in Bosnia, allowed the Franciscans to administer the last iites,
permitted- the vicar to administer all sacraments, and gave him power to
delegate this authority to other brothers who worked in regions without
secular clergY.(I39)
Not only had Klelii's son most probably accepted catholicism, but so
too had Hrvoje VukEi6's nephew and successor Djuraj vojsalic, Lord of
the Donji kraji and rvrtko's leading supporter, whom the pope in 1437
allowed to build a church of our Lady for the Franciscans toward whom
he hadparticular affection.(140) Further evidence of his catholicism is
by a charter he issued in 1434 to the brothers
shown Jurijevid (the sons
of Djuraj Radivojevii). It was witnessed by the Bosnian vicar and other
Franciscans: "with all the described (lands) we render them into the
hands of Lord Vicar 2uuun and each vicar who will succeed him (,,i
vsakomu vikaru kon' vikara") and all Franciscan brothers of the Holy
Catholic Church ("svete cr'kve katoliEaske',) of Roman faith of the
Order of St. Francis."(141) The expression "vikar(u) kon' vikara,' is
unusual; the meaning, however, almost certainly is that the present
vicar and his successors (those who come after him) stand behind the
grant' This is similar to the formula "did kon' dida" from a Bosnian
Church charter of 1446.(142)
Further progress of catholicism and the Franciscans is demonstrated
by four papal letters from 1434 and 1440 which speak of a bishopric
(controlled by Franciscans) inside of Bosnia.(143) unfortunately uery
little is known about this bishopric. we know nothing of its formation,
its relationship to the bishop in Djakovo, how much territory it included
or how long it lasted. we know only that it was subject to Dubrovnik
and included Visoko. Srebrnica was added to the title by 1440.
VIIL. The Kosata Famifu; Cburcb Building and
Relations with the Ortbodox Church
[n.1434 sandalj sent an envoy (notably not a patarin)
to Dubrovnik to
say that he wanted to build a church and hospital there. Dubrovnik
was
unwilling at first to allow this.(144) Truhelka thinks
that this was a sign
.sandalj in his old age had begun to worry
that
-hisabout his soul and
wonder if the Bosnian church really
iould secure salvation, and had
decided to get some insurance
by building a church.(l45) We may
question Truhelka's view. The
fact that Dubiovnik was not interested in
252 Medieval Bosnian Church
the church suggests that it was to have be_en
_Orthodox. Dubrovnil
always worked to prevent the building of Orthodox churches in i6
lands, and to convert Orthodox and schismatics to Catholicism. If
6u
church was to have been Orthodox then it seems_probable that Sandali
had wanted to build it for his Orthodox wife, Jelena, daughter of the
Serbian Knez Lazar.
This view is confirmed by Resti, who has his chronology slightly
twisted but otherwise presents a plausible account of what must be the
same event. Resti says that the Serbian despot at the insistence of Jelena,
wife of the late Sandalj (thus erroneously dating the event after Sandalj's
death) requested the Republic to permit her to build outside the city a
church in which Greek services would be carried_out ._. . the (Ragusan)
Council, always averse to any rite other than the Catholic in its lands, at
once gave a negative reply.(146) Eventually it seems that some sort of
compromise was reached. However, we do not know if the church was
ever built because five months later in March 143) SandaU Hranid died.
Churches were built in Sandalj's lands and it is possible that Jelena
may actually have built one of them. Ruins of a church are found in a
medieval cemetery between Sandalj 's Klju[ and Cernica. The cemetery
clearly dates from Sandalj's time since one stone with an inscription
marks the grave of Radohna Ratkovii who was killed beneath the for"
tress of KliuE for his lord Sandalj.(147) Since the church ruins are old
and since cemeteries frequently were established beside churches, it is
probable that the church was contemporary with the cemetery. The
church was probably Orthodox, though it may have been Bosnian. Near
the walls o{ Kliui is an old mosque which the local inhabitants say had
originally been a church built by Sandalj's wife Jelena.(148) The
tradition claims erroneously that she was Jelena Obilid (rather than
L,azar's daughter), and that Sandalj had abducted her by force (about
which we know nothing). The tradition reports that Sandalj was a rhan
without faith (bezujerac) while his nephew Herceg Stefan had been
Orthodox.
That Sandali died a member of the Bosnian Church is confirmed by
Resti whose description of Sandalj deserves full quotation: "He was a
prince with lively spirit, with great intelligence and with much delicacy
(!), who was always able to penetrate the heart of the matter with great
facility, whose memory would have been immortal, if his life had not
been stained and his fame obscured with the error of schisrn and the
Patarin rite in which he was born and in which he died.' '(L49) Here too
the Patarin rite is depicted as schismatic rather than heretical. Sandali
left a huge state to his nephew and successor, Stefan Vukli6 Kosata who
was to go down in history as Herceg Ste{an, as a result of the title
Bosnia [rom I39l to 1443 2t3
lJaerpe obtained in 1448.(l)0) Stefan began his career holding the
I^,il"oftn" Neretva, and all the land from there to the west bank of the
l,l,- niu*. He inherited his uncle's main court of Samobor (near
[rrji-.1 as well as other fortresses at Kosman (near Fda), at
and at KlluY. His lands stretched north to Koniic
il*ffot, " Blagai, Nfislc'
rnd south as lar
as
-
i"ndali's widow Jelena, Knez Ldzar's daughter, remained an active
.,,Joo.,.i of the Orthodox Church. Presumably she had been in-
in Sandali's fequest to build a church in Dubrovnik, and
"rJunl"ntrt
,.rJi,ion also links her to the church in Kljut. After her husband's
death she returned to
Zeta'
she left a will which was deposited in Dubrovnik. The will
ln 1442-43
by two clerics, Nikandar, a starac (elder
was witnessed among others -
was also used in the Orthodox Church) from Jerusalem, her
rhe term
soiritual adviser. and by a monk named Jovan. Nikandar presumably
lived at court and served as her chaplain and confessor. She left him,
monk Jovan and a priest (pop) named Teodosius sums of money. She left
to her great-nephew Vladislav various valuables, including the relics of a
saint, and to her sister a gold icon. Money was set aside for charity and
for her grave. To the churches of St. George and the Holy Virgin were
leftasilver bowl and some other items to do as they wanted with, and
money was assigned to roo{-over the church she had built for her grave.
A few lines below she mentioned 200 ducats to cover St. George's
church at Gorica. She also left 1000 ducats for a new church to be
dedicated to the Virgin at her grave in Gorica (The church was built on
the island Gorica (Be!ki) on Lake Skadar).(151) She assigned the task of
seeing that the churches were completed and her will executed to her
"grandchildren" Elena and Vladislav. Vladislav who was the son of
Stefan Vuktid was actually in our terms her grandnephew. They were to
provide for anything the churches lacked
- books, furnishings.
Near
the close of this interesting testament, Jelena stated that someone
named Voio had sent a message to her through Starac Radin in the
KorEanska (sic. GoriUanska) Church of the Holy Trinity that she should
put down her wishes and make a will and pray to God in the name of the
l'loly Virgin that her wishes be carried out. And therefore the will was
written by her spiritual advisor Nikandar . . . .(152)
Jelena was evidently a devout woman, involved in church building
and surrounded by
Orthodox clergymen. Yet she had been married to a
ntember of the Bosnian
Church. There is no evidence that any of these
clerics caused friction
by trying to force her to convert her in-laws. To
comp_lete her
church-building projects, she called upon her husband's
Srandnephew Vladislav, about whom we have no evidence that he was
2t4 Medieval Bosnian Church
Orthodox. Vladislav's father was clearly a supporter of the Bosnian
Church, and a later Ragusan source calls Vladislav's brother Vlatko a
"Patarin " as well. This means Jelena trusted a man who probably was 6
follower of the Bosnian Church to see to it that these Orthodox churches
were completed and properly furnished. In addition, she left to this
grandnephew some treasured holy relics, which she could easily have
left to one of the three mentioned Orthodox clerics. All this strongly
suggests that the Bosnian Church was neither opposed to the cult of
relics nor to church buildings.
Jelena's will also mentions a Starac Radin. The title starac can refer
either to a Patarin or an Orthodox monk, but because the famous
Patarin Radin (subsequently to be a gost) had by 1437 achieved the rank
of starac and entered the service of Stefan VuktiC, it is possible that he
was the Starac Radin in the will. If so, then Radin the Patarin gave
advice to the Orthodox Jelena and she publicly admitted this fact in her
will; clearly, she did not consider him a heretic - any more than
Catholic Dubrovnik did. And this Radin himself had been in the church
and passed on this Voio's words ; thus Radin's speaking to Jelena inside
a church (presumably an Orthodox one) would be evidence that Patarins
were not hostile to church buildings,(153) and that Radin had cordial
relations with Orthodox clerics. Jelena's career and her will show,
despite Sandalj's and his successor Stefan VukEi6's ties with the
Patarins, that there were strong Orthodox influences at their court, and
that relations between the Orthodox and Patarins were cordial. Thus we
see here what could be regarded as an Orthodox-Bosnian Church
symbiosis, similar to the Catholic-Bosnian Church symbiosis frequently
noted in relations between Bosnia and Dubrovnik. Thus, I think
Jelena's will is further proof that the Bosnian Church was not Bogomil
or, indeed, heretical. The presence of the two faiths at Stefan Vuktid's
court also illustrates Bosnian tolerance to, or indifference about, the
existence of different religious faiths.
IX: PoliticalEuents from tbe Late 1430's to 1443
and the Secular Role of Patarin.r
In the late I430's Turkish activities continued at an increasing rate in
Bosnia. The Turks were used by Stefan Vukiii in his wars with his
neighbors and they were also active on their own behalf. In 1439 Serbia
fell, and Ottoman raids into Bosnia became more frequent. Contrary to
general belief , however, it seems that the Turks occupied no territory in
Bosnia other than a few towns along the Drina. It had been generally
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 251
and the near-by fortress Hodidied had.been oc-
helieved that Sarajevo
and held permanently. However, Dini6 and Sabanovi6
cupied in 1436
iru. *to*n that this town and fortress were not taken and held per-
until after I448'(lJ4) The Turkish raids seem, however, to
rnanently
have done considerable damage, and in 1417 the Franciscans com-
ohined that over the previous two years the Turks had destroyed sixteen
in
.hurcher and monasteries the Bosnian vicariat.(155) We do not know
how many, if any, of the sixteen were in the Bosnian kingdom.
Despite the obvious danger to the kingdom, the Bosnian nobles
rernained faithful to their own interests. In addition to the struggle
between Tvrtko II and Radivoj, civil war broke out in 1435 between
Radoslav and Stefan Vuktii after Radoslav had divorced his wife
Theodora (Stefan's sister) and had remarried; thus we may assume that
he had married her according to Bosnian custom. In 1439 the two made
peace; to seal it Radoslav
- his second wife having died - took
Theodora back.(156)
These casual Bosnian marriages also caused complaint beyond the
borders of Bosnia. After Tvrtko I's conquests, Bosnian overlordship
extended along southern Dalmatia as far as Kotor (from ca. 1385) and
various Bosnians had settled in that town in the final decade of the
fourteenth and the first half of the fifteenth centuries. In October 1438
the Bishop of Kotor received a complaint from Stanislava, wife of one
Miloslav of DraEevica (the Yupa stretching inland behind Hercegnovi),
that Miloslav, with whom she lived in lawful marriage, had, for no fault
of her own, driven her from his house and had taken a second wife
according to Bosnian and Patarin custom.(l57) We have discussed
Bosnian attitudes towards marriage previously and have ar:gued that
they were derived from popular tradition rather than from any religious
creed. However, we may assume that the Bosnian Church did not
oppose popular attitudes toward marriage, and therefore, it is not at all
odd for the Kotor bishop to attribute this custom to "Patarinism."
Radoslav died in l44l and was succeeded by his son lvaniY, who was
able, after a brief quarrel with Stefan, to arrange a peace. Stefan's in-
terests were diverted elsewhere as he pushed both into the region beyond
Nikii6 and into Zeta's coastal holdings. In 1437 King Sigismund dled ;
his weak successor Albrecht died shortly thereafter setting off a civil war
in Hungary. Hungary was thus unable to intervene in Bosnia which
may have been a hardship for Tvrtko who was still faced with the anti-
king Radivoj. When Tvrtko died in 1443he was succeeded by Ostoja's
nn and Radivoi's brother, Stefan Tomaf.
After an interval of several years without mention of Patarin envoys,
we again find references to several Patarin ambassadors in Dubrovnik
256 Medieval Bosnian Church to 1443
Bosnia from 1J91 257

lrorn Radoslav and Stefan VukEii in 1437 and in the years immediatat,,
trA/-\ In that contract Dubrovnik used the term
following.( 158) In April 1437 Stefan Vuktid_sent St"...l
-Radin 9':1fl;;:;:iir,-p.,"ri.s used when thev spoke of themselves. In
Dubrovnik.( 159) This shows that Radin had left Radoslav and had come
,"j:';; Vkchs were hired to take merchants to the place of Ruxin
to serve Stefan: he would remain in Stefan's service. until the latter,t -

death in l4(r(r. Radin had been by now promoted to the church rank l:.ff; Glubscovo.(I67) Ruxin was presumably prior of the house.
starac.
of i'l.*,;' contract of I4l4 simply referred to the Patarin place at
Early in the spring of 1438 ambassadors had been sent to Dubrovnik 1,1T"*l"o.fro8) In 141J a contract instructed the Vlachs to lead the
jointly by the Bosnian king, Radoslav, and the djed.(160) We-do not Il"fu",r io the house of Radoycho in Glubscovo'(169) We may
Patarin and had succeeded Ruxin as prior of
know what they came to discuss, nor who were sent as envoys. dlrkovii ll"r.,f,r, this man was a stated that the merchants were en route to
believes that these embassies were sent to intercede on behalf of il-tour., This document
ilt*i... Thus we can assume that Glubscovo (probably correctly
Radoslav who was having difficulties in his war with Stefan Vuk-
i,ri.f.o*l was located somewhere in the vicinity of Srebrnica, and
I'ic'.1lr,l;
In August 7439 Dubrovnik wrote Radoslav to send it one of his lJii oroUably a full day's iourney away from it.(170) References to
iiuur.ouo and the Patarins continued in 1416.(r71) Ljubskovo lay in
Patarins for discussions.(162) It is clear that on this occasion for some
i*-i.ri,ory of the DiniiEid family; since in 14J0 this family sent a
reason Dubrovnik did not want any envoy, but a Patarin. Had an ambassador, we can conclude that the
prterin to Dubrovnik as
DLrbrovnik found Patarins more easy to deal with ? This is also evidence
Diniifidi, if not actually adherents of the Bosnian Church, at least
that Radoslav must have had several Patarins around his court who were
msinrained cordial relations with its clerics.(172)
on call. We do not know if Radoslav acceded to this request.
ln I4 I 8 a contract was made for the Vlachs to take merchants going
At the end of April and early May 1440, we find Radin and a layman
ro Bosnia to Bradina to the house of Milorad Patarin.(173) Milorad
again in Dubrovnik on behalf of Stefan. Radin is once referred to as
;,resumably was
the prior of the Bradina hi'a. The Vlachs were told that
"starac christiano. " (163) which shows that the term krstjanin could be
il bad weather prevented them from going as far as Milorad's house,
a general one for all who were ordained, and on occasions could be used
rhey should stop at the house of the king in Konjic. Bradina lay on the
for a man even after he received a higher title.
mure between Konjic and Vrhbosna. This last document tells us of yet
And finally in 1442, a Ragusan envoy sent to the royal court was
one more hifa, and shows that in 1418 the king held Koniic and also
instructed to get a treaty sealed before ordained members of either the
maintained caravanserais. The collection of contracts shows clearly that
Roman faith or of the Bosnian faith.(164) Thus as we move into the
rt least certain Patarin hiY.as served as hostels for merchants and
reign of Stefan Tomai gaaf|g we find that, despite Catholic gains,
travelers. And they also show that Dubrovnik did not object to its
the Bosnian Church was still active in Bosnia, and even at Tvrtko's mcrchants stopping over at these monasteries of the Bosnian Church.
cou rt.
- being residences and centers for
From the point of view of function
rhe Bosnian monastic order the hilas can be called monasteries.
llowever, the term "monastery" - may suggest to the reader large
huildings (or complexes of buildings) housing many monks. Though this
X; Patarin I'lilas and Dubroanik mey have been the case, the terminology of contemporaries to describe
tlrer residences (house"
domus, casa, hiEa: words that all mean '
We have noted Patarin hiias in Mottre in 1322-25 and have heard of -
rug8ests that they were -
fairly small in size and in number of inhabitants.
one at an unknown location where RadiliC's brother had sought refuge' In confirmation
of tnit nypoit,esis is the fact that archaeologists have not
We may suspect that the djed's letter of 1404 from Janjidi was also unearthed any large
foundations in villages where known hiias were
issued from a hila. ln l4l2 Ragusah sources mention yet another kxzred.(174)
Patarin house. It was normal for Vlachs to be hired to lead rnerchant relations between the patarin hiias and the Ragusan
caravans and in this year they were hired to go to "Glubscovo" to the -5.u.., were not always friendly. In November L44O before a
Patarins.(165) A second coniract that year hlred the Vlachs to take the il::::1",tcourt
in :llu:tn a merchant made complaint against one Radoe Rugiza,
merchants to the home of the Christians (domos Christianorurn) *no he claimed had taken a
horse with furnishings and other goods
258 Medieval Bosnian Church
worth thirty ducats from him near GoraYde on the Drina on account of
(or for the sake of) that Patarin.(17)) Since we shall meet Radoe again in
a second court case, where we shall find him to be a landowner with his
own peasants, it is likely that he was not an ordained Patarin. Thus we
must conclude that either the Ragusan court was using the term loosely
for a lay supporter of the Bosnian Church and hence was referring to
Radoe as a Patarin, or else Radoe was working for a Patarin well enough
known to the iudge so that it was not necessary to refer to him by name.
Since Radoe committed his crime near GoraYde, we may choose the
second alternative and suggest that the Patarin referred to is Gost
Gojisav, whom we shall meet in the next case. However, since com-
plaint was made against Radoe we can suggest that he and the Patarin
were in cahoots.
In January 144I , two Ragusan merchants complained against two
brothers and their father-in-law Bosigchus, who had promised to obtain
for the merchants a safe-conduct so that they could pass through the
territory of Gost Goysavus (Gojisav), who lived near BoraE. The gost
with a functionary of Vojvoda Stefan (VukEl6; (cum valioso vayvode
Stiepani) Eave a safe-conduct to Bosigchus who returned with it to the
merchants and suggested that they set out, saying that he would lead the
way and retain the document. When they entered the gost's terfitory
Bosigchus disappeared and since they were unable to produce the safe-
conduct, the gost had confiscated all their goods.(176) It is apparent that
the merchants had fallen into a trap. Presumably the Patarins and
Bosigchus' family split the profits.
The Patarin hiia lay below Borat which was still the capital of the
Pavlovidi.(177) Yet it is clear that the gost's hiXa was not in Radoslav's
lands but in those of Stefan Vuktii, since it was the latter's official who
had validated the safe-conduct. In the previous case complaint had been
made against Patarins near Goralde. Goralde lay in Stefan's territory on
the road between Bora[ and FoEa, not far beyond Borat. The Patarins in
the 1440 complaint did not live in GoraZde but near it. Both complaints
then seem to have been leveled against the same hila, which lay on
Stefan's lands on the road between Goral,de and BoraE.
The gost's involvement in issuing a safe-conduct and his confiscation
of goods lacking papers show that Stefan VukEid utilized Patarins in
matters of administration. Since the document had to be shown the gost,
the hila was apparently located immediately on the Pavlovi6-KosaZa
border, and served as a border post (and very likely also as a customs
house). Thus when the merchants could not produce the safe-conduct,
the gost as customs agent simply seized their goods, since they did not
have permission to bring them into Kosata land. After all, the mer-
Bosnia from l39l to 1443 2t9
chants could not expect to travel without a visa. If safe-conducts wefe
needed to go from the territory of one noble to another, we have further
evidence that Bomia ought to be regarded as a ldnd of separate
autonomous units rather than as a unified statt. The role of the gost in
stefan's administration also should be emphasized. we have no
"ui-d*."
that other hiYas played this sort of role, but considering the scarcity of
documentation we cannot rule out the possibility. And if the gost
controlled a border post and was able physically to seize goods we may
speculate that he had assigned to him (or had acquired himself) a certain
number of armed retainers. This would have been almost a necessity for
an administrative official on this tense border between two frequently
warring parties. And if he had retainers, we may speculate that the gost
played some role in keeping order in the region of Gora"zde. thus ihis
gost, regardless of his unscrupulous behavior, was evidently an im_
portant and influential figure in the GoraYde region.
In February 1441 Boghissa Bogmilovii, a merchant, comprained to
the Ragusan court about Radoe Rughiza (whom we met in the case of
the lost horse in November 1440) and his villagers of the town of
"vinizcha" and about three other men, one of whom was from
Goralde , and some other peasants. Added in a second hand to this list is :
"and against Gos patarin and against his familia." These people were
accused of seizing a large quantity of goods having ionsiderable
value.(178) Since the Patarin was called "Gos" and since again
Goralde was mentioned, we may assume that gos meant gost and that
once again our Gost Gojisav and his hila near GoraZde were involved in
robbery. The most interesting item is the expression about the
"familia" of the Patarin. presumably it refers to his household which
would include the other krstjani living in the hila and any servants (or
even.armed retainers) the gost might have had. It might, however, refer
to relatives of the gost. It has generalry been ,rru,n"d that
the kistjani
were celibate. This belief is supported by the
fact that we know of no
examples of any Patarin having children. In addition,
since the Bosnian
Church seems to have been a continuation of what was
origin,ally a
catholic monastic organization, it seems probable
that the ,norr"k, *ould
becelibate. Thus since the evidence rugg"rr.,
though not conclusively,
that ordained members of the Bosnian church
were celibate, then
family, if that is the meaning, would presumably
have referred to
relatives, (brothers, nephews, eic.;
who lived in the area.
In December l44r a patarin named Vukosav and a rayman
were
of theft.1179) In a case before the Ragusan court in
ii:):.d
144.2 once again complaint January
was made against patarins n"r. Go.uid"
seizing goods.(180) we
should not generalize about pu,r.in l.nJo. o"
260 Medieval Bosnian Church
the basis of this material since all the identifiable cases most probably
refer to the same hila. But it is clear that Gost Goiisav was a figure f21
more concerned with gathering the fruits of this world than storing away
credits for some vague hereafter. Gost Radin, as we shall see later, 4ts6
would manage to amass an enorrnous fortune from other activities
carried out while he was a starac and a gost.
XL' Graue slone Insc riptions Giuing Information
About tlte Bosnian Cburcb
We have eight undated gravestone inscriptions at seven sites which
refer to ordained members of the Bosnian Church. Most scholars date all
or most of them in the fifteenth century.
The first inscription is found at KoXariCi near Bogutovo village not far
from Biieljina. It states that a man whose name is illegible (Truhelka has
been able to deduce only the first name Radoe), buried on his own land,
has had a new stone placed over him by Gost Ratko (or Ra'sko) and the
son of the deceased.(181) This suggests that the dead man had been a
follower of the Bosnian Church. Somehow something had happened to
his original gravestone, and the man's son and the gost hadplaced a new
stone over him. This shows that Bosnian Church clerics were, not
surprisingly, concerned with the burial of members of their church. It
also shows that the Bosnian Church allowed its adherents to be buried
on their own land. The most interesting thing about the inscription is its
location. Bijeljina is far to the north, near the junction of the Drina and
Sava. Other sources have only vaguely suggested that the Bosnian
Church was active in this region which was only at times, and then only
nominally, under the control of the Bosnian ban.(182) This one stone is
not sufficient evidence to show that a Bosnian Church monastery existed
at (or near) KoYariCi, although we cannot rule out the possibility.
Otherwise this region seems to have been a mixed Catholic and Or-
thodox area. There was a Franciscan monastery at Bijeljina by 1385
since it was noted on Bartholomaeus of Pisa's list of monasteries in the
Bosnian vicariat.(l83) Orthodox believers lived all the way along the
Drina, and near Bogutovo village at Trnjabka, a grave inscription also
from about the fifteenth century was written by "Goitin the priest"
(pop),(184) whose name and title suggest he was Orthodox.
At Poljska between LaXva and Travnik, we again find a gost placinga
new stone over a dead man, presumably a follower of the Bosnian
Church. This time the gost wrote the inscription.(185) Presumably that
means he wrote the text, and someone else did the actual carving.
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 261
A third inscription also concerns a gravestone. Found at Medjedji at
crrtlernent Djipi between Goralde and Vi$egrad, it mentions a certain
i-rdourn and a Krstjanin RadaYin pulling a stone (presumably from the
ourrry ,o the grave site).(186) Perhaps Krstjanin Rada'sin was a member
of ttt. trilr near
Goralde where we found the greedy Gost Goiisav.
Two inscriptions are found on two different stones at the village o{
Zgunie on a hillside overlooking the Bosnian side of the Drina between
Biiina Balta and Peru[ac. Both stones have been removed from their
original locations by farmers since they interfered with farming. The
first stone is damaged and only one word "stroinik" now appears on
it;(187) we have noted before that a stroinik was a member of the djed's
governing council. The rest of the surviving face is clean and bears no
iigns o{ writing; the missing piece is not large, thus the complete in-
scription that originally stood there must have been brief. The second
stone is a very attractive obelisk. It is the first of the stones we have
noted that has designs upon it. On one face it has three rosettes. On a
second face is depicted a solitary ''T" staf{. This shows that this symbol
was not limited to churchmen of rank but could be used by any ordained
member of the Bosnian Church, including krstjani, for the inscription
"Here lies Ostoia Krstjanin at Zgtnje" tells us the deceased was a
krstianin.(188) Ostoja is known from one other source. Okig found in a
Turkish defter of 1534 reference to the hereditary lands (baltina) of
"Kristians" Ostoia and Vladislav in the village of Lower (Dolinji)
Zgunie, nahije Osat.(189) BeXlagiC concludes that Ostoia was still alive
at the time of this sixteenth century survey and thus dates the stone to
the sixteenth century. The obelish shape also suggests that Ostoia's
sone was influenced by Turkish styles and thus was late. Bellagii dates
the "stroinik" stone, however, to the fifteenth century because of its
boxlike shape and the style of the carved letters. It seems probable to me,
since there are only eight stones extant now (possibly there were once
more), suggesting that this was originally a fai'ly small cemetery, that
all the stones would be from roughly the same date. Since in the defters
we frequently find lands named after former owners who have been dead
$ome time, I do not think we can assert that Ostoja lived in the sixteenth
c.entury (though we cannot rule out the possibility). Since his obelisk
does suggest Turkish influence I think wL should date him no
earlier
than the middle of the fifteenth century.
Since we do not find mention in
dor-unients of dleds or stroiniks after the Turkish
conquest, it seems
Itkely that the stroinik
stone would be prior to 1460 (if not even earlier).
Thus I would date the two
stones 1440-1470. The inscriptions tell us
little.about the Bosnian Church
except that it seems to have had
members as far as
the Drina. Since the other six stones have no markings
 262 Medieval Bosnian Church
at all, on the basis of two Bosnian Church inscriptions we may
suggest
that this had once been a Bosnian Church clericai cemetery. Tirere
may
well have been a hila at Zgunje. The community in Zgunje evidently
was of some importance, since one of its members had been on the
died's administrative council. zgunje does not lie very far from Ljub-
skovo where we noted a hiY.a in the second decade of the fifteenth
ccntury. Thus this general region may have been a Bosnian Church
center. whether these communities dated back to the fourteenth
century, or whether they sprang up. only during the fifteenth century
under the protection of the pavlovidi and Din;iliil when the catholic
of{ensive began to assert itself in the center of the state is unknown.
At Puhovac nearT'enica, not at all thr from Birino porje and
Janji6i,
was found a stone without.decoration bearing the following
inscrlption:
"Here lies good Gost MiYljen to whom it was arrang"a uy order
of
Abraham his great hospitality. Good lord 11.e., miXllen) *hen you go
befcrre Our Lord Jesus mention us your servants. G. M. writes.'-'(19-0)
This inscription shows two important things about the Bosnian church.
First, it mentions Abraham, showing that the Bosnian church did not
reject the Old Testament or its prophets. Secondly, we see that in the
church's views regarding the hereafter, it is believed that the in-
terventi.n of holy individuals (in this case, the gost) could affect and aid
the salvation of other people. Thus the hypothesis that the Bosnian
church considered salvation dependent solely on correct baptism and
thereafter strictly obeying ceftain prescriptions is incorrect.
our seventh inscription marks a grave close to the old fortress Soko
(or Sokolgrad) on the Piva River. Since Herceg stefan is referred
to in
the inscription bearing the title "vojvoda" we can date it between 1435
(the date of Sandalj's death and stefan's accession) and l44g (the
date
stefan took the title herceg). unfortunately there are several lacunae in
the inscription which reads: ,,God, unite petko . my soul; and
brothers and friends I beg you not to disturb my remains for i was as you
are and you will be as I, dead. I placed this grave-marker during my life
time and death cut me down at Sokol . . . Bless Vojvoda Stelfan who
honorably fed me and God guard his soul forever I, petko Kr'_
stienin. "( 191)
This inscription, then, marks the grave of a Bosnian Church cleric.
The inscription shows that Stefan Vuk[ii had had close
relations with
members of the church, and had fed at least one
cleric. we may assume
that Petko had lived either at court or else ar , ner.-bf
t,#u-*ior"
members were supported by the charity of Stefan
Vuk[ii. Other
evidence suggests that there may well have been a hiya in
the
vicinity.(192)
Bosnia lrom 1397 to t44j 263
It was found at
Our final stone is probably the most interesting.
Humsko near FoEa, and now sits in the court yard of the Zemaljski
rnuzej in Saraievo. On the front face is depicted a man standing,
bareheaded, dressed in a skirt which ends above the knees. He wears a
rope-like belt. In his left hand he holds a rectangular object which is
almost certainly a book; in his right, he holds a "T" staff. On each of
the two sides is depicted a rope-like object running vertically, which
probably represents his belt. This belt probably had some significance
(possibly it designated his rank) that we cannot be sure about today. On
the back is depicted a rosette inside two circles. All four sides are en-
closed within a rope-like border. Inscriptions are found on three sides.
"ln your name Immaculate Trinity, the gravestone of Lord Gost
Milutin born Cr'nitan, " "He perished as God willed it. " and "Zitije
("Life", a term used for a saint's biography): He lived honored by the
lord of Bosnia, he received gifts from the great lord and nobles and from
Greek lord and was known to all."(I93) The grave was excavated
the
and around the skeleton were found fragments of a rich gown (in which
the corpse had obviously been lain to rest) on which were depicted stars
and a lion. Skarii dates the stone fourteenth or fifteenth century.
This stone reveals a man who had achieved the rank of gost. He
presumably was from a family in ' 'Crnice " (possibly Cernica near Kljut
in Hercegovina). He cleady was a worldly figure; not only did he live
honored by the nobility, but this aspect of his life, rather than some
religious aspect, was what seemed to him (or to those who buried him)
important to mention on his gravestone. He was wealthy and like it,
noting gifts from various noblemen including a Greek lord; he also was
buried in a rich robe, not what we would have expected for an ordained
cleric.
We do not know who the "Greek Lord" was, for surviving sources
give almost no data on any relations between Bosnia and the Greeks.
Truhelka speculated that the reference most probably would have been
to the Despot of Epirus. I would like to suggest that the Greek Lord was
Thomas Despot of the Morea to whom Herceg Stefan sent an embassy
(whose participants are not named) in 1457. At the same time at
Stefan's house in Dubrovnik was staying Manuel Cantacuzenus, who
was related to Anna Cantacuzena, the wife of Stefan's son
Vladislav.(194) Since Cemica whence Milutin seems to have come
belonged to the KosaEe, it is not impossible that Milutin served Stefan
Vukiii
and participated in the 1457 embassy to the Morea.
Since it is after the list of his important connections, that it is stated
that he was known to all, we may suspect that his fame was through his
state-court service. This would also be a reason for his receiving so many
 Medieval Bosnian Church
gifts. Strange to say, his name is not mentioned in any extant source
despite the fact that we have considerable material about Patarin
diplomats in the Dubrovnik archives. As a worldly and wealthy figurq
we may place him in the company of two other worldly rich gosts --
Radin and Gojisav.
The only religious reference in the inscription is to the Trinity which
we have noted before was clearly accepted by the Bosnian Church. We
may suggest that the man whose portrait is carved on the stone is
dressed in the habit worn by krstjani in general, or possibly gosts in
particular.
XIL' Patarin Diplomats
As a preface to this discussion we must note that almost all the in-
formation about Patarin envoys comes from Ragusan records, which
focus on the town's own foreign affairs and speak almost entirely about
their mis.sions to Dubrovnik. Occasionally, mention is made of a patarin
embassy within Bosnia, but these are scattered and give us no basis to
generalize. Of the forty-two missions for which there is data, forty were
to DLrl:rovnik.(195) It is probable that an equally high if not higher
- courts within
- and then a long gap until 1 mission was sent in 14J4. Of these twelve
number of Patarin envoys traveled between different
Bosnia. However we just do not know.
Despite the fact that we know of forty-two embassies on which
Patarins participated as envoys, we should not exaggerate their role in
diplomacy. We have no evidence that any Patarin served as a diplomat
prior to Vlatko in 1403. The Bosnian kings used Patarin diplomats only
twice(19(r) -- tn 7tt03 and 1430 and Truhelka argues convincingly
- really
that the 1/+30 mission may well have been sent by the djed. When
we turn to the great nobles and only the leading magnates did con-
- we find only two families
duct their own foreign policy using patarins
with any regularity -
the Kosa[e (Sandalj and Stefan Vuk[id) beginning
- Pavlovi6i and l8 for Stefan VukEi6); Radalin, 4; Vlatko, 3 (excluding
in 1419 and the Pavloviii beginning in 1420. A third noble family the
DiniiEiii sent one Patarin mission in 1450. Hrvoje, though calied a
Patarin, was never known to use a Patarin as a diplomat.
l'he KosaIe used Patarins in twenty-seven missions. For this figure I
am not counting the possible mission of Dmitar Starac in 1430 since
though we know he was due to be sent to Dubrovnik we have no in-
formation that he actually came. I am arbitrarily saying that Radin made
three missions to Dubrovnik in 1453-)4 to negotiate the peace treaty
after Stefan's war against rhe rown. Radin is found in Dubrovnik for
large parts of those two years, and it is impossible to determine how
Bosnia from 1391 to l44l 26t
rnany trips he actually made. The KosaEe missions are spaced as
1419,1in1423, then a gap broken by Dmitar
foltows:2in
I - possibly
in
inl43O - until 1432when Patarin came,2 l4)7 , 3 in 1438, 1 in
t440, 2 in 1441, I in 1443, 2 in 144i, then a gap until 2 in 1450 then
onrc 14J3-54 when we estimate Radin made 3 trips, I in 14J6, 1 in
1459, I in 146I, L in 1462, 2 in 146), L in 1466.In all but one of
these twenty-seven missions at least one lay ambassador par-
ticipated.(197) Frequently though, the Patarin (especially Radin) was
the first negotiator. Of the twenty-seven Patarin envoys, Radin was the
ambassador in eighteen cases, which suggests that Radin was trusted by
Stefan and may well have been used frequently for that reason rather
than because he was a Patarin. And in fact Radin occupied at Stefan's
court a position which could accurately be described as foreign secretary.
The Pavlovili sent Patarins on twelve different missions. On four
occasions more than one Patarin participated. If Radoslav did accede to
Dubrovnik's request in 7439 to send one of his Patarins to discuss
matters, a thirteenth embassy took place. The twelve known Pavlovii
missions,are spaced as follows: l in 1420, I in 1421 , 7 in 71+22, 2 in
1423,then a gap until 1430 when one mission occurred, I in 1432,
I
then a five-year gap until I more is sent in 1417 , 2 in 1438, in 1439,
missions, Radalin participated in four, Vlatko in three and Radin in
three
- with Vlatko and Radin participating once on the same mission.
In nine of the twelve missions lay envoys definitely participated; in one
case it is evident that Radavsin came alone, in two cases we do not know
about lay participation.
In the 1403 and 1430 royal missions and the 1450 DinjiEi6 mission
lay figures also went along.
When we turn to the thirty-nine missions sent by the two leading
magnate families, we find that in thirty-seven cases the Patarin envoy is
mentioned by name; we find that Radin served on 2l (3 for the
his 1403 mission on behalf of King Osto ja); Dmitar, 2; the total is 29
since Radin and Vlatko once served on the same mission.This means out
of J7 missions (where the envoys are mentioned by name) in 29 ot
them. one of these four men participated. Hence. we may suggest that it
was their individual merit rather than the fact they were Patarins which
led to their selection. Of course, on occasions, for example in war-time,
their clerical status might have been advantageous, and hence a factor in
their selection. Dubrovnik did evidently see a difference between Patarin
and secular envoys. The town usually showed special deference to
Patarins, on occasions giving them larger gifts than it gave to the secular
 266 Medieval Bosnian Church
envoys, and once in 1439 specifically asked Radoslav to send one of his
Patarins. unfortunately, we do not know why Dubrovnik particularly
liked Patarins.
However, despite the frequency with which these two noble families
used Patarins after 1419-20, we should not lose sight of the role of
secular envoys. First we must stress that prior to 1419-20, all the
embassies sent by these families had been entirely composed of laymen
lesser nobles or dijaAs (scribes). Thus Patarins
-families only served these
as envoys during
the final four decades of the Bosnian state. In
addition, of the thirty-nine missions on which patarins participated sent
by these families,lay envoys accompanied the Patarins on at least thirty-
four occasions.(198) Unfortunately, for many of these occasions it ls
impossible to determine whether the Patarin or a layman was the chief
negotiator. Finally it should be added that the presence of a cleric on an
otherwise entirely secular embassy was common in the Middle Ages,
both in Slavic and non-Slavic states.(l99)
Professor DiniC has extracted from the Dubrovnik archives all
mention of Patarin missions. Thus this gives us a picture of patarins
dominating diplomacy. However, during this period, 1419-66, we find
various missions composed entirely of secular figures. unfortunately the
records of the Ragusan council meetings for the fifteenth century have
not yet been published; and no scholar has had the interest or time
to extract the references to entirely secular diplomatic- missions -to
Dubrovnik. Thus we do not have a basis on which to make concrete
comparisons between the number of missions with patarins and those
without. However, when we take into consideration that relations were
constant between these two families and Dubrovnik both for commercial
and political reasons, and when we note the long time intervals without
mention of Patarin envoys to l4j0; 1432 to 1437; 1445 to
- 1423
1410; and on occasions longer {or a particular family
- we
assume that the diplomacy during these intervals was handled
must
entirely
by secular envoys.
It cannot be argued that many Patarin missions occurred which
soufces do not mention. Ragusan council records are preserved complete
for these years of the fifteenth century. And since it was one oi the
council's tasks to vote upon matters of foreign policy as well as to
receive and give gifts to envoys, we may assume that few embassies
arrived in Dubrovnik that were not noted in the council minutes.
Professor Dinii has combed all these, as yet unpublished, minutes and
records, as well as letters to Ragusan arnbassadors and court cases on
wills, and has published all references to Patarins. Thus we may con-
clude that there were not many more than forty patarin missions to
Bosnia from I39l to 1443 267
Dubrovnik. In the intervals between Patarin missions we know that
relations continued, for we have a variety of charters issued by Sandalj,
Stefan, or the Pavlovi6i to Dubrovnik, which are signed only by secular
fisures. In addition we know that the Konavli tribute was to have been
oa'id regularly. We have only two references to Patarins being involved
in its collection. Evidently during the years when we see no Patarin
envoys, lay embassies had been sent from the Pavlovii and KosaEa
courts to Dubrovnik to collect it. Thus, we have good reason to believe
that when the Ragusan records are published from the fifteenth century
- and publication
has now reached 1389
- we shall find that the
number of entirely secular missions greatly exceeded the number of
those participated in by Patarins. Since most frequently the records only
mention receiving letters brought by envoys without mentioning the
nature of the business being transacted we are in no position to judge
whether Patarins tended to be sent to discuss particularly critical
matters.
Unfortunately we do not have data to judge about Patarin missions
tetween the different courts within Bosnia. Dubrovnik mentioned
Miala Gost and a secular envoy going from Radoslav to Sandalj in 1423,
and theking sending two unnamed Patarins to Radoslav accompanied by
lay envoys in I43O. We may suspect that these nobles used Patarin
envoys to a greatef extent for missions within Bosnia than they did for
missionsto the coast.
Thus, we conclude that although we should not underestimate the
role of Patarin diplomats in the Kosa[a and Pavlovid foreign service in
the years after I4I9-20, we also should not exaggerate their im-
portance. If we exclude the towering figure of Radin, who, almost
certainly because of his specific talents rather than his clerical status,
became Stefan's "foreign secretary," it can certainly be said that even
after I4l9lay envoys continued to conduct the bulk of diplomatic affairs
with Dubrovnik. Of course, within Bosnia, who knows?
Xill ; social and Potitical Position of the Bosnian Cburcb
Now that we have discussed the period to 1443, we can turn to the
question of the social and political position of the Bosnian Church. Prior
to 1340
- the advent of the Franciscans we may safely assume that
most of the nobles in Bosnia were members- of the Bosnian Church. This
supposition seems certain since in much of the banate no other church
was present. It is also supported by passing references to "heretical
nobles" in papal and Hungarian letters. Between 1340 and 1391 some
 268 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 26g
of them p:r.ru..ub! followed the example of their rulers _ Stjepan
t\otromanrc and Tvrtko I and became Catholics, while others There is no evidence that Patarins were at his court, or served him as
probably retained their loyalty- to the Bosnian Church.(200) During diplomats-, or even had any monasteries on his lands. Thus we cannot
this
whole period, however , we do not have reference to a specific nobllman that the Bosnian .church had any role in his political activities or
say
being a member of the Bosnian Church, except for the small number even rhat it played an important part in his life r.ligiou, or otheiwise.
nobles, only one of whom
of
y.,j" *1t so was his nephew - and successor Diur"i
Vlah DobrovojeviC- is known from other {i: _Clldi:.;
sources, who are damned- in the Serbian sinodiks. Vojsali6,_as was Djuraj's son Peter. It also is most probable that'Hr-
voie's relatives of his own generation included catholics. Hrvole, in
Tgy:u"., although many nobles were members of this church prior fact, is the only member of the family known to have h"d .onn".iior*
to 1391, its influence on them and its services to them were probably
solely religious. we do not find patarins at their courts; we do'not find with the Bosnian church, although his uncle Vukoslav Hrvatinii
the nobles aiding the Bosnian church or it serving them in any securar (whose chafter was guaranteed by that church in the 1320,s) may well
way. All that we can point to is that the Bosnian church had been also have been a member. Hrvoje's career leaves us with the impression

among the guarantors and witnesses of two charters in the 1320's. that he was indifierent to religious questions.
T'hus, in the years prior to I39l , we may well wonder how important c) Pavle Klexi6: we first hear of him in the l3g0's. we first find
this church was to the nobility in non-religious matters, and whether reference to his connections with the Bosnian church in 1403-04,
one is really justified in speaking of an alliance between this church when the djed did him the great service of pacifying King ostoja's ,rath
and against him and restored to him his confiscated pioperly. In ihis
the nobility, which many scholars feel was a major aspect of the care,
Bosnian then, we do have evidence that the Bosnian chuich-supiorted a
Church's history throughout its existence.(201) noble.
However matters may have stood, it is only in the period directly However, the church may have supported him because his case was
after just, rather than because he was a'nobleman. The king it supported
1391 that we find seven major families having connections *rih
th. him.against also seems to have been a follower of the Bosnirn
Bosnian Church six in Bosnia and one in what is now Hercegovina. ihur.h.
-
Thus, the common, possibly unjustified, and certainly urrsrripo.t"d KleusiC's ties with the Patarins did not lead him
to persecute
catholics. A
statement frequently made by historians that the Bosnian nobl"s catholic bishopric existed in his city of Duvno r" know of a variety
u, a "nd
of catholic churches, including Franciscan monasteries
group were politically allied with the Bosnian church is based mentioned by
sources from the last seventy years of the state. we shall now
on Bartholomaeus of pisa at Duvno and GlamoE, on his rriJr.- rn"
turn to catho-lics eventually succeeded in winning
these seven families, taking those in Bosnia first: his family, and we find
Pavle's son Vladislav a catholic in the
a ) Tepli ja Batalo : We have no evidence
that patarins served him , but
r430is. There i, no ii"t
any Kletid besides pavle and his wife
we know that he was interested in their church. He had a Gospel were followers of "uia"n."
the gorni.n
Church.
manuscript copied for them and presumably gave them financial
or other d) Pavle RadenoviC, his sons Radoslav and peter pavlovii, and
support since the inscription in that Gospel stated that he was good _
to Radoslav's son Ivanit Pavlovid: This family had active ties with
good people. we thus have evidence tharthis church was the
impoitant to Bosnian Church. When Pavle Radenovii was murdered in l4l5
him for religious reasons; there is no evidence that it played any other Patarin ._ Vlatko Tumarlii
a
part in his affairs. we know nothing about the religious loi
arty oi any of RadoslavPavlovi(;nt43O made - took his body back to Vrhbosna. When
war on Dubiovnik,the town called him
his children. All documents about Batalo are from the 139d,s; a Patarin. The family used
Patarins as diplomats frequently
presumably he died about 1400. Thus we cannot speak
about ties xnown missions between l42O and 14i4. And it is evident- onthat
twelve
the
between his family and the patarins in the fifteenth century. - patarins on cafl at
family had several
b) F{rvoje vukti6: He was caled a patarin and clearly considered court ot at a hdr;";;;y--
since Dubrovnikonce asked -
Radoslav to send "one of his patarinsi' to
himself something other than a Catholic, since in I4B h; complained Dubrovnik for negotiations. A Patarin
that he wanted to become a catholic for he did not want to die in the also was found in 1422 asone of
two administrators for Radoslav's
1'pagan"
rite. Krstjanin Hvar copied a Gospel manuscript for him. This part of Konavli. It has also been
speculated that the
is the only specific Bosnian churchman linked with Hrvoje. we might Bosnian Church played a role in bringing about
peace between
note that a Catholic , pop Butko,also copied aGospel man,rscript
Radoslav and Sandalj HraniC in 1423 i"a rulO.
for him. Although we cannot prove
the church itself played this role, on both
270 Medieval Bosnian Church
occasions Patarins were active as envoys. However, it is possible t[61
they were simply acting on orders from their secular masters. Thus this
family was closely connected with the Bosnian Church and was served
regularly by Patarin diplomats between l42O and 14J4. This, then, is
the first (and only Bosnian) family found connected to the Bosnian
Church early in the fifteenth century which would retain its loyalty to
the Patarins well into the reign of Stefan Toma"s.(202)
e) Peter Dinjilid: Unlike the four families noted above, no DinjiEid
was ever spoken of as a member of the church. However, the DinjiEidi,
if not members, clearly had close ties with its clergy. The Ljubskovo
hiia, which we have discussed, was located on their lands. And in the
next chapter we shall find Peter DinjiEid in 1410 sending a Patarin as an
envoy to Dubrovnik.
f) The brothers Dragilii (Pavle, Marko, and luri, sons of lvani!).
Though never called members, we may conclude that they belonged to
the church since its hierarchy, as we shall see in the next chapter,
witnessed a grant of KljuE on the Sana to them from Stefan Toma! in
1446. Becalse the king was then Catholic, we can assume the djed was
made guarantor at the request of the DragiSl6;. Sinc" they lived in an
area with relatively strong Catholic in{luence, we cannot conclude that
their predecessors had been members of the Bosnian Church.
These, then, are the only families in Bosnia for whom we can find
concrete ties with the Bosnian Church. And out of these six families,
only one
- the Radenovii-Pavloviii - had ties extending for a period
longer than one generation.
In what is now Hercegovina, the bulk of the nobility mentioned in
sources remained Orthodox throughout the Middle Ages. Only one
family had known ties with the Patarins, and that happened to be the
most important family the KosaEe.
-
g) The KosaEe: Sandalj Hrani6, Herceg Stefan VukEii, and probably
at least some of the herceg's sons. Dubrovnik spoke of Sandalj as being a
member of the Bosnian Church, and in 140) it suggested that the died
mediate a border quarrel between it and Sandalj. Whether Sandalj ac-
cepted the suggestion or not is unknown, but here we see the djed being
suggested for a political role. The djed and his stroiniks also, as we shall
see, were involved in guaranteeing a treaty between Stefan Vuk[i6 and
his family in l4J3 that put an end to his son Vladislav's revolt. Both
Sandalj and his successor Stefan VukEii frequently used Patarins as
diplomats after 74L9. We know of twenty-seven diplomatic missions on
which Patarins served the Kosale between l4I9 and 1466. Stefan Vuk-
ti6 also used the Patarin hila near Goral,de on his border with the
Pavlovidi as a border-customs station. Thus the Patarins did serve this
Bosnia from 1391 to l44j 271
family politlcally and diplomatically. This family and the pavlovidi are
the only families to whom the Patarins gave considerable service and to
whom this service was extended over a period of time longer than one
generation '
It is almost certain that some (oi even many) less itnportant families
did have connections with the Bosnian Church not recorded in the
sources. For example, we may note the three men at whose burials
Bosnian Churchmen participated, as we learn from gravestone in-
scriptions. However, the services rendered by the Patarins at burials can
be considered part of their religious functions. Yet, because the only
regular secular function that we have noticed the Patarins fulfilling was
diplomacy, and because diplomacy was limited to the king and two or
three great families and was not carried out by these lpsser nobles, we
may conclude that the impact of the Bosnian Church in the secular
activities of these lesser nobles was slight. Thus other than possibly
giving advice on occasions, or using their literacy to help draft
documents, or possibly providing asylum or mediating quarrels brought
to them, the Patarins' role in the lives of the lesser nobility who adhered
to their church mosd probably was limited to religious matters.
when we examine the above data we find that only seven families had
known Patarin connections. of these seven families, the church only
rendered secular services to five
- Kle'sii, Dinji[iC, Dragi5ii, Kosa[a,
Radenovi6-Pavlovii. And of these five, only the last two iere regularly
served by Patarins over a long period of time, and are known to have
kept up ties with the Bosnian Church for a period longer than one
generation. Both Kleiii's and Hrvoje's successors were catholics.
obviously then the frequently repeated generalization that the Bosnian
nobles supported the Bosnian church is an exaggeration. Such ties
can
only be shown for a short period of time all the data pertains to the
final sixty years of the state and only two -families maintained such
ties
{or the full sixty years.
From these few cases we cannot support the common generalization
that the Bosnian Church supported tire nobility or decentralization.
There is evidence that at least King Ostoja (and the king was
the
representative of centralization) was a supporter of the Bosnian
church
also. He once used a Patarin diplomat, rna
it ir apparent that various
Patarins lived at or near his court. Several
times the djed is referred to as
being present at court, and from
Ragusan documents it is apparent that
ne played an influential
role there. Not only did ostoja someiimes follow
his advice, but also Tvrtko
II, most p.obrLly a Catholic throughout but
certainly one by 1428, kept
the died as a councillor at court. Their
continued presence
at the royal court suggests the patariris were not
272 Medieval Bosnian Church
anti-royal. No document ever states that the Patarins took a particular
postition; thus we cannot say that their advice or inlluence els
weighted in a direction favoring the nobles or the king. We also see that
frequently their influence was beneficial to Catholic Dubrovnik, qn6
that frequently they appeared to have worked to maintain or bring about
peace. Thus if Radin was regarded by Dubrovnik as its friend, even
though he served its enemies Radoslav Pavlovid and Stefan Vuk[ii, it is
evident that Radin was not simply working to advance the interests qf
the local nobility.
We have only two cases, other than direct service as a diplomat,
border guard etc., where Patarins helped nobles. First they gave shelter
to Pavle Radilii's brother in 7403. However, it was regular for
churches in the Middle Ages to give shelter to fugitives. This does not
prove that the church supported Radi3i6's political position. It does not
even prove that he was a member of the Bosnian Church. Second, the
church played a role in restoring Kle"siC to his property, but as we have
stated before, we do not know what the djed's motives were. These two
examples certainly are not sufficient evidence to support a generalization
that the Bosnian Church supported decentralization and the nobility
against the king.
However, the Bosnian Church did in one respect indirectly work
against centralization. Professor Babidpoints out that in other lands, the
Catholic or Orthodox Churches supported the interests of the central
government against fragmentation. Such a policy facilitated both the
church's effectiveness in its own territorial administration and also
served to gain the church greater landed estates. In Bosnia, however,
the presence of the Bosnian Church prevented either of these other
churches from attaining such a position of power and influence which
might well have furthered centralization, and in so doing it thereby
served the interests of decentralization.(203)
It is also difficult to judge how important the Patarins were to the two
families which they did serve regularly. Prior to l4l9-2|,lesser nobles
and other secular figures had served as diplomats. And even after l4l9-
20 the majority of diplomatic missions were probably still carried out by
secular figures. Presumably, these petty nobles and clerks could per-
fectly well have handled all diplomatic dealings in the fifteenth century
as well. One advantage the Patarin diplomat might have had would be
that as a cleric he could more easily pass through warring lands.
Certain Patarin diplomats who were used frequently like Vlatko
TumarliC, Starac Dmitar, Radatin and Radin were obviously important
to their masters. However, this importance may have lain in their in'
dividual abilities rather than in the fact that thev were Patarins. And
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 273
with the erception of the inlluence Gost Radin seems to have had on
StefanVukEid's policy the final fifteen yeers or so of his reign, we
-in
have no evidence that Patarins were involved in the making oipolicy
decisions. It is probable that some, if not the maiority; of'patarins used
rs diplomats simply carried out assignmerns given to them by their
secular lords' . ."
In one case a hiza served as a border station. Presumably Gost Gojisav
was useful in this role but if he had not had his monastery there, we can
63 sure that a secular vassal of Stdan could have managed the task
quite well. We have noted that the church _* be it Catholic or Orthodox
-_ at Glasinac also served as a customs house. Thus this was not a
unique or unusual service carried out by the Patarins. We have also
ooted that on occasions, the king, Sandalj and Radoslav had made use of
catholic clerics as diplomats. That the Patarins were willing to carry out
these services shows that their church was not completely focussed on
religious and other-worldly matters. Thus, it was typical of its age. In
western Europe catholic clerics regularly performed the functions we
find Patarins fulfilling in Bosnia. The literacy, of at least many, of the
Patarins as well as the fact that most of them do not appear to have been
members of great families, having their own interests to advance, made
them logical choices to be used for diplomatic missions.(204)
I have argued that it cannot be proved that the Bosnian church
supported the aspirations of the nobility as a class. presumably a patarin
working for a given noble served that noble as best he could. presumably
also' the Patarins at the royal court served the king
iust as loyally as
those at Sandalj's or Radoslav's courts served them.
And iust as there is no evidence that the Bosnian Church had any
political principles or worked to support an idea like decentralization,
there is no evidence that the nobility in the fourteenth or fifteenth
centuries strove to maintain or support the Bosnian Church. We have
frequently pointed to the indifference of mosr of these nobles
about
religious matters. In Stefan TomaY's reign, when persecution
of the
Bosnian Church was initiated, we shall ,"" littl.
sign that this bothered
the nobility or that the nobility
tried to defend the Fatarins. There is no
reason to believe that
the nobility would have behaved any differently in
the first hal{ of the fifteenth
..niury, unless it was felt that the church
organization that would replace
the patarin Church would be opposed to
the_interests of the nobiliiy
a Hungarian-rur, pro-Hungarian
Catholic-Church, or even a- chuich
".g., that clearly supported
the king
against the nobilitv.
we turn to the relations between the Bosnian Church and the
.Wh.:"
ruler (i.e., the ban and rater the king) we find
that here too the church
271+ Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia from l39l to 1443 275

had a minor role. We have do documentation about the church playing

A1tet 1442 we cannot
demonstrate Patarins were regulady at court. We
any political role in the thirteenth century
- other than provoking
crusades or plans for crusades against Bosnia. When we start getting have noted that they stood behind aroyal charter for the Catholic King
Stefan Toma3 in 1446. But since this may well have been at the request
sources in the fourteenth century we find that the rulers were not
Jiih" gr.n,""s the DragiYidi this does not prove close association
members of the Bosnian Church. Stiepan Kotromanid seems to have - -
been Orthodox until his conversion to Catholicism in the 1340's and with the king'
Tvrtko I was a Catholic throughout his whole reign. And though both Thus we may conclude that the Bosnian Church did have some in-
rulers seem to have had cordial relations with the Patarins (Kotromani{ fluence in politics. Howevef , this influence was not constant, and only
even had the Patarins witness two charters), there is no evidence that in exceptional cases does it seem to have been decisive. Hence we should
the Patarins were regularly at court or had any political influence. This not exaggerate its importance. Except for guaranteeing two charters in
the 1320's and one more in 1446, the political role of the church in the
situation continued until the accession of Ostoja, when, for the first
affairs of the central (royal) government was limited to the period 1403-
time (from l4oi), we find the Patarins exercising political influence and
playing a political role. ln
1403 the Patarin Vlatko Tumarlii served 1442; and it was really only between 1403 and 140) that this influence
seems to have been of great significance. And in the second reign ol
Ostoja as an envoy to Dubrovnik and the died's intervention in politics
in the period l4O3-05 has been discussed. We have noted his role in Ostoja, the only ruler who seems to have been a member, the church
does not appear to have had a significant political role. In 1418 we even
patching up the quarrel between Ostoia and Pavle Kle"sii. We also have
found Ostoja twice using a Franciscan as a diplomat. Thus one certainly
seen that from l4O3 to 1405 (i.e., extending into the first years of the
should not consider the Bosnian Church a state church. And we may
first reign of Tvrtko II), the djed was present at court and his advice
well conclude that its influence on the state and on society as well
seems to have been frequently followed. Dubrovnik clearly believed the
was relatively unimportant.
- -
djed to be influential at this time and sought that its peace treaty with
The rapidity with which the church disappeared after the Turkish
then the treaty's confirmation when Tvrtko II came to the
Ostoja
throne
- andhave Patarins among its guarantors. But this impressive
conquest, and the speed with which the populace accepted other
-
position is found only for the two-year period I4O3-0t. The djed may
religions may be evidence that the Bosnian Church had not created
strong bonds between itself and its follorpers. Thus the peasantry and
have been present at court prior to 1403 also, but since the sources do
even the nobility seem to have lived their lives according to traditional
not speak of him, his influence may not have been great. This is not
patterns little affected by the teachings of this church. The greatest
strange since neither Stjepan KotromaniC nor Tvrtkb I was a member of
failure of the Bosnian Church was that it never seems to have made a
the Bosnian Church, whereas Ostoja seems to have been. After 1405
concerted effort to build ties with the populace. The reason such ties
the djed's influence seems to have declined and we hear nothing more
were not created may partly have been owing to lack of popular interest.
about him in state affairs until 1428. Then Dubrovnik instructed an
However, this situation was also a natural result of the organizational
ambassador that if he found the died at court he should give him a letter,
structure of the Bosnian Church itself. The evidence suggests that the
for it was hoped that the djed would intervene on the town's behalf.
Bosnian Church as an organization
From this we may conclude that the dfed may still have frequently been
simply a Catholic non-preaching order- itsgone
hierarchy and clergy
into schism with -Rome.
was
at court and even have been a relatively influential figure. But still his
Non-preaching monastic orders lack the organizational structure
role had declined from a guarantor to one who might talk the king into
necessary to assume the task of serving the needs of a populace (i.e., of
some policy the town desired. The decline is not surprising since, by
becoming a real church). To have been successful, the Bosnian Church
1428 (rt not long before), Tvrtko II was clearly a Catholic. ln 1430
would have had to re-organize its hierarchy and, organization to handle
Tvrtko used some unnamed Patarin as diplomats; but their use may the new situation in which it found itself. The limited evidence we have
have been caused by the fact the issue at hand was a war between two
does not suggest that the Bosnian Church ever tried to reform or
members of that church
- Sandalj and Radoslav. The djed (or members
of his church) was present at least on occasions at T'vrtko's court as late
"modernize" its organization; there is no evidence that it ever or-
dained secular priestsor tried to establish a territorial organization. In
as 141+2, for a Dubrovnik envoy sent thither then was told to get a treaty
lact, the evidence suggests that, throughout its history, the Bosnian
sealed be{ore ordained members of either the Roman or Bosnian faith.
Lhurch and its clergy except for the few clerics involved in secular
-
276 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from l39l to 1443 277

service at certain courts

- remained a monastic order with its djed one in Ljubskovo mentioned as a hostel between l4l2 and 1416 and
presiding over a relatively small number of ordained clerics living in
lno,ft.r in Bradina in 1418. We may suspect that Goiisav near GoraEde
monasteries. Orbini, writing in 1601, confirms this picture when he to take in guests' This function was not unique to
ebo found it profitable
defines the died as an abbot and the stroinik (sic! gost) as a prior of a and Orthodox monasteries did the same'
the Bosnian Church. Catholic
monastery.(2O5) There is no evidence that the gosts were responsible We know that in 1415 the Ragusan envoy to the Bosnian court,
for overseeing religious needs for the territory surrounding the hiYas, or GunduliC, stayed at the Franciscan monastery at Sutieska. And Ragusan
records mention fifteenth-century caravans stopping at Orthodox
that Bosnia had been divided up into territories supervised by particular
gosts. The number of hilas seems to have been fairly small, and there is
monasteries in the region of the Lim - MileTevo' St.
Peter and St.
no evidence that hilas could be found throughout Bosnia. Thus many paul's at Biielo polje and the Banja monastery near Priboi.(206) Six-
villagers probably had no contact with Bosnian Churchmen at all, and teenth-century travelers report spending the night at these same Or-
we can say that the church's influence on society was limited to villages by allowing
thodox monasteries. Thus we see that the Bosnian Church
located near its hihs, and even these villages may not have developed its rnonasteries to take in travelers simply followed this general custom
'
strong ties with the church. Thus we must conclude that even though and presumably it was simply retaining a custom that it had had when it
the Bosnian Church tried to s€rve as a church, it failed to realistically was still a Catholic organization; at Bilino polje in 1203 the
priors had
face the situation in which it found itself and by failing to re-organize promised to bury travelers who happened to die at their monasteries in
itself into a preaching order, it never was able to make itself into a real their church cemeteries.
church or to establish firm ties between itself and the peasantry.
Except for two charters from the l32o's guaranteed by the Bosnian
Church, all evidence of Patarin participation in secular affairs comes FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER V
from the fifteenth century. Thus we have reason to believe that these
functions at court were newly acquired in that century. It is probable
l. DabiYa had been mentioned by name only in various diplomatic records.
that the acquisition of this political role must have strengthened the The earliest reference we have to him is in 13J8 when a Ragusan embassy was
Bosnian Church's position in the state and to some extent have worked sent to Tvrtko, his relative Dabila and Sanko Miltenovid. (Monamenta
for its preservation in the face of Catholic pressure to destroy it. Though Ragusina, II, p. 208). ln 1366 a Ragusan ambassador was instructed to consult
the Patarin church did not play a major role at the courts of the Pavloviii with Dabiia and Sanko because thetown had hope and trust in them. Orbini
claims that Dabila joined Vuk in his rebellion against Tvrtko in 1366; we do
or the KosaEe, still the king could not freely attack the Patarin Church,
not know if Orbini was correct in this, bur sqbsequently DabiYa did seek refuge
lest it provide an excuse for those nobles to revolt against him. The ftom Tvrtko in Dubrovnik. Orbini calls DabiYa Tvrtko's first cousin. Evidently,
Bosnian Churchmen, though, in accepting this role and in order to keep since he was mentioned back in 13J8, he was an older man when he came to the
this role (which to some extent was necessary for the church's survival), throne.
had to become more worldly to serve the interests of these noblemen. Of 2. M. DiniC, Drlauni sabor srednjeuekoane Bosne (SAN), Beograd, 19)5;
and S. Cirkovid, Istorija srednjouekoane bosanske drlaue, Beograd, 1964, esp.
course, it was not difficult for men like Gosts Radin, Milutin or Gojisav pp 22.4-226.
to be worldly. Yet it is clear that the Patarins serving as diplomats had to 3. CirkoviC, op. cit., pp. 224-25. CirkovlC in a separate article, "sugubi
serve the interests of their secular masters rather than their church, for venac," Zbornik radoua Filozofskog fakulteta, Beograd, VIU, 1964, pp. 343-
otherwise these lords would have utilized Franciscans or secular 69, presents his views in detail. He argues that Tvitko's coronation ireated a
new concept of state which was completely different from the earlier one under
diplomats. Thus the failure of the Bosnian Church to acquire actual
the bans. He argues that prior to 1377 the state was considered the personal
popular support, now in the fifteenth century with a Catholic offensive property of the individual ban, whose rights over the state were the same as
underway, left the Patarins totally dependent on the favor of a limited those of a noble over his lapds. No differenliation was made between private and
number of powerful nobles (by 1443 only the Pavlovi6i, Stefan Vuktcid, public power. However, CirkovlC insists that by the beginning of the fifteenth
and possibly the DinjiEiii) to survive. ceritury the state was considered a unit in itself, represented by the king and
nobles collectively through the institution of the sibor; the idea of the ltate,
As a postscript we may note the secular functions of the h#as symbolized by the crown, had become independent of the individuat ruler;
themselves. We have one example of ahiza near GoraYde serving as a the
towns and lands belonged to the crown and were considered inalienable to be
border post. In addition at least certain hiYas functioned as hosteleries, passed on to the next king.
 278 fuledieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 279
4. J. Fine, review of iirkoviC's Isrorija, . ., in Speculum, XLl, 1966. o.
whcre I saict, "l musr express scepticism, no*"u"!,'i#irletil';,if.."tri,?J; .harterto Dubrovnik (Miklosich, p. 28) and the name is also found in various
that these self-seeking nobles really had a deep belief in abstractions such as
the grbian epics. Nelep'c in the anathema may refer to Nelipac or one of the
unity of Bosnia or loyalty to her crown." I still think his view is too abstracl
1e ruelipfiC family who were involved in Bosnian affairs early in the fifteenth
be relevant to Bosnia and feel that evidence is lacking to prove it. Nobles ..,r*ury; however, these Croatian noblemen were clearly Catholic as well.
were
present to witness charters prior to 1377, and there is no evidence that
the proro^ur^, the sister-in-law or daughter-in.law (snaha) of Ban Stefan
"stare" was considered indivisible after 1377. one cannot say that after Radi8 t.resumably Kolroman or Kotromani6) is not known from other sources.
sankovi6 sold Konavli to Dubrovnik, Vlatko Vukovi6 and'pavre n"J.noui6 '" 14. Most recent edition, Dl. RadoiiEii, "Odlomak bogomilskog ievandjelja
marched aqginl
.him to
preserve the unity of Bosnia. The fact that the two bosanskog tepaEiie Batala iz 1393 godine," B'lgarska akademija na naukite
noDlemen divided the recovered te*itory suggests that their motives were (lzvestiia na lnstituta za istorija), 14-11 , 1964, pp.498-507. We can only
to
increase rheir own holdings. Then in the 1420's both the king and the leadin! ,.qra the large n umber of typographical errors in the rendering of the text. Also
nobles agreed to the sale of Kgnavli to Dubrovnik by sandalj and Radoslav there is much in his introduction that cannot be accepted, particularly his ac-
Pavlovic. I alrc cannot r.."pt Ci.kouic's contention tirat the exislence of ths ceptanceo{D. Mandit's (Bogomikha nhaa. . .,p.209) view that the list shows
crown aided in stabilizing the Bosnian state. The period from Tvrtko's death Bosnian dleds back to the beginning of the eleventh century.
well into the 1430's was medieval Bosnia's most chaotic and anarchistic despite 1). Radoiitii, pp. 504-)06.
the presence of the crown. And what unity there was in the last years of rvitko f (r. J. Fine, Jr., "Aristodios and Rastudile," GID, XVl, Sarajevo, 1967,
II and under stefan Tomai can be attributed to the decline of the great nobility 22J-29.
(excluding thc Kosate who for all practical purposes had created for themselves " 17.
"n. A. Soloviev, "La Doctrine de I'Eglise cle Bosnie," Acad'emie de
an independcnt slate in Hercegovina.) Belgique, Bulletin, Lettres, )e ser., XXXIV, 1948.p.118.
5 Dini( ult. cit., pp. 62-6i. 18. On this Gospel manuscript see, G..Dani"ci6, "I{valov rukopis, " Starine,
(r.
A. Babid, "struktura srednjoviekovne bosanske drlave,,, pregled, XIll, III, l87l ,pp. l-lt+6, esp.pp.2-7.Dani(i(presenrsavaluablediscussion about
No. 1, 19(r1, pp. t-8. Professor Babicpoints out that the pavrovid lands'*e.e a the manuscript and then presents the actual text.
unique territory in that they formed a region without specific lraditions, whoss 19. N. RadoiEi6, "9 jednom naslovu velikoga voivode bosanskoga Hrvoja
onlv cohesion was owing to the fact they had beer accumulated by pavle VukEiia," Istorijski tasopis, I (l 2), 1948, pi. 37 t3.
Raien,,uil- 20. Miklosich , r. 213.
7. On the sources, see CirkouiC, op. cit.,pp.166-69. 21. V, Pttuiesr Bosne .. ., p. 196. It is interesting to note that in
Klail,
B. On the G.ospel manuscripts in general, see above Chapter II. medieval Bosnian history we have only three cases (only one of which went
9. V. Mo{in, "serbskaja redakcila Sinodika u Nedellu pravoslaviia," smoothly) of succession from father to son; a) Stjepan Kotromani6 who, before
l/izantiiskij t,remennik, XVII, 1960, pp. 278-353; the lists of anathemas he could assume his banate, faced a revolt which forced him to seek refuge in
referring to Bosnia, see pp. 302, 34j-46, 348. Dubrovnik-; b) Stefan OstoliC Q4I8 21). who was rapidly deposed; c) Stefan
10. V. Molin, ibid; "Analiz tekstov,,' Viz, urem,Xyl, 1959, pp.3l7 lbmaYevi6in l46l who, though spared a local rebellion, was overthrown and
391t,
_and
his "Rukopis pljevallskog-sinodika pravoslavlja,', Slouo, 6-h', l9t7 ,
beheaded by the Turks two years after his accession.
pp 154 76 A. Solovjev. "Svedocanltva.. .," GID,V,1953,pp.44 6g. 22. Lj. Stojanovi(, Stare srpske pouelje i pisma, I, pt. I , p. 1 70.
ll. Mosin, V'iz, urem., XVII. l9(rO, p. 302. 2J. See below. note 40.
12. The "Ban stefan" probably refers to Kotromani6, who was orthodox 24. On Hrvoie, ,"" F.5isid, Vojooda Hraoje Vukiit Hraarinit i njegouo doba
until he accepted catholicism in ca. r34o. since he was clearly not a heretic it is l.l5o l,4l{t. 7,agreb, 19O2.
plausible to link his damnation to some prolitical opposition to serbia, _25 C Truhetla, "Grobnica bosanskog teptije Batala obretena kod Gornjeg
presumably in 1326 when he annexed Hum or l3)l when-Dutan went to war Turbeta (kotor Travnik), GZMS, XXVII, 1915, pp. 36t-73. The inscription
against him. The other possible "Ban stefan" was his father Kotrornan who .simply says that here lies the powerful man Teptija Batalo (the) Bosnian and
also was certainly no heretic since he married stefan Dragutin's daughter. The Radomil the dijak (clerk, scribe) writes (the inscription). ("Ase le'zi uzmo(Zni)
'I'vrdko on thc lix is certainly not mrrl r(ep)Eiia Batal(o) hosansk(i) a pisa Raclomit iilalr'."1 The mausoleum is
the ban-king, since the man is given no title
and since Tvrtko received his coronation from the serbian melropolitan at iound under a mound which the local inhabitants refer to as "crkvina"
Mile1evo. Possibly, though, Tvrtko's activities jn the Drina and Lim region (church). whether at some time in the past a real church had stood here is
not
were the cause of Vlah (or Vlai) Dobrovojevid's anathema. This nobleman known. If there had been a church, thefact that Batalo was buried in it might
anathematized is known from several of Tvrtko,s charters. lead us to believe that it had been a Bosnian church further evidence thut ih.
ll. We assume that the Priezda mentioled does not refer to Kotroman's Ilosnian Church did have churches. However, it is- more than likely
that the
father Ban Priezda or Kotroman's brother of the same name. These two thir- lahel came from the mausoleum itself. On
the locality's name seej M. Mandid,
teenth-century figures were both clearly catholic. If it is one of them who is "{9rbe kod Travnika," GZMS, XXXVI, 1924, p.81.
anathematized, then presumably he was damned for political motives. priezda is . 2(,:S:"abovenote lt, RadoiiEiC, "Odlomak ," irp.JO4,06.In theGospel
not an unusual name. A Priezda S'finar was a witness to Ninoslav's 1234 ulscription when he refers to his brothers-in-law, it is-Hrvoje Lord
of the Donji
kraii who is Vojvodaof Bosnia, Hrvoie's
brother Vuk Hrvatini6 who is Ban of
 280 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 281

croatia, and presumably Hrvoje's second brother Knez Vojislav "Voivodif 221'222' No.
who is referred to as Knez of Bosnia.
', 49. Dinit PP. 2

10. DiniC. P. 223, No' 4.

27. On Pavle Radenovid see, J. Radoni6, ..O knezu pavlu Radenovi6u,
Jl. Dinid, P. 223, No. 4.
priloiak.istoriji Bosne kraiem XIV potet, XV veka,',
Novi Sad, Vol. 211, I9O2, laopis Miii"i"irpre",
pp. 39 62, andvol. 212, 1902, pp. 34-61.
)2. Li. Stoianovi(, Stare srpshe pouelje i pisma,I. pt. I, pp.433-34.
28:,91 Sandali see, J. Radoni6. "Der Grossvoyvode von Bosnien Sandali tr. Ibid., P. 434.
,-
Hran i6 Kosa[a, "A rc bia fil.r Staaische Pbilotogie, 19, 1897, pp. 3g7 -456.
,4. Ibid', P- 43t.
55. See below. note 190.
29. The{otlowing historical narrative is, unless otherwise noted, drawn from
-
Lrrkovri, ,lyorija. . .'the collective work Poaiest, . , published in Sarajevo in io. dirtouii, Istorija . . ., p. 202.
1942, and the monographs noted above in notes 24, Zi, ZS, on Hrvoje, pavle
j7. M. DiniC. DrYauni sabir . . ., pp.26-28, discusses the overrhrow of
Radcrrovic and Sandalj. Any matter that is disputed or controversial wiil receive Ostoia. On April-2r, 1404 Ostoja issued a c-ommerical -charter to Venice;
witnesses included Pavle Radenovi6, Pavle KletsiC and Radit Sankovid. Sandalj
a special footnote, otherwise the reader may assume that an euent or fact
mentioned is generally accepted in the historical literature. Matters related and Hrvoje were absent. On April 25 Ostoja was deposed. DiniCsuggests thai
religious questions will in all cases be documented.
to those present to witness the charter on the 22nd still supported Ostoja, while
rhe two powerful absentees opposed him. A Venetian source confirms half of
30. Liubid, Listine,IV, p. 309.
3l.l.jubid Listine,IV, p. 378. This archdeacon represented Sandalj again in thistheory, stating that Ostoja was ousted by the authority of Hrvoje (Ljubid,
Listine,Yl, p. 134). Hrvo je, however, makes it appear a collective decision ; he
1398, Jorga, Il, p.72. announced to Venice that the nobles hadousted ostoja and had chosen Tvrtko II
32. Documents on the sale of slaves, see Dini( Iz dubroaalkog arbiaa,lll
(Lfubid, Listine, V, p.45). Dini6pointsout that this shows Tvrtko II obtained
(henceforth in notes to Chapters V and VI cited simply as Dini6),
ppl;_tAO,
-sv. the throne, not by any right of inheritance , but, by his selection by the nobility ;
u. LremoSntk , Istoriski spomenici arbiua, ser.III, "na
1, SKA,
-dubroaaikog his membership in the royal family simply made him one of those eligible. I
Beograd. 1932. That catholics could not be soid as slaves is shown
ry * in- think it clear that Hrvoje opposed ostoja and was instrumental in hii over-
teresting case from 1393 when two Bosnian women bought as patarins
were
freed by a Ragusan couft_after they testified that they wer! bgptizedctii.tians
throw; I only wonder whether we can be sure that the three nobles present at
court to witness the charter on the 22nd-really-haue
supported him. After his r"cent
(i.e., Catholics born of a Catholic mother). On this ..r",
,"" e :T;;h.ik;;"t;t experiences one would hardly expect KleliCto backed Ostoja.
o testamentu ggsta Radina i o patarenima,,' GZMS, XXV, 1913, pp.
See also, Dinid, pp. 63-64. ' :AO-St. )8. Dini6, pp. l8l-82, No. 2.
59. Dinii, p. 182, No. 3.
33. Resti, p.188. 60. Dinid, pp. 182-83, No. 4.
34. Written communication from S. Cirkov;C. 61. Dini6, p. 183, No. 6.
, Si5iC, "Nekoliko isprava iz poEetka XV st.," Starine,39, 1935, p. 62. M. Dinid, "Jedan prilog za istoriju patarena u Bosnir" Zbornik
,710t. Filozo$hog fahulteta Beogradskog uniuerziteta, l,
1948, pp. j3-44.
made a large donation for the elaborate sarcophagus for St. "
63. Si(ii, "Nekoliko isprava . . ., p. 256.
lJomnlus lrl )Dltt.
^^rj:I:y""swife 6_4.1. Thalloczy, Codex Diplomaticus comitum de Bkgaj, Budapest, 1887,
l7 F. Sifii, 1 'N"koliko isprava . . .,' ' pp" 207 _08. p.220.
ll .*: aelow. note 82 to this chapier.
39. Si5iC, olt. cit., p. 192.
6). Dinii, pp. 183-84, No. 7.
66. Liubid, Listine, X, p. 229.
.
V Djurii. "Miniiature H.valovog rukopisa. ,' Isroriski glasnik,lX (1.2). 67. Pouiest B i H . .,, Sarajevo, 1942, p. 409.
^19
'p' 48.It is also worth noting thalthis catholic corp.r fir. rfp""aJi.
19)7 68. Dinii, p. 184, No. 8.
i,
certain non-canonical rites cornected with the south 5Lr!f --a",n.ru. (r9 Hval 's Gospel manuscript and its dedication, discussed
earlier in this
.
Gospel includes the rite for a hair-cutting goa-f;;;.sl,tp chapter, see above note 18.
lflrT?r.'_ll,-
(stsano pum lne,nutJ<9
)and the. wineiressing rite to be performed on
st uo 'si 70. Thalloczy, Studien zur Gescbicbte Bosniens. . ., pp. 348-JO.
this. John.s Day.
For L.P (arguii), Kriiani bo"sanske crhi,e, p. tll.
see 71. Theiner, MH, ll, p. 179.
72. Fefer, X. pt. 4, pp. eUOt.
f,halloczy, "Vo jvoda Hrvoja.i njegov grb, "' G ZM S, V, Igg2, p. 17 3.
4 I . L.
42. F. Si\ii. "Nekotifto isprava . ..,,, i8tirna AB,p. d5. 73. Lucius. lllemorie di Trau, p.268, As noted earlier I have
4J. Urrko_viC, lstorija . . ., p. 197. ;
not been able
to get hold.of the original-text. I have drawn
Lucius' material here from r. Siyid,
11 lyrif, I, appendix from sluYbena knjlga, V. voluoda Hruoje Vuhlii . . ., pp. 20r
06.
zt1.DiniC, p.222. No. 3; Jorsa, II. p. 9g. 74. A Venetian source
iust staies that the barons and especially Sandalj were
46. A. Babii. "Diploln^a1$a slu!.ba u srednjevekovnoj
Bosni, ,,
restnnsible for Ostola's ,eiurn
Radoui, to the throne (Ljubi/ , Listine,V,;. n4).'
(NzBTl, Xrrr, sarajevo ,1960, pp. rr io, .;;.;;. 75. Jorga, II, p. 119.
47. Dinid, p.
7.34,66. 76. AB, po. 87_89.
222, No. 3.
48. Dinid, p. 221, No. I 77'By l4')"0 sandailheld most of the land from the Drina and Lim
Rivers to
282 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 283

the Neretva. As a result of his seizure of the Sankovif lands he gained the 97. DiniC' P. 189, No. 20.
territory around Nevesinje, and from there up almost to Koniic, as well as the S8. lt{iLloriitt , pp. )L9-21; Radoslav re-issued the same charter from Borat
land from there down 1e Popovo. Pavle Radenovii held the territory fresl rhat April (Miklosich , pp. 323-2r). The same four envoys are referred to in.
had first envoy in March 1422,here a ^g
young
Dobrun to Vrhbosna and from Olovo down to.Ustikolina. His capital was at train *ttom Radoslav used as an
Boral He hacl also obtained parts of the Sankovii lands, including' the rich town ,nrn rt the beginning of his career, will later achieve fame as Herceg Stefan's
of Trebin je and the territory from Trebinie up to Fatnica and Bile6a. Gost Radin.
7ft. Sandali gave active support to the Serbian despot in the latter's struggle 99. Miklosich , pp. 32I-22. Miklosich is responsible for causing considerable
against the l'urkish leader Musa son of Sultan Baiazit, which resulted in .nnfusion with his publication of this document. because he publishes it twice.
M.,sa's death in lztl3. Thus the despot or Sandalj, rather than Marko Kraljevid if,. firtt time (p. 251) he readgthe date" on the document one thousand "Eetiri
(+1391r), should have been the hero in the epic describing the death of the u, i tr"t'i. leto mesac fervara 3t a'n' (February l7 ' l4O3): and the second
threc''hearted Musa Kesedfija. On Sandali's participation in the campaign iir" mon. thousand "Eetiri sta dva deseti i tret'e leto mesac fervara 2l d'n' "
against Musa. see Pouiest BH,Saraievo, 1942,pp.437-38. ii.brurty 16,1423). Since the document refers to Sandali's wife as Lazar's
irught.r I and since Sandali married Lazar's daughter in l41l (Liubi6. Listine,
79. I Iaving i,isited, these catacombs I accept this conclusion which VIf , pp. 121-24) we must choose the second reading. Miklosich's €rror was
corresJnnds to that of C. T'ruhelka, Kralieushi grad Jajce pouijest i znamenosti, caused-by overlooking the word "twenty" the first time he saw the document.
Saraievo. 19011, esp. pp. )7-(r0. AB, p.67 , citing Miklosich repeats the mistake. This error of Miklosich is the'
8(). J. Dltrgosz,, Ilistoriae Polonicae, Xl, in Opera Omnia, XIII, Cracow, source for the frequently seen erroneous statement that Sandali sent Dmitar to
1877. p. l4t. Dubrovnik n 1403. As we have seen above, Sandalj began to use Patarins as
81. Fcjer. X, pt. 1, p. 4Q1t. dinlomats onlY in 1419.
82. Fejer, X, pt. 1, pp. 385 8(r (who cites Lucius, Memorie de Trau,p.392 I 00. Stoianov i€, p. 37 I .
ff. ). 101. In l413 (StojanoviC, I, 1, p.357) envoys from Sandali pawned for him
8J. Oral communication to me. in Dubrovnik an icon depicting the Virgin. Whether the icon really belonged to
8/r. Johannes de Thurocz, Cbronica Hungarorum (written 1488) edition, Sandalj rather than to Jelena, his Orthodox wife, is not stated. However, on
Monumenta. Hungarica, I, Budapest, 1957 , pp. 92-93. qther occasions she pawned items in her own name.
85. Dinit{, p. 186. No. l4a. 102. We shall meet Radin constantly from the 1430's until his death in 1467.
8(r. Jorga II, pp. l(r2 (r3; Ostoia's wn King Stefan Ostoji6 made use of the Dmitar we hear about once again in 1430, when the Ragusan council hears from
sanre Brother Stephen once in- 12+20 (Jorga. II, p. 180). alayman envoy Vlatko Pokali6 that they must wait until Dmitar "Crestianin"
87. On Radoslav Pavlovii see, A. IviC, "Radosav Pavlovii veliki vojvoda comes with , i.tto from San<lali (Dini4 p. 190, No. 21). We do not know if
bosanski ," Letopis Matice srpshe (Novi Sad), 245, 1907, pp. I 32; 246, l)mitar ever did come, since l)iniC publishes no more material about it.
r9o7, pp. 24-48. However. this mention does show that Dmitar was still alive, in favor, and
88. This is the second wife Ostoja had so disposed of. In 1399 he had aban- serving Sandalj in 1430.
cfoned Queen Vitaia. (Jorga, ll, p.79). Sometime thereafter he married a 103. Liubli. Listine, Vlll, pp. 2rt ,6.
w()man namcd Kuiava, mentioned in a 1409 charter (Miklosich, pp. 272 73). lOli. V. Corovid, "sandalj Hranid u Dubrovniku 1426," Bratstao, 17,
Presumably it was Kuiava who wasousted in 1416. ln 1415 it was reported in 1923, pp. 102-01; Jorga, II, pp. 230 31.
Dubrovnik that the Bosnian queen feared for her future because she was a 101. Resti, pp. 229-)O.
relativeof "ContePolo" (i.e., Pavle Radenovi6) (Jorga, II, p. 151). In l4l6 l0(r. See above note 35 to this chapter.
we learn of Ostoia marrying Jelenica, Hrvoie's widow (Gelcich-Thalloczy, 107. K. Jiretek, "Glasinac u srednjem vileku," GZMS,IV, 1892, p. 100.
I)iplomatariunt ., p. 2(rl). Thus Osto ja's divorcing Ku java was probably l0B. Stojanovit, p. 17 1.
influenced lxlth by his desire to acquire some of Hrvole's lands, as well rrs hy the
109. Pucif, II, p. 91.
la<'t thirt Krrlava was rr,lated to thc Radenovid PavloviCfamily who now wcrc in
10. Jorga, ll, p. 211.
disfavor.
11. Liubil, Listine, YIll, p. 227 .
fi9. M iklosich . p. l() I . 12. V. Grigoro vi€, O Serbii a eja orno'leniiah k sosednim defiauam u XIV'
90. Stoianovii, Stare srpske pouelje i pisma,l,1 , p.363. XV stoletijah, Kazan, lSt9, p. 52. In making his "chronicle" of Serbian
91. Only thc most important embassies including Patarins (or those providing histr:ry out of various older texts! Grigorovit has Russified the original language
information about the Bosnian Church) will be discussed in the text. For a rr (now that the manuscript of Kon"stantin's life of the despot is loslthat we
cnmplcre list of thosc missions I have found see note l9) of this chapter. cannot iudge the date the manuscript might have been written' In Chapter II we
92. See below note 191. have shown that the remark about Bogomils in this text cannot be accepted
93. Stojanovil, I, 2, p. 3; Puci8, I, p. 1(r9. without hesitation.
9/t. J<>rp,a. Il, pp. 209, 2l l. ll3. On Catholics
95. Jorga. ll. p. 2l I.
in Srebrnica: The earliest reference we have is to a
Presbyter Marcus "Capellanus" in Srebrnica in 1376. Presumably he was
9(r. Jotur, II' P. 211.
 284 Medieval Bosnian Church
chaplain for the,Ragusan commercial colony that grew up there in connection
with the mines. Shonly thereafter we begin to hear of the Franciscan monastery
there; it is mentioned in Bartholomaeus of Pisa's list of monasteries from l3gi.
We have frequent references to this monastery church (St. Mary's) from l3g7
on. In.1391 w_e find mention o{ a second church, dedicated to st. Nicholas.
Immediately after the serbs recovered Srebrnica in r4l3 artisans were hirJ
from Dubrovnik to build a church there; clearly this was to be an orthodox
church. srebrnica wasto become a major catholic center, and it seems by laao
a Catholic bishopric was ro be centered here. On Srebrnica see M. nii€,
'Za
istoriju radarstoa. . ., I deo, pp. 54, 57, 7 3, 94-%. Dinl€ is convinced that the
maiority of the inhabitants of the town were Catholics. See also, lvt. Veg;,
Naselje . . ., p. 108.
l14. Thalloczy, Studien zur Gescbichte Bosniens. ., pp. 142-44. n. b.
Tvrtko calls his subjects schismatics and unbelievers rather than heretics.
Thalloczy (p. 143) erroneously states that that marriage never took place.
However,documents in the Dubrovnik archive present a full description of the
participation of Ragusan envoys at the marriage festivities- (see Joiga, II, pp.
242 43). Thu.s we may safely conclude that the marriage took place. -
ll5. Dinii. p. 190, NJ.23,24.
1l(r. DiniC, p. 191, No. 29 (also Jorga, ll, p.282).
ll7. DiniC, pp. 190 91. No. 26, )7.
I 18. Dinid, p. I91, No. 28.
ll9. C. Truhelka, "Konavoski rat t430-33,,' GZMS,29, 1917, p.
l8i.
120. Gelcich and Thalloczy ,. Diplomatarium ,, pp. 337, j47_49, 3jl,
ltt, 358, 363, 372, 373. The tixts of course coniirn the war uni hru.
nothing more about Radoslav's religion than the negative lables about it, e.g.,
"ab perfido heretico patarino Radissavo."
121. Dinid, p.224, No.9, Jorga, II, pp. 308 09; Stojanovi6, pp.619,628.
122. Lucc,ari, p. 1)1.
123. V. Corovii, "Iz protlosti Bosne i Hercegovine, " Godilnjica Nikob
Cupita, XLVIII, 1939, i. 136.
121t. Stojanovii, I, pt. 2, p. lll.
12). Wadding , Annales Migorum, Vol. X, original pagination, p. 191 .
1 26 on cremoSnik, "ostaci arhivi bosanske franievatke
these events see G.
vikarije," Radoui,I\DBH, Sarajevo, III, 19tt, pp. 32-38. The summarized
letter is from p. J4. cremolnik's convincing reasons for re-dating the letter, pp.
34,31.
127. Ibid., p. 32.
128. AB, p. 139.
129. Jorga, ll, p.317.
130. Drawn from M. Batinid, Djelouanje franjeuaca u Bosni i Hercegouini,
Zagreb,1881, pp.88-89; and Wadding, Annales Minoram, Vol. X, original
pagination, p.233. Wadding misnames Tvrtko's queen. Further evidence of the
Franciscan order's (as opposed to the local Bosnian Franciscans) hostility toward
Tvrtko is seen in the following remark attribqted ro a Hungarian Franiiscan in
1435 lust after Tvrtko had visited the Hungarian court. "The. king is only
outwardly a Christian, in truth he has never been Christened; in every possible
way he has interefered with the Franciscans who in his land baptize his'people.' '
(Cited by L. Thalloczy, Pouiest Jajce . .., p. 38.) Thalloczy giu"r,,o iefeience
and I have not been able to find his source. I suspect it comes from some later
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 285
Franciscan chronicle and may well be entirely based upon "the slander" Tvrtko
Jacob of spreading about him through Christendom after Jacob's angry
'ccused from Bosnia for Hungary (see above note 128). If my suspicions are
departure
oirea this rernark's preservation shows that Jacob's propaganda was effective
and was to cause permanent damage to Tvrtko's reputation in Franciscan
sources. I believe that Tvrtko's adherence to Catholicism has been shown above.
Following the quoted rern ark, our Hungarian Franciscan contihues, ''For in his
land live Manichee heretics. In vain have Ragusan priests worked. They ried to
convince the heretics to send envoys to Basel, but three hierarchs the djed-gost,
the starac and stroinik, wild enemies of the Catholic Church, threatened the
king into refusing" (Thalloczy, op. cit., p. 38).These remarks too are not
original but are &awn from any one of several sources about Basel. At Basel the
Bosnians were accused o{ being Manichees (see below note 137 of this chapter).
The description of the Bosnian Church hierarchy is straight from the Ragusan
letter to the council (see below note 13J of this chapter) though it may well be
drawn frrom a latertristorian, such as Luccari, who quotes the Ragusan letter.
l3l. CrernoSnik, op. cit., p. 33; and Wadding, Vol. X, original pagination,
p.195.
132. AB, p. 1t9.
131. AB, p. 163.
l)4. AB, p. 163.
ril. Dini(, pp. 192'93, No. 31.
136. Monumenta conciliorum Generalium XV, Concilium Basileense, II,
Vindobona, 1873, Joannis de Segovia, Historia gesrorunt Generalis Slnodi
Basiliensis(ed. E. Birk),lib. ix, Chap. 5, p.710.
l)7.Ibid., p. 7)0.
r38. AB, pp. 150-)1.
139. AB,pp. l)4-)5; also Jorga, ll, p.346.
l4O. AB, pp. 160-61 ; Jorga, ll, p. 342.
l4l. Miklosich , pp.377-79-. Though I am accepting the VoisaliJcharter as
authentic, there are several things which make me suspicious about the
document. First we must always be on our guard with documents about the
Franciscarrs. Second, the document purports to have been issued from KreXevo.
A Franciscan monastery had been erected there prior to the Ottoman conquest!
though we do not know exactly when it was built. Krelevo is a place about which
forgeries have been composed and about whose ''ancient Catholic heritage" the
Franciscans have actively spread tales. With no contemporary documentation to
support it, they have claimed that the twelfth-century Bosnian Catholic bishop
re_sided at Krttevo. (e.g., Luccari-, pp.34,12, refers to two Bosnian bishops
Milovan irom the time -as
of Borid and Radigost from the time of Kulin
Bishops of Krescevaz. -
Farlati, 15, Vol. lV ,;. 46 claims that ca. 1200 patarins
destroyed both the cathedral church and thi bishop's court at Kretevo. If this
destruction had actually occurred, the absence oi any mention of it in con-
ternporary papal letters about Bosnia is hard to explain.) The Franciscans also
utststed and possibly even forged documents to demonstrate
that the Franciscan
monastery at Kretevo had been erected in the fourteenth centurv (see chaoter
II' Appendix A). Why the Franciscans have fabricated a tradition foi Kre(euo is
not clear, but we can assume that the fabrications
were made by subsequent
Franciscans who sought to build up the presrige of their rnonrit.ry.
Lt.Y:y"
lhe Vojsalid chafter (since KrXevo was nor p.rt
oi hi, llnds) might have been
286 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 287

forged to suggest that the vicar resided at Krelevo. ln addition to the suspecl
lJ0. On Stefan VuktiC Kosata, see S. Cirkovid , Herceg StefanVuktit-Kosala
combination of Franciscans and KreIevo, I am somewhat bothered by the /aDa (SAN, pos izd.), Beograd, 1964.
languageofthecharter. Iam no linguist but when reading the charter I feel that
i' niegouo
the vocabulary and syntax are more modern than that of other fifteenth-century
iit.O" this church see Istoiia Crne gore, Titograd, 1970, II, 2, pp.483-
88.
charters. The term "katolicalke" (Catholic) is strange. In, other Bosnian l12. Miklosich. PP. 415 17.
documents the Catholic Church was not called Catholic but Roman or Christian
lJ3. We also saw in Chapter IV that heraics and Patarins came ro Cathotic
(Rim ska or Krldanska). The only way to make the term's presence plausible is to were saying mass, which corroborates my belief
churches when the
Franciscans
attribute it to Franciscan influence; such an explanation is possible. The ex-
rhat the BosnianChurch neither opposed church buildings nor church services.
pression "vikar kon'vikara" is also unusual; it is similar to "did kon' dida"
lt4. M. Dini6."'Zemlie hercega sv. Save," G/as. (SKA), L82, 1940, pp.
r,rsed only once in a charter oI 1446 (Miklosich, p. 440) about whose authen-
ZIB ff., and H. Sabanovii, Bosanski palaluk (Djela NDBH, XIV), Sarajevo,
ticity rcme doubt has been expressed. Thus it is possible that both charters are lgr9pp.27-3L and his "Pitanie turske vlasti u Bosni do pohoda Mehmeda II
fakes worked in the same period and in the same milieu. It would be helpful if
t4$ ei' GID,Vll, 195), pp. 37-51. But though Turkish conquests in the
linguists would examine both of these charters for general features and also if 1430's were less extensive than has generally been thought, Bosnia was still in a
they would m ake a study of this expression , find other cases of its use, and see if, most critical position. Tvrtko II, expecting the end of his kingdom, in 1441 was
{or example, it was not an expression rnore common at some later date. negotiating with Venice about finding asylum there. The pressure was not to be
llowever, though doubts exist in my mind, I cannot prove the Voisalid charter a alleviated until the successful crusade of 144) (on it see, Chapter VI) whose
fake;the evidence {or its autheqlicity is impressive: The forger would havs 1e effects,of course, q'ere shon lived.
havc known of Vicar Johannes lZuvan in the charter) who held office for only a tlr. AB, P. 161.
very brief term ; we would expect a forger to have had as vicar Jacob de Marchia, 116. lorga, ll, pp. 362'63'
the most fanrous fifteenth century vicar who, after being a visitor to Bosnia in l)7. S. Kuli5i6, "Tragovi Bogomila u Boki kotorskoj," Spomen l (SAN),
1432 33, became vicar in 143J.In addition the individuals named are known 105,19i6, pp.4l-43. He quotes from the Bishop's Archive in Kotor, sveska
from other sources and the land grants are plausible. Vofsalif's Catholicism is l, p. 27.
also attested by his church building. Thus I tentatively accept the charter as 118. In the text we shall only note those o{ special interest. A complete list is
auth entic. {ound below in note 195. In the period 1433'36, there is record of only one
142. Miklosich, p. 440. This charter is discussed below in Chapter VI. Patarin in Dubrovnik a man named Veseochus (Veseoko?) who was given
141.D. MandiC, Raspraue i plilozi iz stare bruatske pouijesti, Rome, 19(r3, permission to carry some oil from the town (Dini€, p.224, no. 10). We are not
pp. 1lB3 88. A full discussion of this bishopric is found in J. Fine "Mysteries told where he came from ; we do not even know if he had been an envoy. He may
ahrut the Newly Discovered Srebrnica-Visoko Bishopric in Bosnia (1434- simply have been sent from his monastery to obtain oil.
l44l)," Ilast Euroltean Quarteily, VIII, no. l, March, 1974,pp.29'43. 159. Dinid, p. 224, No. 12.
l1t1t. Jctrg,a, ll,
pp. 320'21. 160. Dini( p. 225, No. 13, 14.
1115. Truhelka, "Konavoski rat . . .," GZMS, 29, l9l7,p. 210. l6l. S. Cirkovi(, ITerceg Stefan Vuktit-Kosata i njegouo doba, Bmgrad
l1t(r. Resti, p. 264. (SAN), l!64, p. 44.
12r7. S. Deliy', "Dva stara natpisa iz Hercegovine," GZMS,21 ,1911, p. l(r2. DiniC, p. 194, No. 35.
49t. 163. DiniC, p. 194, No. 36; p. 227 . No. 20, 2l; and Stojanoui/, l, 2, p. )tt.
lzr8. DeliC, op. cit., pp. 496, 499-100. 164. PuciC, II, p. 10).
l/i9. Resti, p.264. We_might point out here that in addition to his nephew l6). DiniC, p. 184, No. 10.
and successor Stefan Vukii6 who had connections with the Bosnian Church, 166. DiniC, p. 185, No. ll.
Sandalj may have had a relative who was an ordained member of the Bosnian l(r7. DiniC, p. 181, No. 12.
Church. In the viltage gf Kosafe, near Goralde was found a grave inscription 168. DiniC, p. 186, No. 14.
which according to BellagiC reads,-"Flere lies Gospoia 1n)eota kr'stianica 169. Dinii, p. l8(r, No. 1).
daughter of Pribisav Kosata" (S. Betlagif, 'Nekoliko novopronadienih natpisa 170. See map at endof M. Vego, Naselje. . . . However, there is no reason to
locate Ljubskovo exactly where Vego does, since Vego's placing of Ljubskovo
na steicima." GZMS(arch), XIV, 19t9, p.242. Bellagit dates the inscription
fiftemth century but lacked data to be more precise. M. Vego, however, requires the caravan route between Viiegrad and Srebrnica to take a wide
looping detour that has no justification in the geography or the sources. Vego's
disagrees with Bellagii's reading and comes up with, "here lies kr'stijaTinov's;
Bt'oka"; in this case instead of a monastiC title we simply have the name of routeproperly leaves Viiegrad and follows the Drina north, but from the point
where he correctlv has the route leave the Drina. he should have drawn the
Bc'r'rka's husband. (M. Vego, "Novi i revidirani natpisi iz Hercegovine,"
route so as to have it continue straight overland to Srebrnica with no significant
CZMS, n.s., XIX (Arh), 1964, pp.2Ol 02.) I have not seen rhe srone and thus
deviations from a basically straight p'ath. The straight route would corre;pond to
haveno basison which to takesides. We do not know who Pribisav Kosa[a was,
present day peasant paths toward Srebrnica, would be shorter, and would be
but he clearly was a member of the family, and his daughter may have been
more reasonable than Vego's looping detour that is not mentioned in any source
ordained as a si$er in the Bosnian Church.
288 Medieval Bosnian Church
(oral communication from V. Palavestra). Since the medieval caravans most
likely did follow this straight path, then it-is most probable that Liubskovo lay
somewhere on the straight line between Vilegrad and Srebrnica on the Bosnian
side of the D.;ina. V. Palavestra and M. Petri6, "Srednioviekovni nadgrobni
spomenici u Zepi," Radoui(NDBH), XXry, Sarajevo, 1964' p. 14?. luggest
that Liubskovo may well be the modern village of Liubomillia in which lies the
largest medieval cemetery in the area. They describe the cemetery (pp. I47 -52);
its itones have few motifs and no inscriptions, thus giving us no basis to connect
the cemetery with a particutar confesiion. M. Dinii, Za istoriia radalstaa a
sredn j euekoanoj Sr biji i Bo sni, l deo, Beograd' l9JJ, p' 34 places Ljubskovo in
the same g*"."1 area; but rather than identify it with Ljubomillja' he locates it
in the vicinity of three settlements (Purtidi, KrniC and Parabutie) in the vicinity
of Osat.
171. Dinid, Iz dubrouatkog arbiua,Ill, p. 187, No. 16, 17.
17 2. M. Dini(, Za istoliju fuda/staa, .,, I deo, p. 34, cites documents from
the Dubrovnik archive from 1425 and 1426, one of which says ". , ' usque in
Glubschovo in contrata Dragisini, " showing that Liubskovo lay in the territory
of Dragiia Din,ifi6. On Peter DinjiEi6's use of a Patarin diplomat in 14)0 see
below. Chanter VI.
l7l. Dinii. Iz duhroua/kog arhiua,lII. pp. 187-88, No. 18.
174.See Chapter IV, note 27 for a list of villages known to have had hiias. A
thorough study of the material in the Turkish defters m.ay eventually shed
{urther iight on the size o{ certain specific Bosnian Church hiias.
l7). Dini6, p. 194, No. 37.
176. Dinid, pp. t9491.
177. We know Borat was still held by the Pavlovi6i since three months later
in April 1441 Radoslav Pavlovid issued a charter from Borat. Miklosich, p. 4$.
178. Dini6, p. 195, No. 39.
179. DiniC, p. 196, No. 40.
ls0. QiniC, p. 196, No. 41.
l8l. C. Truhelka, "Natpisi iz sjeverne i istofne Bosne," GZMS, Vll,
1891, p.348. "(as)elel(i Rado...).. nai6i (na svoi)na ple(menito)i postavi na
nem' kamcn'novi Gost Ra( )koe i Radiv(o) sin." (Here lies Radoe (?) on his
family land and over him Gost Raiko (Truhelka suggest RaXko' it could equally
well be Ratko) and Radoe's son place a new stone.) A slightly different reading'
but with no change in meaning, is found in M. Vego, Zbornik sredniouiekounib
natpisa Bone i Hercegouine, IV, Saraievo, 1970 (henceforth, Vego, Zbornik),
p.131, No.3l2.
182. A second inscription on another gravestone from the same general area
(at Batkovi6i, l0 km. from Bijeliina) has been announced as referring to a cleric
of the Bosnian Church. The stone is quite damaged and only part of the in-
"Here
scriptioncanberead.S.Betlagi€,whoannourtced-it,readsitasfollows:
lies Ra....... Milorad...ost Bellagi6 believes that the second line
mentions a Milorad Gost. The spacing between letters would allow this. S'
Beilagii, "Novopronadieni natpisi na ste6cima," NS, XII, 1969, pp. l4I 42'
Flowever, M. Vego comes up with a different reading for the second line
"Miloie Anko," thus arriving at something very different from "gost."
(Vego, Zbornik,lV, pp. iL6 li, No. 296). Vigo prints a clear photograph of
ihe'inscription which-I think clearly shows the man's name was Milorad'
However, the second word is totally unclear, but from what can be seen I doubt
Bosnia from 1391 to L443 289
.,av m[ch it says "gost." Thus I do not believe that we have another feference
]^','g..rrian Ctrurctr cleric in the vicinity of Biieliina. However, we have various
ilinii re{erences in written sources to members of the Bosnian faith or
I"1"", in" the north noted in repofts about Jacob de Marchia's work in Srem in
ll"'ilfO'r. Srern of course lies beyond the Sava at considerable distance from
llilit"". r. uaJi ion. Danilo's "l-ite" of Stefan Dragutin, Ban of Matva and
heretics from the
il$il|iiZSa t316), says that Dragutin convertedbemany found in his realm and
iorni.n land; presumably these heretics were to. Bosnian Church. We also
Ii"-it fu some oi them may have been adherents of the
[i"Jtt.t"i.t and Patarins in 1376 in Matva, see above Chapter IV'
""'l-83- Bartholomaeus of Pisa, "De Conformitate vitae Analecta
Franciscqna, IV, 1906.
"|iq.t. Truhelka, op. iit.,p. P. 55)'
348. "Ase le"zi . . . na svoi zemli plemenitoi. Asi
bileg sva . . . i Trdoe a toi pisa Goiiin pop' "
-*auista
""ig'. I. Kralinouid, "Tri revidirana nadpisa iz okolice Travnika," GZMS'
ri , irlil, pp'. 8a3,6. "(Se leii Drgal), unasraiani! (or nakraianil) Ase-pisa
il,,trXin suom g(ospodi)n', t<oii me bi{e vmma s'bludi zato molu vas gospodo ne
n. n!1.t" deie ve (:vi) biti kako on a (o)n ne mote kako v' (:vi)' V
ir. o., i sina 'z bogdan na Dragoia novi kameni postavih, i da viste (:znate) da
"*"pti,.
Zete umriti ivsi domu poginuti pravi
(veli J. K.) apustl' i slava di(l) et (i) i
ia(boru). Se pisa Gost. " Kraiinovi6 proiects that the bc.g_in_ningrof the inscription
,usthru.beenhereliesDragai .... Then it states: "1, Vukaisin, write for my
io.J, *no greatly defended (according to J. K., deriving s'bludi {rom s'bjudati)
,n.;'tt,"r"fi.. I ask you, sir, do not tread on him because you will be as_he and
t,. irnno, be as you. ln the name of the Father and Son, I, Bogdan over Dr.agoia
pl.c"d n"* ,ion" and you know th-at--you. will die and your whole home
" K.) "the_ apostles correctly say_and the
[household) will die (then according to l.
glorious group to the council. " The ending is confused. It is quite possible that a
i'nougttt.onl". to an end after "the whole house will die." In the final phrase
"rryl' tnd "council" are simply proiections of J' K' In 1894 IGZ"M.S' V::
780 8l)'fruhelka read this last line ". . . poginuti pravi a pusti slav cetr . .
Thus even the word "apostle" is not ceftain. Thus I do not dare try to come to
any conclusions about any doctrinal ideas that might be contained. since. the
inscription begins with Vuia"sin writing and ends- with an unnamed gost writingt
J.K. plausiblisuggests the two are th; same and thegost's lllt.ltt
Vukaiin'
b{.or.r., *" ao"not know how the deceased had defended Vuka'sin - from
persecution? bandits? It is interesting to note that this is the second case of a
new stone having to be erected. Does this simply signify that originally a wooden
marker had beei placed over the grave, which now was being replaced by a
stone? Or had an earlier sone bein destroyed? If so, was it a case ef grave
robbing hence the reminder on this stone to leave the corpse alone,- which -we
find on a-large number of Bosnian and Hercegovinian stones
- or had Catholics
shown hostility toward the Bosnian Church by damaging the stones? These
questions, though interesting to ponder, unfortunately cannot be answered'
186. M. Vego, "Novi i revidirani natpisi iz H.ercegovine," GZMS (ath)'
XVII, 1962, p. Zll,, "Ase se ovoi kamene uzvute Radovan s Kr'stieninom'
Rada--sinom ,^iiuotona se." Radovan and Krstianin Radalin set up these stones
{or themselves during their lifetime. (Reprinted in M' Vego, Zbornih,lV' pp'
l4-15, No.209).
I 87. M. Y ego, Zbornit, IV, pp. l1+O 41, No. 3l 7 claims that the stone does
290 Medieval Bosnian Church
not say "stroinik" but "etroinik." His photograph does seem to have a line
through the initial "c" (cyrilic "s"). However, when I was at Zgunje in the
springof 19(r7 Icarefully examined the stone andit said "stroinik" as clearly as
if it had been printed. The initial "c" must have acquired a scratch through it
since then.
tRs.5. Beilagi6, "Novopronadieni natpisi na ste€cima," Naie starine,lX,
l)64,pp. 138 39. "Ase leYi Ostoja Kr'(s)tijannaZguno." The description of
the site comes from my own visit there.
189. M. Okig, "Les Kristians (Bogomiles Parfaits) de Bosnie d'aprls des
Documents Turcs in6dits," S'idost-Forschungen, XIX, 1960, p. 124, from a
register of 1134.
190. Li. StoianoviC, Stai srpski zapisi i natpisi, SKA, Beograd III, 190t, p.
10. "A se leli Dobri Gost Mi(len komu bi5e pr(iredio) po uredbi Avram svoe
veliko gostolubsrvo. Gospodine dobri, kada pridel prid Gospoda naXega Isuha
ednoga spcrmeni inas svoih rabovi, Pisa G. M." See also M. Yego, Zbornih,
lV. rn. 60 6J. I'ls. 2119.
l9l. Li. Stoiano"ii. Stari
srpshi zapisi i natpisi, Vol. 6, SKA, Beograd , 1926,
p.63.
192. The presence of a hiYa in the vicinity is suggested by the fact that
Turkish deftersmention lands connected with krstjani in three different villages
in the later Turkish nahijaof Sokol : in Podi, Suhodlak and Kunovo (see Okig,
"Les Kristians...," pp. 123,127-28).ln thislast village at the timeof Herceg
Stefan (143)-66) a certain Cvatko Gost had sold some lands (see below Chapter
VII). This suggests there may well have been a hila at Kunovo. However-, ai we
shall see from the example of Gost Radin, every gost did not have a hiYa. We
shall also find that Bosnian Church figures, at least in some cases, retained
private property; thus we cannot assume Cvatko was disposing ol church
property. (On the private wealth disposed of by Gost Radin in his Testament see
below Chapto VII; for 22 examples of hereditary land (baitinas/ of specific
krst jani whose names are given
we have iust discussed
- including Krstianin Ostoia of Zgunje whom
see OkiE, pp.l23 24, and also above in Chapter II,
-
where I discuss ba"stinasof Bosnian Church clerics.) Also possibly pointing to
the existence of ahr"z.a in the vicinity is the treaty between Herceg Stefan and his
rcn Vladislav signed in l4)3 guaranteed by the djed and a dozen stroinici at the
place PiIEe on the Pivska Mountain (see below, Chapter VI). We do no-t know
whether this agreement was signed at a hila
- like StiepanorKotromani6's
grant to Vukoilav Hrvatinid at the Mottre hiia in I )22
land
at one of Herceg
Stefan's numerous residences.
- 18. February 143b, Stefan Vukfid sent RadaIin "Christianin" to
193.V. Skari6, "Grob i grobni spomenik gosta Milutina na Humskom u
foEanskom srezu. " GZ M S, 46, 1934. pp. 79 -82. " Va ime rvoe priiista Troice
gospodina Gosti Milutina bilig rodom Cr'niEan' ": "Pogibe ion ego li milosti
hriiei " ; "iitie a !ih u Easte bosanske gospode primih darove od velike gosgrde i
vlastm i od gr'Ike gospode a vse vidomo."
l9z+. S. CirkoviC, Herceg Stefan . . .,p.232, mentions Stefan's embassy to
Thomas and his hospitality to Manuel Cantacuzenus.
195. The stati$ics include only missions sent by secular figures and do not
include the few missions sent by djeds and by Gost Radin. This section also does
not consider the few cases we have noted of Catholic clerics serving as diplomats
for the king and br cenain nobles. The missions we have taken into con-
sideration (with source references) are as follows:
I
).i
Bosnia from l39l to 1443 291
I . Septon ber , 1403 , K ing Ostoja sent Vlatko Patarin to Dubrovnik
rDinii, p. 222, No. 3l Jorga, II' p.98)'
2. Ianuary 29, 1419, Sandali sent Dmitar Krstjanin to Dubrovnik
rstoianovii, Stare srpske poaelie i pisma,l' l, p.363).
' j. Dece-b"r 2l ,1419, Sandali sent Divac Krstjanin to Dubrovnik
(SroianoviC, I. l. P. 304).
'-'4. Nou.-b"r 1410, Radoslav sent Krstianin Vlatko Tu(mar)li6 to
Dubrovnik (Stoianovii, I, l, pp. )67 69; Miklosich, pp. 306-08).
1. July .1421, Radoslav sent Vlatko Krstjanin to Dubrovnik
rstoianovif, I, I, p.319).
(r. March 1422, Radoslav sent Raden (Radin) Krstianin to
Dubrovnik (Stoianovid, I, l, p. 324).
7. Janttary 16, 1423, Radoslav sent a "Patarin and others" to
Sandali (Jorga, II, p.2ll). January 27,1423 we.find a reference to
Radoslav having senr MiaXa Gost to Sandali (Dinii, p' 189' No' 20).
These two references certainly refer to the same mission.
g, p. February l,, 1423 Radoslav sent Krstianin Vlatko Tumr'ka
(sicl) and Radin Krstianin to Dubrovnik, and Sandall sent Starac
Dmitar to Dubrovnik. The two not only dealt with Dubrovnik but also
concluded peace between the two noblemen (Miklosich, pP. 319-21).
10,|n l43O Dubrovnik expected Sandali to send Dmitar Krstianin
thither. We clo not know wheiher he actually came (Dinid, p. 190 , No.
2t).
I l. June 1430, King Tvrtko sent two unnamed Patarins to
Radoslav (Dinid, pp. 190 91, No. 26, 27).
12. June 1430, Radoslav sent some unnamed Patarins (including a
starac) to Sandall (Dinii, p. l9l, No. 28).
13.|n 1432 Radoslav sent Krstianin Radin to Dubrovnik (Dinii, p.
221r, No.9; JorBa,II, pp.308 09; StoianoviC, I, l, pp. 619,628).
14. February 1432, Sandali sent an unnamed Patarin to Dubrovnik
(Dinii, p. 223, No. 7).
15. January 1437, Radoslav sent Radalin Patarin (and companions)
to Dubrovnik(DiniC, p. 224, No. 11 ; Stoianovii, I, l, p. (r33).
16. April ll, 1437 , Stefan Vuktii sent Radin Starac to Dubrovnik
(Dinid p. 224. No. l2).
17. April 20, 1437 , Stefan VukEi6 sent Radohna Starac to
Dubrovnik (DiniC, p. 193, No. 33).
Dubrovnik (Dini6, p. 226, No. l8).
19. June 1438, Stefan Vuktii'sent Starac Radin to Dr.rbrovnik
(Dinid, p. 193, No. 34 andp.22), No. 1), l(r; Stojanovid, l,2,p.
46).
20. September 1438, Stefan VukEiCsent Starac Radin and Krstianin
Radelfa to Dubrovnik (Stoianovid, l, 2, p. 48).
21. Auqust 14J8, Radoslav sent Radalin Krstjanin to Dubrovnik
(Dini6, n. 226. No. l7).
22. November 1438, Radoslav sent RadaYin Krstjanin and Jurai
Krstianin to Dubrovnik (DiniC, pp. 226'27, No. l9),
23. January 1419, Radoslav sent Krstianin Radalin Vukti6 to
Dubrovnik (Sto janovid, I, l, p.635; Miklosich, pp. 397 -98).
292 Medieval Bosnian Church
24. August 1439, Dubrovnik requested that Radoslav send thither
"one of his Patarins." We do not know whether Radoslav obliged
(Dini1, p. 194, No. 35).
25. April-May 1440, Stefan VukEiisent Radin "starac christiano"
to Dubrovnik (DiniC, p. 194, No. 36, and p.227, No. 20, 21,
Sto janoviC, I, 2, p. 54).
26. April 144 1, Stefan VukEii sent Starac Radin to Dubrovnik
(Dinid, p. 228, No. 23).
27. August 1441, Stefan VukEiC sent Starac Radin to Dubrovnik
(DiniC, p. 228, No. 24).
28. ln l4rt3, Stefan VuktiC sent a Patarin named Radivoi to
Dubrovnik (Dini6, p. 229, No. 26).
29. February 11141, Stefan VukEif sent Starac Radin to Dubrovnik
(Dinicl,p. 197, No. 43, 44).
3t). July 14l,r), Stefan Vuk[id sent Srarac Radin to Dubrovnik
(Dini{, p- 198, No. 45; AB, p. 197).
,31 , 12.In 14iO Stefan VukEic< twice sent Gost Radin to Dubrovnik
(CirkcrviC, Ilerceg Stefan .., pp. I 14. 129 (Note 48)).
73. ln 1450 Peter Diniiiii sent Radohna Krstianin to Dubrovnik
(Dini6, p. 229, No. 28).
71t 36. ln the course of 14J3-J4 Stefan VuktiC was represented in
Dubrovnik for considerable periods of time by Gost Radin. It is im-
possible to tell-how many trips he actually made. I estimate three ).4 B,
p 218: Dinid, p. 209, No. 64).
37 . In 1454 Nikola and Peter PavloviC sent rn embassy including
two stroiniks (Gost Radosav BradieviC and Starac Radosav) to
Dubrovnik (Miklosich, pp. 469'72).
38 41. In Februrary 1416, March 1459, March 146l and February
l1t(r2, Stefan VukEiC sent Gost Radin to Dubrovnik (Dini6, pp.23l-
13, No. 34 42).
rt2.ln 146) Stefan VuktiC sent Gost Radin to Dubrovnik (Dinii, p.
2J4, No. 46, 47).
1r3. In December 1465 Ste{an VukEii sent Tvrdisav Krstjanin to
Duhrovnik (StoianoviC, I, 2, p. 78).
44.|n the summer oI 1466 Siefan VukXiisent an embassv includins
two Patarins (Krstlanin Tvrdisav and Krstianin ferenko) and an
Orthodox metropolitan (David of Milelevo) to Dubrovnik (Miklosich,
pp. 491'98).
We list 44 m issions here and in our discussion we include only 42. The reason
for this is that in the discussion we do not include numbers 10 and 24; for in
these two cases our sources $ate that Dubrovnik was expecting or hoping for a
mission that included a Patarin, but we do not know whether the missions
actually came.
196.8y not adding 1404,I am assuming that the krstlani and stroinici sent
{or Pavle Kleiii;n January 1404 were sent 6y the djed alone and not by the djed
and Ostoia (asone Ragusan document states, Sto,anov;i, I. t , p.4)il. lllam
incarrect, then we must increase the number of royal Patarin missions to three.
I also do not include the Spring 1438 nrission to Dubrovnik sent iointly by the
Bosnia from 1391 to 1443 293
aied, king and Radoslav, since we do not know who the envoys were (and thus
l'int.t iny Patarins were on it).
"'ii7. In on...t. (Radin's second triP in l4t0) we do not know whcher a
.*u6r.ouoy participated' In my statistics I assume one did (for on the basis of
probability it seems most likely) however, it is possible that Radin had
ortistlcat
l.*otar cbmpanion on 23 rather than 24 missions.
""iig. S". note 197; here with the "at least" I am not including Radin's
--i99. mission
second in l4)0'
E*r*ples of such irint embassies in other lands can be found in K.
trdek, Istoiia Srba, Yol. ll' pp' 28-29'
' 200. In what is now Hercegovina prior to 1391 all nobles whose religion we
can identifY were Orthodox'
201. The origins of this common opinion are a historiographical problem of
tittle relevance to this study. It can be found expressed for example in, S.
flitouif, " 'Verna sluiba' i 'vjera gospodska,' " Zbor4!/- Filozofskog
fakulteta, Beograd Univerzitet, Vl, 2, 1962, pp. 9t-l I I ; F. SiSii' Voiaoda
'11roo1svutciT llraatinii'i njegoao doba,Zagteb, 1902, p.236; M. Dini6,
,,Bosanska feudalna drYava od XII do XV veka, " in Istorija naroda fugoslauije,
l, lgt), P. 120, etc.
202.We also find evidence that the Pavlovifi maintained peaceful relations
with the Catholics. We have earlier noted Radoslav's use of a Franciscan
(Brother Stephen) as a diplomat in 1422.In addition, the Franciscan monastery
at Olovo (noted in 1385) was on their lands. This monastery continued to
function througfrout the medieval period; there is no reason to believe that
Pavle RadenoviE or his successors the Pavlovi6i, despite Bosnian Church ties,
interfered in any way with this monastery. Since in local folklore
been greatly influenced by the friars at Olovo
- which has
the Pavlovi6i, never called
-
heretics, are glorified as heros against the Turks, we have reason to believe that
pood
the familv had relations with the Franciscans.
203. A. Babi{ "Nelto o karakteru bosanske feudalne drlave," Pregled, Y ,
No.2, 19J3, p. 84. Professor Babi6, claiming that the Bosnian Church did not
possess large estates, goes on to arSue that since the Catholic Church did amass
largeestates wherever it established itself in Europe and since it was doing so in
Bosnia (as can be seen from Bela lV's charter of 1244 as well as from grants to
the church by various bans), the nobility, in the interests of keeping its estates
intact, ought to have defended the Bosnian Church.
However, this theory now seems invalid; data from the Turkish defters,
which have become available since Babi€'s article was published, give us reason
to believe that the Bosnian Church like other Christian churches of its day, had
considerable landed property. This problem is discussed in Chapters II and VI.
204. Unfortunatety, we know nothing about the families from which Patarins
came. In only a few cases are we given a last name patronymic for a
Patarin; these few names do no[ itrdi.rt" connections - or with any of -the top
families.ln addition none of the numerous documents about the leading families
evelr suggests that any of their members became ordained in the Bosnian Church
(excluding the disputed inscription about Beoka see note 149 for this chapter
-- about which BetlagiE and Vego cannot agree- whether she was or was not a
xrstlanica)' However, it is likely that some of the Patarins were drawn from the
lesser nobility; the'Iurkish
defters' references to bdlrinas(hereditary estates) of
certain krstiani indicate
that some of thern came from well-to-do families. Yet,
294 Medieval Bosnian Church

even so, the origins of the great maiority of Patarins, whom we_have met
in the
sollrces, rernain a mystery. Therefore, since we cannot show that a significxnl
numher ol Pararins were drawn from the higher classes, we cannot ui t"_,,,,
ties to argue rhat the Bosnian clerics should have supportea tn" ;"t"."rt.
oi'it,l
nobility.
201. Orbini, p. 314.
20(r. M. Dini6, "Dubrovavcka sredn jevekovna karavanska trgovina t,
Jugo.rlouenski istorishitasopis,Ill (No. f-q, 1937 , pp. 123 24. CHAPTER VI

BOSNIA FROM 1443TO 1463

L. Increased Mention of Dualisn in Sourcesfrom the 1440's

Prior to the 1440's, the existence of dualism in Bosnia is suggested by

only a small number of sources, most of which are ltalian. Because
Slavic and Hungarian sources rarely hint at it, it seems probable that
this dualist culrent was unimportant. The material we have examined
thus far on the Bosnian Church strongly argues against that church
being dualist, though it may well have acquired certain practices or
attitudes under dualist influence. In the period to be examined now,
there are more references to dualism, some of which even try to link the
Bosnian Church with dualism. These references to dualism begin ap-
pearing in documents in the late 1440's and continue until the fall of the
Bosnian state, after which they were incorporated into early historical
works. And thus was established the generally accepted view that both
the Bosnian Church and heresy were terms for a single dualist
movement existing in Bosnia throughout the Middle Ages. Yet even in
this final period while some sources speak of dualists, others continue to
speak o{ the Bosnian Churchmen in the same manner that they had
throughout the earlier fifteenth century, and still others continue to
speak vaguely of heretics and schismatics or even link the Bosnians with
the Eastem rite. Either some of these sources are inaccurate or else the
religious situation in Bosnia entered a phase so complex and varied as to
be indescribable on the basis of our limited source material. No
satisfactory account of these final twenty years has ever been advanced.
And no hypothesis is really possible thai does not make some highly
speculative assumptions.
One might suggest that there was a change in the actual religious
.
srtuation in Bosnia after the mid 1440's and that the
dualist movement
mentioned in the Italian sources (and presumably quite unimportant
until then) suddenly grew and attracted a large following or possibly
even influenced the Bosnian
Church. Yet much evidence exists to
counter such suggestions.
Sources such as Gost Radin's will, which we

I
 296 Medieval Bosnian Church
shall examine in Chapter VII, make it clear that the mainstream of the
Bosnian Church remained non-dualist. However, the possibility that
a l'j"rrin a"nirnt practices (some of which may have seemed similar to
minority broke away from the mainstream and formed an actively
dualist wing cannot be excluded. Such a splintering off by a dualist
minority from a non-dualist parent body is not unheard of: Nina
Garsoian, as we have noted above, has postulated that a dualist current
developed within the ranks of the Paulicians in Constantinople,(l) and
the appearance of dualist groups among the Waldensians is well
documented. Such a development would give us a plausible way to
explain not only the increasing number of documents calling ths
Bosnian Church "Manichee,'n but also four documents, all in-
dependent of one another, whose testimony about the church being
dualist is very hard to reject. These documents, all to be discussed in
this chapter, are: 1) The Ritual of Kr'stjanin' Radosav. This ritual most
probably is derived from a Cathar ritual, and although there is nothing
heretical in its content, it does suggest ties between some Bosnian
churchmen and dualists. 2) A treatise on trade by Benko KotruljiC. In it
we find the term "Manichee" used for Bosnian Churchmen by a
presumably well-informed Slavic-speaking eye-witness merchant from
Dubrovnik who had no connections with the papal court or the
inquisition and who had no known reason to be slanderously artacking
religious beliefs in Bosnia. 3) A letter of Patriarch Gennadius of con-
stantinople from the 1450's referring to Kudugers
generally believed to mean Bogomils - a strange term
being influential at the court of
Herceg Stefan. 4) The documents- concerning the three Bosnian
noblemen, called leaders of the heresy at court, who were sent to Rome
as ''Manichees" by the presumably bi-lingual Bishop of Nin.
If the Bosnian Church had split into two wings, one of which
exhibited dualist features, the popes in this period would have had a
concrete reason to call the Bosnian church dualist; the catholics might
have thought that dualism had infected the whole church or might, at
least, have found it convenient to depict it as doing so. However, we
must stress that such a split cannot be proved the documentation is
far too scanty. And one might well ask, whence- did such a dualist wing
receive its impetusT Although there had been a history of dualists in the
area, and although the Bosnian church, with its lack of any effective
central organization as well as of a corpus of clearly defined dogma,
would havebeen an ideal body to subvert, it seems that foreign dualist
movements were dead or moribund by the 7440's. It is hard to believe
that the impetus for such a direction would have come from Bosnia's
non-intellectual non-speculative inhabitants.
However, if we do not want to postulate such a division within the
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 297
Church, we are left with a unified church, which despite
Bosnian
li""of dualists), remained as it had been all along - a non-dualist,
-"r. or less orthodox Slavic-rite off-shoot of a Catholic monastic order.
i" nir.6" we must seek in the authors of the sources that speak of it the
increased references from the late 1440's to dualism in
-ur.. fo. theAnd here we must turn to the papacy, and the papal legates
ilriifru..tt.
F.rn.ir.^ns in the field. We may regret that we know so little about
"rrd
ihe interaction of these three elements. Did they work out this in-
,"..,retation togetherZ Did the popes hand it down and the local
irlt,ofi.t find it convenient to accept it? Or did the local Catholics -
would aid their own work to pass
lecates and,/or Franciscans - think it
infotrntaion on to the popes f'ar away in Rome? UnfortunatelY, our
,u.h
limited sources allow no more than speculation about these questions.
However, regardless of who initiated this interpretation, we have two
choices as to how it came to the fore: a) through a misunderstanding of
the situation in Bosnia, b) through a deliberate frame-up:
a) The Bosnian Church, which we have suggested originally grew out
of a Catholic monastic organization with no guidance from people
educated in any aspect of theology or church practices' surely did
acquire various heterodox practices. Some of these may well have
resembled certain dualist practices whether they were independently
under the
-
influence of the dualists found in the
arrived at or acquired
area. The Franciscans and papal agents, encountering such practices,
might have associated them with dualism and have concluded that the
Bosnian Church was dualist. The name Patarin would have served as
confirmation of that suspicion. And if these agents while in Bosnia did
encounter actual dualists, they might well not have realized that these
dualists had nothing to do with the Bosnian Church and instead have
{ound in them confirmation of their suspicions. Lacking theological
sophistication, the Bosnians would not have understood what the
Catholics were looking for or were bothered about, and hence would
have been of limited help in aiding the agents to realize that the Catholic
Church had a mistaken view of the Bosnian Church. The papal agents
throughout behaved in Bosnia as if ' 'heresy' ' and ' 'orthodoxy' ' were as
meaningful and realizable to the Slavic peasant as the terms and what
they represented
-
were to the agents.
- that the "Manichee" view originated in Rome
It is also possible
owing to papal confusion over the term Patarin. In this case it is probable
that papal agents and Franciscans in Bosnia, who were hostile to the
Bosnian Church, would have found this misunderstanding helpful to
them; it was likely to result in greater papal interest in and support of
 298 Medieval Bosnian Church
their efforts in Bosnia. Thus we would not expect them to have gone ox1
of their way to correct Rome's confused views about Bosnia.
b) Some people (whether they were papal agents, Franciscans or both,
we cannot be sure) for motives of their own, decided to frame 61u
Bosniah Church. Presumably linking the Patarins with dualism * and
- would have served to justify
the valuable pejorative label Manichee
the destruction of a small body that was in fact only schismatic. These
people would have been assisted by the fact that, throughout the Middle
Ages, people had been attributing heresy to Bosnia, and by the fact that
various popes in the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries [14
regarded the Bosnian Church as being heretical in some way. Thus it
should not have seemed difficult to convince the popes that the Bosnian
Patarins were the same sort of heretics as the Italian Patarins.
Papal agents, seeking a united Bosnia loyal to Rome to participate in a
crusade against the Turks, might well have felt that the destruction of
the Bosnian Church and the elimination of Patarins from positions of
trust at political centers would enable Catholics to occupy these
positions and would insure the loyalty of these various centers to Rome.
Simply having a Catholic king had not been sufficient for this end.
The rulers, except for possibly Ostoja, had regularly been Catholic since
the 1340's, yet the Bosnian Church had retained its position in the
state. The existence of Bosnian Churchmen at, for example, the courts
of Stefan Vuk[lC or the PavloviCi probably prevented ih" p".*un"nt
residence of Catholic clerics there who might have had at least in
Rome's views of matters predominant influence on -those nobles.
Iience, when the Bosnian -king decided on a policy pleasing to Rome,
there was no guarantee that either of these magnates would support it.
In fact, they could have easily opposed it and gone to war against the
king. Thus to achieve a unified policy against the Turks under papal
leadership, it was necessary that toleration of the Bosnian Church clergy
bc replaced by persecution.
The destruction of the Bosnian Church might have seemed easily
realizablel its clergy, as we have argued, was not too numerous, seems
to have been concentrated in monasteries, and does not seem to have
forged close ties with the populace. Papal agents might well have
reasoned that it would not be difficult to effect the exile of these clerics,
which would in effect destroy the Bosnian Church as an institution;
then the uneducated peasants, who simply considered themselves
Christians, might easily be won over to Catholicism.
Because it does not assume a level of ignorance on the part of the
papacy that is hard to explain, this second theory is the one toward
which I lean. (Of course, we must assume a certain degree of ignorance
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 299
Bosnia on the part of Rome for such a frame-up to have worked.)
"hout
I shall stress in the beginning that we have no documentary
"i^*.u"r, a frame-up had been plotted, and we cannot
."ia.n." to show such
particular individuals. Unsatisfactory as it may be,
.tearly link it to any
,tt. explanation of the chaotic situation that for me best fits with all
il.
,te.uidence that we have examined and shall now examine which
.ironsly argues against the Bosnian Church being dualist. And of course
,t;, typottt"tis does not exclude the theory that a dualist wing broke
a split would have been most useful to
away from the church; such
kame the non-dualist mainstream of the Bosnian Church.
II; Ciait War between Stefan Toma\ and Stefon Vuktii
Shortly after Tvrtko II's death in 1443, King Ostoja's son Stefan
Toma! was chosen as king.(2) Apparently, Ste{an VukEii KosaEa did
not participate in his election, since he immediately refused to recognize
him and announced his support of the new king's brother, Radiovi, who
a decade earlier had been put forward as an anti-king by the Turks, and
who had been supported by Stefan VukEi6's uncle and predecessor,
San dali.
ln 144) the papacy was interested in mobilizing a great Christian
offensive against the Turks. The papal legate in Bosnia was Thomas
Tomasini, Bishop of Hvar, who, though a Venetian, must have known
Slavic, both through his service in Hvar and through his long
associationwith the Bosnians. He had been assigned as permanent papal
representative to Bosnia in 1439 and was to hold that post until 1461 ;
unfortunately the few sources we have about his mission tell us little
about his personality, his politics, his activities in Bosnia, or his
relations with the Franciscans. That he would have had an influential
part in forming papal views on Bosnia and the Bosnian Church is cer-
tain. And if he played a role in convincing the papacy that dualism
existed in Bosnia we can be certain that he acted not through ignorance
or through misunderstanding matters, but deliberately. If the Bosnian
Church was to be the victim of a plot, it is most probable that Thomas of
Hvar played a part in it.
Resti reports that in 1443 the pope offered Stefan Toma! a crown if
the king would
ioin the league against the Turks and if he would per-
secute Manichees.(3) Elecause Resti wrote centuries later and believed
that there had been Manichees in Bosnia, we cannot take the term
"l\lanichee" in his history as evidence of the actual situation. The
1'ope, though, most probably would have been interested in drawing
Bosnia into his league again.st the Turks, and Thomas o{ Hvar could
well have approached Stefan Toma! at this time on the subject of the
300 Medieval Bosnian Church
league and heretics; that he may even have offered him a crown is
confirmed by Stefan Tomalevid's letter to Pope Pius II in 1461' a source
we shall discuss below.
However, Bosnian participation at this time in any sort of league was
not likely, since a civil war had broken out almost immediately upon
Stefan Tomal's accession between the new king and Stefan VuktiC' The
pope could not expect the king to send troops against the Turks at such a
time, and the pope had no means to make Stefan Vuk[id desist from
making war on the king. It may have been this situation that led papal
agents to conclude that it was necessary to eliminate the Bosnian
i-hu..h. They may have believed that if Radin and the Patarins were
ousted from the KosaEa court and replaced by Catholic clerics, the
Catholic Church could then bring about peace between the two camps.
And with such a peace, it might have seemed possible to create a united
Catholic Bosnia, willing to refrain from separatism and civil wars and to
unite behind papally-sanctioned leaders to execute papal policy, and
make a sizable contribution to the crusade against the Turkish threat.
ln 1443 the papal league, without any Bosnian participation, worked
effectively, as Catholic armies under the valiant Hunyadi marched
through Serbia and into Bulgaria, capturing Ni3 and Sofia, and forcing
the Turks to withdraw from these regions. In June 1444 the Turks
recognized these Christian gains and a ten-year truce was signed' The
Balkan Christians seemed to have gained the much needed breathing
space to recover and prepare their defense. Serbia also re-appeared as a
state.
In Bosnia, quite oblivious to the existence of this major confrontation
between Christianity and Islam and to its results, the war continued
between Stefan VukEiC and the new king. The papacy clearly sym-
pathized with the king for in 1444 Hunyadi confirmed Stefan Toma! as
king. IvaniK PavloviC now joined the king's side and together they began
to make considerable progress against Stefan VukIiC. Needing allies,
Stefan Vukfif turned to Alfonso of Naples, a successor of Hrvoje's
Ladislas of Naples. Alfonso dreamt of greater things than Ladislas; not
satisfied with only prospects of the Hungarian throne he also fixed his
sights on the Byzantine empire. As his ambassador Stefan Vuktid sent a
Ragusan monk, "the Abbot of Santo Jacomo."(4) Thus in addition to
Patarins, Stefan Vuktid was willing to use Catholics, and Catholics were
willing to serve him. Alfonso willingly accePted Stefan Vukti( as a
vassal but in February 141t4 instead of a contingent of men Stefan Vuk-
[iC received from his new suzerain a belt of the Order of the Virgin Mary
which also bestowed upon him any and all privileges of that order'(5)
Though Stefan VuktiC would doubtless have preferred troops, at least
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 30r
we see that the ruler of Naples was willing to make a supporter of
patarins a member of the Virgin's order. Thus already we find Stefan
VukfiC in touch with all three confessions, while, of course, main-
taining cordial relations with the Turks. He was vassal of a catholic lord
and a member of the Virgin's order. The Bosnian Church was
represented by Radin and other Patarin diplomats, and Orthodoxy by his
wife Jelena, daughter of Bal$a lllolZeta. She had married him in 1424,
and remained his spouse until her death in 1453.
with the bulk of rurkish troops out of the Balkans, and with
momentum on the christian side, the crusaders decided that they had a
chance to finish with the ottoman presence in Europe once and for all.
Ignoring the ten-year truce that they had agreed to, they resumed the
offensive.(6) This resulted in a rapid rurkish mobilization and the defeat
of the crusaders at varna in November 1444. The serbian ruler George
Brankovic who had wisely remained neutral reaffirmed his status as
vassal of the Ottomans.
After Varna, Stefan Vuktid at war with the pope's and Hunyadi,s
protegd stefan Toma5, received help from the f:uiks. In addition, the
Turks encouraged their vassal George Brankovic to provide aid. Thus
Stefan vukEic, who had lost much of his territory to the king, emerged
as the stronger and, taking the offensive, he began to recover the lands
he had lost. Turkish soldiers proved a better remedy for his troubles
than
the belt of the Virgin. The war was to continue until 1446.
During 1444 we hear of heresy but only in vague terms. Fra Fabian,
the new vicar, was dispatched to root out heresy in the vicariat, in
Hungary, Bosnia, Moldavia, Bulgaria, Ralka, and Slavonia.(7) A
month later we find him at work against the Hussites.(g) Thus,
crearly,
he had not gone to the kingdom of Bosnia. The
next year Fra Fabian had
to battle somewhere in the vicariat against the wiles of
evil enchanters
and enchantresses.(9) Because his chief concern
seems to have been
with Hussites, these fiends probably were not in
Bosnia proper.
III: King Stefan Toma'! Accepts Catbolicism
Il. tt.t 144) Pope Eugene IV recognized Stefan Toma! as the
,regrtrmate
king and granted him permission to end his marriage, since
ne h.ad not been properly
married. He had simply taken the* girl ac_
cording to the Bosnian
custom, that she be good and faithful, *iihou,.
church wedding.(10)
That the pope *as rri'ed to allow the annulment
suSSests that
stefan TomaY by May r44i was already accepted by the
J02 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia 6rcm 1443 to 1463 303
pope as a Catholic or else as a man who had given sufficient guarantees
o{ his intent to become one. yetin 1446 the papal letter states that stefan Toma! had just accepted
T'hat the king's relations with the Catholic Church were good is al5s catholicism, converted by Thomas of Hvar. It is appareni that he was
seen by the fact that in the summer of I445 several Franciscans served not baptized in 1446, for Pope
Pius later states th;i the king followed
him as envoys to Dubrovnik.(11) The Franciscans' service to Stefan christ, but abstained from the sacrament of baf,tism until
the religion of
Tomas at this time gives us strong reason to doubt the frequently ad- the late 1450's when he was baptized by Gioanni cariinal di s.
vanced opinion that in 1445 the Franciscans and the king had had a Angelo'(14)
pius does not explainwhy the king had abstained from
serious quarrel over his toleration of heretics. No contemporary source baptism. some
describes such a quarrel; it is mentioned only in later Franciscan scholars have attributed his delay to a prejudice against the ceremony
chronicles and also in the alleged letter of Pope Eugene IV given by derived from dualists who were hostile to baptism with water. I think we
Farlati. In ChapterII,I have discussed this letter and have explained why can find a much simpler explanation. Most probably the king had
I do not think it is authentic. Thus having sources to suggest that already been baptized in a Bosnian church ceremony and believel that
relations between the king and Franciscans were good, and lacking any he should be treated like a member of the orthodox church who was
contemporary document to show the contrary, I conclude that this being received into the catholic church; for it was against canons to re-
quarrel never took place. baptize members of the orthodox church. If Resti is accurate, stefan
Early in 1446 peace was concluded between Stefan VukEid and the Tomal' father ostoja had baptized at least one son; Resti tells us Du-
king. To seal it, they agreed that Stefan TomaK should marry Stefan brovnik had sent representatives to the ceremony in 1401.(15) And
VukUiC's daughter, Katarina, a plan which perhaps had been envisioned it would be likely that a father who chose to baptize one son should have
as far back as early 1445 when Stefan Toma! had requested the pope to baptized them all. clearly stefan Tomal had not been a catholic for he
annul his earlier marriage. A Catholic wedding was held in May 1446. was just accepting that faith, and had he had a catholic baptism there
We can be sure that Katarina had accepted Catholicism prior to that would have been no question of him being rebaptized. we have argued
date. Since subsequently we find Pope Nicholas revoking privileges above thar ostoja was probably a member of the Bosnian church aid
it
issued by his predecessor Eugene to Stefan Vukti6, who had expressed is likely that he would have brought up his children in his own faith.
to Eugene his wish to become a good Christian, we can suggest that at Thus we may conclude that the ceremony of baptism Ostoja's children
the time his daughter accepted the Roman faith, Stefan VukEii had underwent was a Bosnian Church ceremony; and we .r., ,rgu" that
it
announced his intention of doing the same. However, we have no was a ceremony similar to the catholic and orthodox church
ceremonies because Dubrovnik did not hesitate to call the ceremony
evidence concerning the circumstances or date that Stefan VukEii had a
baptism.
expressed this wish. He could equally well have declared this intention
earlier through Alfonso of Naples when he had been in difficulties over
his war with Stefan Tomal.
A papal letter of July 1446 stated that Thomas of Hvar had converted IV: Tbe Bosnian Church; Tbe Dragiiit
King Stefan Tomat to Catholicism.(12) This letter did not state what Cbarter and Radosau Rituat
the king had been prior to his conversion; we can suppose that he had
There is also another odd aspect about the king's
been a follower of the Bosnian Church since his father Ostoja had acceptance of
Catholicism at this time. In August
supported that church. A letter of Pope Nicholas V from July 1412, 1446, only a mo"nth after the pope
vated that the king was definitely
saying the king and his wife had previously laid aside Patarin errorsi a Catholic, the supposedly Catioi;c
xtng turned around and
confirms this supposition.(13) issued a rand grant to the tiothers Dragiyi6
gxa.anteed bythe djed of the Bosnian Church. Charters guaranteei by
The sources also do not say when Tomat accepted Catholicism. The tpe Bosnian Church are
papal letters of 1445 seem to suggest that the king was already a rare; in fact up to 1446 *e hru!come across
only two authentic
Catholic. Why had the pope recognized him as king if he was not yet a charters of this nature, both from the 1320,s. It is
curious that this
CatholicT And why had the king corresponded with the pope like a custom should be revived ifindeed it had rapsed
Catholic about the question of annuling a non-advantageous marriage?
a time when
the influence of the Bosnian - church at the royal - at
court
seems to have
been essentially finished, when the king was clalming
to
 llrrsrria lrorrr I11/1\ sn lt\1,\ lo5
1(l/l N,lt'<lieval llosniatr (.llrtrlclr

(lrllrolit'st!('('csses llosttiatr (.,lrllllr.1lr,'falt lte i:i lrcltliottetl srultlr':;(s tlurt it t',,rs ratIir:rl irt
lrr.: a loval (latlrolir:' artrl n'ltctt thc dr'rc'tttrtcttts reveal it tvr-'lcarrt rtf a rlir',-l rutttt,.'rl Ilrtko. rvlro
tlrc filst lral{ ol' tlrirt tr:i11tt. lir<,rtt
..ttuu...I]tlsllia.T.lretlatirrgalsorrriglrttrcltrl-rleolle,f()fl.i/t6istlrr:dateIn is rrot ktrorvn frlrrr anv otlrc't sourcc.
tire b.gus C.rttrcil .f I(o'iic'
;i;;,, i,t tl," 'c,,talrle [.,tj.ty ab,'i a lettt:r attributcrl tr, [)oFc lirrgene. 'l lris rnatrrrst'ripl als() t'orttnirrs a litrral in Sl;rvic rl'll ( ll (-;r'r ru'<:ttt'atclr.
?;lru,.r,*,. U. l havc ^lr,_, arguecl that hc <lcsr:rihc<l as att rrl,tirlltt'rl vctsiott of llrc (.,rrtlr;rl rilrrrrl ol l.r',rtts.
'I'his
tirrrc (},Jlrvetuber
*hi,.lr tr..rrsirl.r.,, {,rrg.,rf, \1ras nlsL) tl^tetl al*rrrt tlris liturrl. <liscrrsserl irr (..lraptt:r ll. rrra1, n'ell lrave Itrerr lrrotrlllrt I'r llosnia lrv
r:haIter's ?rrrtll('ilticity.has
l44i). 'l hrrs, it i* ,,,,t *ur:prising that tlti,s drralists. WIratevcl itsorigitrs, it shorrl<l lrc nolr'<l 1lqx1 l1 Irrll;titls llot ()llc
lleen.lrrestirrrrer.l'1]t,ttlrclarrgrragc:<lftlrisc.har.teral.()llsesll()sllS|)lclo11' hclcti<:al tlrorrlllrl; ils r:ottlcttls r:rrrrlrl ltitvr: lrlttt ircccIlctl Itr' (,atlrolics
ou,l tl," r,'u'ittrt'sses nll wt:re f;gui"t aclivc
itr 1/t/t6 (tlrorr'lqlt rtrtc tllight
:rrr<l ()r'tlro<lox irsrr,r'll. Sincc tlrt'lrislr lirarr<iscirtr itt [.],2.1 sl;rtltl lllat tlr('
rcally.ltavr: lrt't'tt l)tc:i('llt for thc
*,.,r,,,1,,. i{ so lrtatry cligrritarics n'orrltl l)utarins lrntl tlrr.' srntne t it<' as lhe Schisrrratics (i ,'.. Iilavic Or
the l)ragiXi'i)'(l (') [ acccpt tltr: cltarter
,r"'',trr* ,,f.*i1,,I ur, ti,. S,"o to {or conclusit)l.ls rlllsrll)l)ol"ted by thorlox),(I!) arrtl a Iltrttllatiarr clrtotriclct'(rvc shall distttss l;rtt'r) crrlls
as arrtlrerrtic but shall r)ot use it. as a
basis
tlrc llosniarrs Ilastern ritc (llrristiarrs. it is lrosllilrlc Ilrat 1lrc llostrirrrr
otltct t:vitlctrce as rr't:11' Clrurch -.-if it ever rserl tlre Itlrlrrsav ritual ilr :;t'lvites rrliliz.t'tl rrrol'e
.I',hc
clrartcr bcgins,"vith the ttsttal itlvocatiotl to
the'l'l'irrity''l'hen
of the grarrt' lt is.lluaranteed tlrarr rinr-'rit.ual.
follo$,s tlre king's title ancl the conteuts 'ilris rvorrlrl lrc a fitting plar:t: to note ()ni'lirst (ioslrcl rt'lriclr sclrolnls
thatfortttractr.lftlislrwaltyclrtt<lsintorvarr'ltlrckirrgwilltlre,]rirr]t'bc havc lreen rrnablt: to rlale plcr:isely. (lcrrcr;rllt'assigrrcrl tl tltt'catly
rcvokccl . rttrlcss it s"it'rts ]trst to thc
"l'orcl l)id" (tlir:<l)' tltt: Bosttiatl
,.(.l..cl liltr,'rrrtlr ('entnry, tlris []osniarr (iospi'l nright hrvr-'lrt'r.'tt tr,ttrtt'r'tctl rvitlr
i.ir,,r.t,, a'tl t6c IJ.suir,rs" (a tcf nr f'r {aitlrf rrl '.lrlcr'cn).
tlrc lloslriarr (llrrrrr-'lr. lt hirs tlrc followirrg lrricf crrtrv rit llrl ctttl : "l
..Arrdtlrisarltlallr'lratisrvrittetralloveweclclivcrtrltlrcl,tlr<lD'cd
$rote tlris hv tlre (irace of (lorl (a) (,hri:;tiarr (lllstiarrirr) r';rllctl'l'vrllio
fr,f ii,',1,,n,,,1 t,, all .(hcr tlit,tls
rvlr. s6all s.cr:e.ccl hinl (l)itlrr NIil.i. i tlidu
'l'lrcrr {ollorv tlrr: sr:t ttlat rvit- Prilrkovid of thr: (}rrrrilarrirr larrrl."(,1()) Wht:tlrcr "l llslj;rrrin " sltorrl<l
frrn,'.li,la) in tlrc lranrls of tlre t'lrtrtclt." hc rt'a<l "krstiarrirr," rrrakirrg'l'vrtko Pripkovif a lJosltiittt (,lrrrtclttttiut.
act ulx)lr vit'llttol-s ttf lht't'lrar
trcssr:s arrtl tht.: [.rr.:es rvlroscl ctrrsc shall or "hriHrianin " (or the variant firrrn lrristicrrin), nr:rkior lrirn tri ()r-
the expressi<''rr 'tlid kcrr'clida'
tr:r.(17) l)reviously n'e have rrotcd tllat thorklx bcliever is irnpossiLrlr: to clctettniltr:. T'hr-'only "Gorrrilanitt lancl"
that corne aftcl lrinr (hence his
,,r.^,r, thc prcscili clictl and the djecls I have been able to locate is Gorniliarti-pravica in tlte regiorr 1'f 1'rcbinjc.
l1l11l cltartcr o{ Dluraj
srrct'essors): the salrle term had been used in the Since'I'rebinie is a region having nrany Orthoclox bclicvcrs (as rvcll as
thc Ilttsnian vicar' I{ authentic' tltis 11t/t6 t:harter
llllt(t llosnian church Cathotics) alrtl sirr<:e rvr: have no evidence of Bosnian C[rrrrr:lr irr:tivities irr
";ili;i';,,.,:t.]t,.i,," shows that in tlre
8;"c* u, thc dicd,s naurt: aurl t5c kirrg despitc thc regiorr, Lsuspect'J'vrtko rvas Ortltorlox. Irr acklitiorr, in llrc vicinity
itilL,ras rcc,rg'iz-e,l as a legitinrate body i. t6c statc by
thc l)r'irgilii'i' rvlro Ircstultably
ol (ionrilfarri'pravica. Plrlfessol'l{udirnsky trrrnctl rrp lirllr'<:lrur<:lr
lris Catholicisril. No ,l,rulrt thc gfailtce;, nrins; the nanrcs o[ two rrf thcir localities (l)jurdjcva clkr';r rrnrl lion-
that tlx'djccl servc
r,veLc,rc'rrrcrs.f tlrc lkrsnian chLrrch, had suggcstcd staltlirrova r,'r:kva) sugllcst tlrat tlrc originnI chrrrclrcs hatl lrc,.'rt Ot tlroriox
tlrc []osttiatt chrirclr's alrility in 11+1t(r
irs gUaf alltor. wc c.anrrot r:stirnatc ri'lrir:h rvould irrrlicatc tltat Previously Gorrriljarri lratl bt'crr ittr Ortltorlox
tcrl]ts' 'l'his is tlrc last l'c[cretrt:e ilt
to l)fcvcllt vi0latiorrs 0[ tlte chartef's placc.(2 I )
arr<l tlrc Ilosniarl
tlrc sonr.ccs to fricndly ties betrvccn stefalr'l'ofir:r{
at coLlft trp t' t6is litrre' they
Clhur.ch. lf thc Pat ari'i 6acl bee' prescllt
were not to retrtain there tnuch longer' V : Progress ol Latl.tttlicisrn li'om 144(t
ltat'e olte nlore
At sontr: time cltlring the reign of Stefan Tornat lvc rvhich
in a Gospcl n'ranusi:ript
rcfct'ttllcc to a tl]ed, nn"'"ty a cleclication lir<tn 1446 ou rvhctr both I(irrg Stefan 'I'oru:rX ancl Slclrrrr \/rrklid'.s
sirrrlll.yslrvstltatllir<lrlsavl(r'stianirr.rvritcstlrislltl<rkf<rr.(itlisak(i
If thc clarrglrtcr had accr'ptctl thc faitlr of Ilorrre, the Cirtholit:s lrratk'sturdv arrrl
(irisltv) l(r'stjarrirr in thc rlitys,,f t<ing'l'otttiX antl l)jctl llrrtko' irrrlrrcssivc gairrs. ltvtln Stclirn \/rrk[ii'scerrrs {o lravc cryrrcsscrl his
ll()t ir}Stllt lrirrr arrtl ruav (]od
sct.illt' ltirs clrt:tl irt lris t:t.)p-virrg. lllcasc
<1<l
rvillingrrcss to lrcrol:rrc a Cirtlxrlii:. A l(agusarr lcttr:r oI l/l 'r l trrcrrtions
crtllt'd the
lrlcss r,.rr [.rcv.r', n,,,,,r.,.ils;'i'lie ttrrtttttscript, lit'rrt'lall-y I)r'lrclirrgcrrelV(lulll ltl4l)grarrtingcertainprivilcgcstoStt'lrrn\/uk-
col.|tcd tltrring tllc reillll of Stefan
llzrtlosav (ioslrcl afrt,r'its c:01rvist, rvas [iC rvlro hacl <'xprcssr:rl lris il,illirrgness to lrc ba|tiz.ctl arrrl lrt'r'otrrc a goorl
It
,,,',,i( 1l,il\ l): sirrcc irr tirc
(t lzi 50's t5c ki'g lrt'glr' l' tltc
'r't:;cctttt:
 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosrria from 1443 to 1463 5U/
106
Franciscaus at court as chaplains and to use them to help in state af-
Christian.(22) We hear of a church being repaired at Glamot in
amount of interest in fairs.(33) Thereafter we find references to them at court; frequently the
tiZi" 6li Tiris reflects at least a certain built to the Virgin at king was to use Franciscans as ambassadors. If Patarins were still to be
Catholicism in this town'
- New churches were
,,Bozaz" (probably BotuE, between . Jaice and Krupa) and at found at court this late, we may suspect that the Franciscans supplanted
on the Neretva' not far them. The king and queen also completed several churches: St'
"Rossetan" in ffu-(Zai(probably Raltani Thomas'at Vranduk, St. George's at Jezero (near Jaice), St. Mary's at
advance thus can be seen
from present-day Mostar'lt)l> fne Catholic "Virben" (7) and a Holy'frinity Church at "Verlau" (?).(34) With
also moving along the Net"tuu
into Hum ' The pope offered indulgences
the building of churches, Catholic influence could be expected to
to all who visited these churches' penetrate into the regions around them.
peace with Stefan Toma!' was
The king's brother, Radivoj , now at iirkovii points out that there were both cultural and military reasons
under papal protec-
; in 144,6 tht popt placed his lands Voisalii was also a for many nobles to accept Catholicism. In this period the Bosnian
^rro-Coin;li. successor Peter
tion.(2(r) Diurai VoisaliC's son and nobles, enthralled with Western culture, |egan to imitate it and found
was the only prince
Catholic, since ,f,. p"pt stated that
-Voisalid statement has led to the values and much of the content of this culture intertwined with
(princeps)who was Ciit'ollt in the land'(27) This
taken it to rnean that Catholicism. In addition, the Turkish threat increased the necessity of
some misuncl..rt,nait'f '1t""'orn" scholars. have
the word "prin- forging military alliances with the Catholic West; frequently their
;;;;iiJ;rt tn. o'ttf'cutholic nobleman'b,utHowever' refers only to the greatest heresy would prove to be a stumbling block to an alliance's realiz-ation.
ceps'' does no, -.un'luii tty toUf"tul' Stefan Vuk[i6, though, seems to have taken no steps toward fulfilling
magnates. In Bosnia ai tt'" ti-"
only three men merited the title
ancl Vojsali6' And the his promise. Radin was still at his side; twice in 1447 Ragusan am-
"princeps," Stefan **tt6' i"""if Pavlovi6 bassadors to his court were instructed to speak with Radin Gost.(3))
Stefan Vuk[i6' having ex-
other two were flirting with Catholicism' to Thus ten years after he had been made a starac, the Bosnian Church
to Pope Eugene' seemed about ready
or"rr"i ttr".tions of to?ut"lot' puutoulJ seerns to have accepted elevated Radin to gost, its second highest rank. Perhaps his church, in
submit to Rome' n"""- i""ttX an effort to counter Catholic gains, had advanced hirn because hc was
Catholicism sometime in 1446, fot
a 1449 papal letter- comPlained that
had.reverted to his vomit'(28) At the man among them who was most influential among the secular lords.
after three years of Ctifttf lAt- ' Ivani5 Though other gosts presided over hiYas, there is no evidence that Itadin
lvaniS' acceptance of Catholicism'
about the same time thti*" ft""t of ever did. LIe seems to have continued to reside at Stefan's court; his
at which Ragusan caravans
*. ["^, of a priest's house (chaxa it !.ttt^t)
goraE(29) Since in no document does influence may have helped prevent Stefan's conversion to Catholicism.
stopped in his t'Pi;;i ti
patarins as priests, we may assume.that "priest"
Dubrovnik refer to
cleric' Since this is the only
refers to either a Cu'noiit or an'Orthoclox long VL' Papal Mention of Manicbees 1447-1453
reference to him, *" Jo no'ttnow
when he arrived in Borat or how
it is plausible.to consider him a
he was to remain,;;."ii;;"ver, with IX's reference to Manichees in
Catholic and connect his presence
*'th lvanis's fliration For the first time since Pope Boniface
horn from Dubrovnik upon which a list of foes of Sigismund in 1391, in July 1447 a pope referred to
Catholicism ' ln l44SlvaniX ordered
a
gt^'ius (the patron saint of l)ubrovnik) Manichees in Bosnia. Pope Nicholas V, in placing the property of King
he wanted u pi.tu'" lf St' that lvanit was Stefan TomaX under papal protection, stated that Stefan 'fomaY,
goto[ castle'i30) Tr'i'
holding a model or ii' 'ho*' in
whether this interest was tied to scorning the Manichee errors which he had been ensnared, had
his
intereste<l i.t th" Cuiholic saint; is of become the first Bosnian king to accept the Catholic faith.(3(r) The pope
acceptance c"rt"iiii'- tt *rtt'fter he always respected saints had forgotten that Ban Stjepan Kotromani6 from ca. 1340, Ban and
"r
unknown'
course '- -the
Restoje
. .t-^ Proto-uestijar
D-^a^^ later King (from 1377) Tvrtko I, and King Tvrtko ll had all certainly
Other nobles mentioned as Catholics were
Tardislavii reflects Catholic been Catholic. Such ignorance even of recent Bosnian history in Rome
and George f'orai,fuui6, a Hum noble'(31)
leaves us little con{idence that the term "Manichee" should be taken
gains in Hum. under literally.
Papal successes continue din ' Vojsalid's land was placed
1447
'fhe pope gave the king permission to have two Whereas it is always possible that prior to his acceptance of
puioi f.o,..tion.(32)
 308 Nledieval Bosnian Church
Bosnia f.rom 11+43 to 14(t3 309
C-atholicisnr, Stefan 'l'om;rX hacl beren involvecl with rcal dr-ralists, it
In l''ebruary It+48 Nicholas v Placed tlre ra'crs .f Rcstrjc,
seerns much rnore probable that he had been a member of the flosnian
Protottesri.ia, of llosnia, papal protection, and pririscd hirl for
Church. And in fact, the king's former connection with the Bosnian 'nderthough
Chr"rrch is later explicitly stated by Pope Nicholas V in 11t52, when he
holding firm in his cath.licis' livi'g arnong ..hcr.crics."(3g) It
is interesting that he does nclt repeat the term ,,Manichee" rvhich
wrote that Stefan f'omat had laicl aside Patarin errors.(37) In this case he
hadrsed the previous July. tsut in any case, regardress of the vocabulary
thc pope, like many others before him in Western Europe, probably was used, it seerns that. the papacy was beginning to excrt increasing
using the term "Manichee" very loosely to mean any heretic he did not pressure on the Bosnians to eliminate the Bosnian Church.
like. And whiie we may have reason to doubt that the Patarins were In the period 1449 53 we have four mentions of Manichees; none
really heretical, there is little doubt that rnost popes thought they rvere. give ar.ry details.'l'he {irst is a letter cited in Raynaldi's eccelsiastical
Beyond this was the continued use of the term Patarin on both sides of history, compiled in the eighteenth cenrury. Nicholas V in l1+zi9 when
thc Adriatic to refer to the Bosnian Church, which would easily lead writing to Thonras of Flvar made passing refercnce to thc latter's rvork
Italians, already set in their belief that the Bosnian Church was against Manichees in I3osnia.(39)
heretical, to connect the Bosnian Patarins with the dualist Patarins "I'he second reference
appears in a letter of June i4)0. Nichoras v,
who, until recently, were to be found in Italy. Finally, there is the writing the I]osnian king,-refers to the king's iifficultics in ,"uging ,uu.
virtual certainty that dualists, probably in small numbers, did exist in against both f'urks and Manichees.(40)
and around Bosnia proper. lt is too much to expect that Italian clerics, wadding cites a letter of -r'hor'as of Hvar, written in rllil
concernc'd with religious matters on a European scale, would distinguish to John of
capistrano. The letter speaks of the success of the Franci.scans in
between different groups in Bosnia, especially since distinctions between
convcrting heretics. The heretic.s, he states, are rnelting arvav like
groups there may not always have been clearly defined. The blurred rvax
bcfore a fire; there is hope that the whole kingdom bc purgecl of
distinctions between groups was further confused by the fact that the 'vould
the errors of those]vlanichces, and wil be ilruminatecl
different groups seeln to have influenced one another. Various by (thc tight or)
thc true faith. (zt1;
pecularities sometimes found in the behavior of certain n.rembers of the
ln a letter of August 14)3 Nicholas V, in spcaking of problcms, rnade
Bosnian Church may well have been derived from the prejudices, ideas,
or practices of real dualists, be they Bogomils or dualists from Dalmatia
passing reference to teaching the true faith to hcrctics and
Manichees.( 42) The pope evidently ha<i two groups in mind.
with ties with ltaly. We have already noted in Bosnia examples of Ilegardless of what groups were being referrecl to or how lnuch or horv
hostility toward the cross, and possibly even toward certain sacraments. little accuracy there was in the term "Manichee," it is e'iclent that
We have just noted a Bosnian Church ritual which very possibly had word was begin'ing to be used, ancr once in use we can expect
the
been brought from the West to Bosnia by dualists. We may even suggest to see it
used with increasing frequency if for no other ."uron than
that it was links between the dualists and the Bosnian Church which pejorative value. If wadding has- accurately reproducecr 'I'h.mas
its
started the Dalmatians calling the Bosnian Church Patarin in the first of
Hvar's letter, and has not alterecl it to glorify the achievcme'ts of the
place. Thus maybe we should not be surprised that in 7447 the pope
Bosnian Franciscans, we also have evidence that the Franciscan
rnade reference to Manichee errors. But we must ask: why had the mi.ssion
had becon're very successful in gaini.g converts. 'fhornas, presumabry
popes rarely done so earlier? Why, suddenly in the late 1440's and
an informed observer since he had been involved with Bosnian
thereafter, does this "heresy" or schism about which the popes have affairs for
over a dercade! was actually anticipating a time in the not too <.listant
constantly spoken in vague general terms as existing in l3osnia finally
future when the "heresy" (presurnably the Bosnian Church) would
receive a specific label? Once one pope (Nicholas) used the term, be
climinated. 'rhis then is evidence that the Bos'ian church in thse rast
however, it is not strange to find the term repeated thereafter by other
years was becoming weaker and losing its members to catholicism.
popes or clerks in the papal chancellery. We also must keep in mind the This
view- is supported by I'h.nras' statement of February r,
possibility that Nicholas used the term "Manichee'' because someone r1t1t), already
cited,(43) that there remain infectecl with heresy'only sorne of the
(a legate or Franciscan) wriging from Bosnia and trying to take ad-
nobles ancl barons. Stefan V'k[ii and Ivaniy iravlouii,""re
val.ltage of the confused situation described above had used the term, the,r
nre'tiored by name. 'fhis phrasing suggests that Thornas th.ught the
thereby hoping to gain papal demands for the eliminatiotl of the Patarin.
rnajority of nobles and barons had becn won over to catholicisr'. pope
310 Medieval Bosnian Church
Nicholas V in a letter of July I/+52 confirms the contents of Thomas of
Ilvar's letter; and even if Nicholas'source of in{ormation is Thomas, it
at least is confirmation that Wadding has accurately reproduced the
sense of Thomas' letter. Nicholas writes that Stefan Tomas, his wife,
and very many barons and nobles had laid aside Patarin errors and
recognized the true 1ight.(44) T'he letter when compared to Nicholas'
141+7 letter shows that he was using the term Manichee and Patarin as
synonyms and that they both refer to members of the Bosnian Church to
which, the pope believecl, prior to their conversion to Catholicism very
many Bosnian barons and nobles had belonged.
VIL' Stefan VukYii's Political A.ffairs (1448 1451)
a nd l?e lig io u s A s sucia I io ns
When Stefan Vuk[i6 had made peace with the Bosnian kingin 1446,
he strained his relations with his former ailies, the l'urks and Gcorge
Brankovi6 of Serbia. ln 1448 when the "furks sent a plunclering ex-
pedition against llosnia, they pillagccl Stefan's lands as well. Partly to
prevent a recurrence of such an attack, and partly because he and Stefan
TomaX remained mutually suspicious, Stefan Vr-rkti6 tried to improve
relations with Serbia. ln 11+48 he abandoned his titie o{ Vojvoda of
Bosnia (which emphasize his position in the Bosnian state ancl suggested
that he served the King of Bosnia) and took the title Herceg of l"Iunl and
thc' Primorje (which reflected his status as an independent ruler). By
l1+\9 Hercel, Stefan Vukti6 was clearly allied to the Serbian despot in
his war against Bosnia, and now began to call himself Herceg of Saint
Sava -- a title he retained Lrntil his death.(45)
Saint Sava had been the founder of the independent Serbian Church in
l2I9 and his body lay at the Monastery of Mile$evo in the herceg's
territories. Because Sava was one of Serbia's most popular saints, the
new title can be viewed as both a sign of the herceg's re-established
alliance with Serbia and of an effort to win popularity among the Or-
thodox. Flowever, it should be stressed that Sava's relics were believed
to work rniracles without respect to race, creed, or nationality. In the
Turkish period we find that Catholics, Moslems, and even Jews as weil
as the Orthodox honored Sava's cult and sought cures and other rewards
from his relics.
'fhat the herceg was impressed by the miracle-working ability of St.
Sava's relics is seen from the charter issued by Alfonso of Naples,
confirrning the herceg's 1'rossessions. The charter states that at Milelevo
there rests "onc saint who does great miracles."(46) Clearly this in-
Bosnia front 11+113 to 1tt63 3Il.
formation originated with Flerceg Stefan. ll'l.rus the herceg ntav also have
wished to honor this rniracle-worker to gain his intervclr tion and
-fhat the herceg, who rvas altnost ccrtainly a
support in this world.
nrember of the Bosnian Churcl.r. r,rtiliz-ed in his title the natrle of an
Orthodox saint whose relics were part of an important cult is further
evidence against the llosnian Church being dualist; dualists reiected
both saints and relics.
We do not know the extent of the herceg's flirtation with the Or-
thodox Church. FIis association with Gost Radin remained as close a-s
ever and in April 1449 Radh and Stefan had drafted letters to
Dubrovnik about commercial problems.(47) Radin in the course of l4)0
made two trips to Dubrovnik for the herceg.(4ti)
The Serbian-Bosnian war continued over Srebrnica fronl 141i8 into
lzr50. At the same tinre military engagements were fought between
Herceg Stefan and King Stefan Torna!, IvaniS Pavlovii sided wittr the
king. FIe had by now renounced Catholicism and returnecl to the
Bosnian Church. In 1450 lvaniX died and his holclings, much
diminishecl largely because of Turkish attacks in I1+1tB and thc following
-furks established
years, went to his brother Peter. Finally, rn 1l+J 1, the
themselves permanently in Vrhbosna (Saraievo) and in thc neighboring
fortress of Hodidjed. With his holdings so reduced that he had little base
for independent action, Peter had no choice but to become a vassal of
Herceg Stefan. Peter Dinji[ii, who held lands between the eastern
slopes of the Romanija Mountains and the Drina, rnaintained a perilous
existence. We know he had ties with the Bosnian Church, since in 1/+50
he sent a Radohna Krstjanin to Dulrrovnik.(49)
ln 1449 we hear of a Patarin hiYa in the territory of Herceg Stefan.
Complaint was made in a Ragusan court against two nobles who served
the herceg. These two nren had sent their retainers at night to rob sonre
Ragusan merchants in the home (domus) of Obiien Patarin in a.place
called Eretva below Biograd (Eretva sub Belgrado).(50) fhis hiYa too
was used as a hostel ; it was presided over by a Patarin named ObiYen.
"Eretva" is Neretva, and can refer at times to the town of Kclnjic as
r.vell as to the river. By this time Koniic was in the hands of l{erceg
Stefan. Professors Vego and Andjelid have convincingly located Biograd
on the Neretva just a couple ol kilometers above Koniic. Thus we now
have a second hiYa on the herceg's lands, in addition to the one near
GoraYde close to, if not right on, his border with the Pavlovi6i.(51) The
hiY.a at Biograd also lay near the border with the king's lands and
perhaps doubled as a border post or customs station like the one near
GoraY-de. That both hiYas lay near the borders of Bosnia sug.{lests that
the sources of support for the Bosnian Church as well as its sources of
312 Medieval Bosnian Church
manpower for clergy iay within Bosnia. Iixcept for the Kosafa family
and its Patarin cliplomats and these two hilas near the border, we have
found no Patarins in I-lercegovina before 1450. However, wc do find
Orthodox churches and grave inscriptions which lead us to believe that
most of Hercegovina had retained its Orthodox character.
Vlil: 'L'be Ilerce,q's Economic Problems
War witlt Dubrounik
- cluding free movement of Ragusan merchants in Hercegovina' Thus
L'r these years the Ilosnian king and Flerceg Stefan had to raise money
to pay the Turkish tribute as well as to finance their own wars and their
expensive court-life, modeled on Western European courts. Both rulers
spent large sunrs on imported textiles, tapestries, and clothing, and both
hired artists ancl perforrners (both actors and musicians) to livc at thcir
residcnccs.()2) l'he king, with mincs on his lands, was in a far better
economic position than the herceg. Yet his need for money probably
explains iris long struggle with the Serbs over the rich silver-rnining
town of Srebrnica. After the fall of Constantinople in It+53, the size of
Ottoman tribute den.rancls increased greatly. iirt ouiC has calculate<i
that, between lt+J3-I4)7, Stefan,l'oma!.had to turn over to the sultan
l(r0,000 ducats in tribute, and Cirkovi6 beiieves that this sunl must
have represented the bulk of the silver extracted from Bosnia's
mines.(5 3)
Lacking nrines, the herceg was dependent on custorns and tolls
collected from rnerchants who hacl to pass througl"r his territory en route
from Dulrrovnik or Kotor to Bosnia or Serbia. In the late 1440's he
began to expend considerable money and energy toward making Novi
(or F{ercegnovi) into a major Adriatic port. He established tradc ties
with south ltaly. To Novi he imported weavers to set up a weaving
industry, and then he began to market salt in an effort to break
Dubrovnik's near'monopoly in selling salt to the lancllockecl llosnians
and Serbs. lle forbade his Vlachs to buy salt in I)ubrovnik. IJoth
Dirbrovrrik and Kotor protested, but the herceg clr.rite practically replied
that everyone had to look or-rt for his own interests, ar-rd everyone was
free to clo what lre wanted on his own lands.(54) f'he herceg clearly
viewecl Ficrcegovina as his own state. In 1450 Dubrovnik forbade its
merchants to trade in his lancls, accusing him of actively working
against Ragr.rsan merchants. The town claimed that the herceg was
preventing Ragr,rsan nrerchants from purchasing goods from the Her-
cegovinian urerchants within lJercegovina, because he wantecl tliese
I-Iercegovinian merchants to go themselves to Dubrovnik and there
market these goocls. 'I'his suggests that the herceg had been trying to
Bosnia from 1443 to 71t63 313
establish himself as a middle-man and force coastal rnerchants wh<l
wanted Hercegovinian goods to buy thenr through hinr; thus he was
inviting war with Dubrovnik. Cirkovii, howcver, argues that rvc shcluld
not take these Ragusan complaints for fact and points out that when
negotiations for peace were initiated in I453 between the herceg and
Dubrovnik among the first things brought up by the herceg was
resumption of commerce between Dubrovnik and Hercegovina, in-
C;rkovii conclucles that I)ubrovnik had initiated a blockade against the
herceg which it tried to justify by leveling accusations against him.(1))
ln early 145i the herceg asked the sultan's permission to make war
on Dubrovnik. The Ragusans sent an embassy to the Hungarian court
for aid, but since Hungary was involved in a war against thc 'f urks little
help could be expected. ln February 11+51 Dubrovnik requested the pope
to free it from its financial obligations and cited its dangerous plight. The
town said its territory was surrounded by perfidious Patarins and
"Manieri" (surely a slip of the pen for Manichei) with no br"rffer zone
between them and it.(56) This is the first time Dubrovnik used the term
Manichee. By saying Patarins and Manichees, the Ragusans, whose
dealings with the Bosnian Church up to now clearly show that the town
did not consider the Patarins heretical, were probably trying to
distinguish the Bosnian Church Patarins from the heretical
"Manichees." We ntay suspect that Dubrovnik knew the pope had
been using the term ' 'Manichee' ' recently and thus chose to use it as an
effective way to pleacl its case.lt is worth stressing that this reference to
heretics as well as other references that follow frclrn Ilagusan writers
during the next three years all came from a town at war. Previously, in
1430 when Dubrovnik had been at war with Radoslav Pavlovil, it had
spoken of him as a heretic. Now the town would speak the same way of
the herceg. When at peace with these nobles, if Dubrovnik botliered to
comment on their religions at all, it simply called them schismatic.
Thus the terminology in the Ragusan sources, which we are about to
examine, in no way alters the conclusion, stated earlier, that Dubrovnik
dealt arnicably with Bosnian Church members in peace-time, treating
them as if they were schismatics, and damned them as heretical only in
war-time to add strength to its appeals for aid and allies.
ln May l45I the Ragusan authorities wrote a Franciscan named
Biasio de Constadino to protest to the pope against the aggressive
designs of the herceg. In this letter Dubrovnik spoke of its iands as
bordering on those of heretics and Patarins and particularly those of
Duke Stefan.(57) It is interesting that in repeating the February letter's
statement about its geographical position, it replaced the word
3r4 Medieval Bosnian Church
"manieri" with "heretic." Again we may if Dubrovnik intended
ask
to make a distinction between heretic and Patarin. A ietter written to
Hungary, undated but presumably penned at about this time, spoke of
[)ubrovnik's suffering from infidels and heretics.()8) And in May 25,
14)l in yet another letter the town referred to Herceg Stefan's men as
Patarins and Nlanichees.(59)
In June the herceg invaded Konavli meeting with little opposition,
since l)ubrovnik never was able to field an army of any quality.(60) The
Catholic Cellski count supported him and had sent him cannons with
engineers to firan them. F{owever, the herceg's ally, the Serbian despot,
was not pleased with the attack on Dubrovnik, and relations between
herceg and despot deteriorated. In July Dubrovnik spoke of the herceg as
a perfidious Patarin and a public enemy of the Cross of Christ.(61) Also
in July the towtr wrote an envoy to thank Gost Radin for the love he had
always shown the town and not as a payment but as a sign of love, the
town promised to pay him 200 ducats.(62) I)ubrovnik presumably
hoped Radin would take its side to prevent the herceg from pushing his
military campaign too far. Perhaps Radin had communicated to
Dubrovnik his willingness to help. In August Dubrovnik wrote to its
ambassadors at the Serbian court about its war with the pcrfidious
Patarin and heretic.((r3)
In August 14)l Dubrovnik reported to its ambassador at the Bosnian
court that Herceg Stefan had told Pope Eugene that he wanted to be
baptized and become a good Christian, and that the pope had granted
him various priviieges. Since the herceg had not fulfilled his promise but
had persevered in his infidelities, the (present) pope (Nicholas V) has
revoked the privileges offered by his predecessor.(64) Nicholas' reaction
presurnably was the result of Ragusan complaints about the herceg's
attack.
In August 14)1 Dubrovnik becarne aware of dissension within the
herceg's family circle(6)) and opened negotiations with his son
Vladislav, who agreed tht he would revolt against his father. Truhelka
speculates that Radin may have had a role in instigating the revolt since
a month earlier Dubrovnik had promised him 200 ducats. The great
sums of money Dubrovnik expended on Radin, as well as the praise and
other gifts it heaped upon him (especiaily after the war) must have
reflectecl real services Radin rendered Dubrovnik.(66)
In November l4)I the Turks and Hungarians signed a peace, in
which one clause condernned the herceg's war on Dubrovnik, and in
December the Bosnian king agreed to aid Dubrovnik. The king's
alliance with Dubrovnik was witnessed by the Bishop of FIvar (and papal
legate to Bosnia) and by the Custodian Father, Chaplain Marinus.(67)
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 3t5
The king then called on Peter Vojsaiii and Vladislav Klelii to ioin him ;
these two noblemen, not wanting to fight the herceg, attacked the king.
The sarne two clerics then made peace between them and the king,
making possible their entry into the war on his side.((r8) 1'his story
iilustf ates the gains made by Catholicisrn and especially the in[luence it
had achieved at court and in affairs of state'
Early in 1452 the herceg renewed his activities along the coast.
Vladislav in March launched his well-planned revolt; immediately a
whole series of Stefan's maior fortresses, includin g Blagai, surrendered
tohim. By April Vladislav held all of Hum except for the region around
Liubulki. Dubrovnik described the action of Vladislav (who almost
certainly was an adherent of the Bosnian Church) against his father as
being for the honor of God ancl the good of all Christianity.(69) The
Bosnian king and Peter Voisali6 entered the fray in April by sending
troops into Hercegovina against the herceg. The 'Iurks then raided
Bosnia, which caused a temporary withdrawal of Bosnian troops from
Hercegovina. There then erupted a well-or ganized revolt against
Vladislav in the Krajina which declared its loyalty to Venice. At the
same time Venetian ships appeared in the mouth of the Neretva' as
allies of the herceg, and temporarily occupied Driieva. The Bosnian king
almost immediately expelled the Venetians and declared Drijeva part of
his patrimony.
Soon Dubrovnik's two rnaior allies began to squabble over Blagaj
which Stefan TomaX declared e'as part of his patrimony as well.
Vladislav, who occupied this key fortress, refused to yield it. The
Bosnian king offered to confirm Vladislav in possession of all the land
frorn the t.*.*o Mountain to the sea if he yieldcd Blagaj , but
Vladislav wisely retained Blagai , pointing out that the whole region
which the king so generously granted him was at present held by the
herceg. The king then stated his intention to return to Bosnia.
Meanwhile the difficulties which Ragusan merchants had been having
with their transit trade through, and commerce with, Hercegovina
increased immeasurably rvith the outbreak of war, wliich closed off
entirely the overland route through Hercegovina. Professor I. Voie has
recently discovered several documents which illustrate thc merchants'
troubles. One of these speaks of Patarins in the herceg's lands. This is a
contract from February l4)2 between the Ragusan mercharrt Radosar'
RadohniC who had promised to deliver certain goods, now cletaincd in
Hercegovina, to another Ragusan Matko l3ogosalii' 'Ihe goods at
present were "in the hands of certain Patarins." Radosav states that,
when the war is over, he will go to Hercegovina for the goods and then
make delivery of them to Matko; meanwhile the goods should be
JI(t Mcdieval lJosnian Church
considered Matko's property.(70)
Voje believes that this contract should be interpreted to rnean that
Ra{osav had left the goods with certain Hercegpvinian Patarin mer-
chants, which in turn shows that certain Patarins in Hercegovina were
involve{ in commerce. I-Ie suggests, however, that these Patarins might
have been iay members of the Bosnian Church rather than clerics.(71)
Since, excluding polemics, the Ragusans consistently used the term
Patarin to {enote an ordained Bosnian cleric, I think we can assume that
this contract refers to clerics. In addition, the summary of the document
given by Voje he does not give us its text does not suSgest that the
- -
Patari.rs referred to were in any way involved in trade by profession, It
seems probable to nie that when war broke out Radosav's agents had
simply chosen to store these goods, which they could not transport to
Dubrovnik, at a Pataritt nronastery in l{ercegovina Since the monastery
woulcl have seemed a safe place to leave them. Thus all we have here
would be a case of ceftain Bosnian monks providing secllre storage for
the property of certain Ragusan merchants. This of coufse does reflect,
as Voje points out, good will between the Patarins and the Itagusans.
ln 1412 Dubrovnik wrote Hungary oi the evil waf wagecl against
Dubrovflik by Stefan, the perficlious heretic and Patarin, and eneny to
rhe name of Christian, and accused him of clestroying churches of God
and crucifixes.(72) A second letter to Fra Blasio referred to the herceg's
desrruction of Konavli which Dubrovnik had held for about twenty-five
years ancl on which Dubrovnik had spent much morley and the Fran-
ciscans much labof to convert to catholicism the population, which had
been Pataril and hereticai. Stefan was accused of ravaging the area,
wrecking villages, cutting clown trees and vines, spilling Christian
blood, Jestroying churches and the holy obiects inside them, and
converting churches into stables. His men and horses trampled un-
derfoot crucifixes and massacred many christians, including some
priests who were celebrating a mass. The letter called for an offensive
against Stefan and the other perfidious heretics and Patarins in league
with him.(73) A third letter sent to the Bishop of Hvar to pass on to
venice, dated septeml>er 1452, also spoke of the irrfidelity and heresy of
Stefan. It called him a perfidious Patarin, a heretic and an enemy and
persecutor of the Cathqlic faith. His men destroyed vineyards ald or-
chards, burned houses, killecl Cliristians, not sparing even the priests,
ancl defaced the churches 61f God, throwing crucifixes to the ground in
contempt for the divine majesty of the F{oly Catholic f'aith-(7 4)
In June 1452 at the same time that Herceg Stefan was carrying out
this alleged persecution of catholics, he was appfoached by Pagaminus
the Bishop of ulcini to whom the herceg held out the hope of peace and
Bosnia f.ron 7443 rc l1t(t3 317
hinted that he wanted to give up hcresy (probably the worcl hcrcsy is that
of the bishop or the pope) and become a true son of thc Catholic
Church.(7))'I'he Bishop of Hvar rvas dispatched by the pope to see the
herccg about this, but the herceg did not receive him or take any steps
toward his conversion.
f'he herceg's conversation with Paganiinus was presumably
motivated by political considerations; and if he thought it politic to
speak in that way, it is unlikely that he would have directed a deliberate
campaign to destroy churches which could have brought him no
political profit. Thus, it is probable that if churches had been destroyed,
this destruction or damage had occurred in the course of battle.
I)ubrovnik, however, seeking allies and aid, hoping to cause Venice to
break its alliance with the herceg, and knowing that the nations it
mught to influence were Catholic, naturally took thc most cnrotional
tone possible to try to turn the Catholic world against the herceg. Since
Dubrovnik never called the herceg heretical in peace-time, and since the
town could call his son ancl its ally, who was probably also a supporter of
the Bosnian Church, one who worked for the honor of God and
Christianity, we cannot rely too rnuch on these accusations which
Dubrovnik levelled at the herceg.
IX : Peace 'I-reaties of 145 3-54 Role of Gost lladin
-
In early spring l4)3 the herceg sent lladin to I)ubrovnik ro discuss
peace terms; he even conferred with the papal legate to Bosnia, f'homas
of Hvar, but without success.(76) In July Herceg Stefan came to terms
with his son Vladislav and his supporters: they agreed that all should be
as it had been before the rebellion. Vladislav, pleased to receive these
terms, forgot his ally Dubrovnik, which was left alone still in a state of
war with the herceg, to make its own peace with him as best it could. Of
course, the town would have Radin to help it in negotiations, but his
services were expensive.
The peace between thc herceg and his family was signed at PiXde on
the Pivska Mountain and announced in two documents guaranteed by
the hierarchy of the Bosnian Church. The first began with a cross
followecl by an invocation to the Trinity. Stefan gave his titles and then
statecl that the charter was drawn up before the Lord living God ancl
before all the saints. After giving the terms of the peace, he agreed not to
take any action against his wife or sons unless sanctioned to do so by the
Lord Djed of the Bosnian Church, and the twelve stroiniks, among
which stroiniks would be Gost Radin for his lifetirne, and twelve nobles
. . . The herceg swore to abide by the treaty before God all powerful, the
3r8 Medieval Bosnian Church
'Irinity, the Pure Mother of God and Sainted Virgin Mary, before the
Cross of Our [.ord, the four Evangelists, the twelve Apostles, the
Seventy Chosen of God and all the Saints.(77)
The second document in general repeats the contents of the first'
Flowever, instead of referring to the twelve stroiniks, it speaks of the
"twelve head krstlani" (12 poglavitijeh kr'stjan').(78)
Some scholars have assumed that the sanctioning of this treaty by the
djecl an{ his council means that they have moved to Hercegovina,.and
this in turn means that King Stefan TomaY, under pressure from the
Catholic Church, had initiated persecution of the Bosnial Church,
causing the emigration from Bosnia of the church's hierarchy.(79)
Though plausible, this hypothesis cannot be taken as fact' The treaty
between the herceg and his son was an event sufficiently important to
have warranted a guarantor's role for the djed and his council, regard-
less of where they lived.
The variation in phrasing between the two texts shows that the twelve
stroiniks were the twelve heads of the church. Thus we may think of the
stroiniks as the members of a council which aided the djed in ad-
ministering the church. It is usually argued that the passage should be
read as "the twelve" and thus the djed's council was composed of
twelve stroiniks
- the same number the
as apostles
- which would
mean the whoie council stood behind the treaty.(80) Whereas this
thcory is quite plaLrsible, it is possible that we should read the text as
"twelve oJ'tbestroiniks", in which case it would mean that twelve
stroiniks out of a larger group stood with the djed on this occasion. After
all, there were more nobles in Hercegovina than the twelve guaran-
teeing the treaty; perhaps the djed simply wanted the number of clerics
to balance the number of laymen. That the members of the councii,
despite their higher ranks (i.e.,gost, starac) were called "twelve head
krstjani" shows that the term krstjanin could be used for any ordained
cleric, including those who had achieved higher rank and was not
limited to those clerics below the rank of starac.
On this occasion Gost Radin was made a stroinik. He had been a gost
alreacly in 71+1+7 , so we know that all gosts v/ere not automatically
stroiniks. Later we shall meet a starac who is a stroinik: thus men of this
lower rank coulcl be on the council while certain gosts' a rank higher
than starac, might not be on it. Gost Radin was selected to be a stroinik
for life. Whether this was exceptional or standard procedure, we do not
know.It would be rash to try to generalize on a stroinik's tenure on the
basis of one case. Nor do we know whether Flerceg Stefan put pressure
on the djed to appoint Radin as a stroinik; it seems, however, a sensible
decision to piace on the church council a churchman with so much
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 319
influence in the secular world.
Finally, we ntight look at the theological references in the doctrtnent.
The curses against violators, which being magical have forntularized
wording and hence are almost worthless for content analysis, are absent.
However, the herceg swore by a series of items which turn out to be the
same figures which carried out the curses. Among these we find an all
power{ul God, the pure Mother of God the Sainted Virgin Mary, the
strength of the revered and life-creating Cross of the Lord, and all the
Saints. Since these items are regularly found in the formulated curses,
they clearly had a formula base; hence we cannot place too much
emphasis on them. But they do contradict the inquisition sources which
allege that the "Bosnian Patarins" rejected a1l of these'
The document begins with the sign of the cross' frequently found at
the beginning of charters, but by no means an essential ingredient to
make a charter valid. lts presence here like the cross at the beginning
of the djed's letter in 1404
-
suggests that it was accepted by the
-
Bosnian Church, the herceg's membership in which is indicated by the
fact that the djed and his council stood behind this family document.
The presence of the cross also contradicts the implication in the Ragusan
accusations against the herceg which stress his attacks on crucifixes'
'l'he invocation to the -I'rinity, as we have seen, is standard fclr the
Bosnian Ctrurch.lt is also worth noting that the herceg clicl swear by a
variety of holy figures. This shows that layrnen or follorvcrs of the
Church, unlike ordained clerics in it, were allowed to takc oaths.
In April I454, after long negotiations, Dubrovnik, too, obtained
peace on condition that matters be restored as they had been' The
charter issued by the herceg after beginning with the sign of the cross
andan invocation to the Trinity, states that "God sent His only Son to
great suffering in order to deliver His (people) from sins by the
resurrection . . .." Near the end the herceg, his family at.rd sevcrai
secular noblemen swear to uphold the treaty. The holy items they swear
by are the same ones noted in the preceding treaty.(81) Though Radin
had been instrumental in bringing about this peace, neither he nor any
other Bosnian Church cleric appended his name to the documcnt.
llowever, because Radin participated in negotiations and because the
hcrceg almost certainly was an aclherent of the Bclslian Chr-rrch, we
probably are justified in using the phrase I l.rave just quoted as being
representative of Bosnian Church beliei. Thus we see that the Ilosnian
Church held perfectly orthodox views about the crucifixion and its
significance. This is strong refutation of the inquisition's assertion that
the Bosnian Patarins clenied the resurrection, believing that Christ had
only an apparent body and did not really suffer or die on the cross'(82)
320 Medieval Bosnian Church
The charter shows that the Bosnian Church believed that Christ suffered
and died on the cross ancl by his resurrection enabled mankind to be
clelivered of sin. The charter's phrasing also shows that thc' Bosnian
Church believed that Christ was the only son of God. It has often been
stated by scholars that the Bosnian Church, like the Bogornils, believed
that God had two sons Satan, the elder son, and Christ, the younger'
Thus the herceg's treaty shows that this belief was not held by the
[]osnians.(83) It shoulcl be stated here, however, that no source about
the Ilosnians ever accuses them of believing in two sons of God. 'I'his has
simply been a scholarly hypothesis based entirely upon attributing
beliefs found among dualists in Bulgaria and elsewhere to heretics they
believe to be dualists in Bosnia.
Since the peace treaty restored matters tcl the ante bellurn state, all the
causes for tension , the issues of the trading and Novi, remained. During
negotiations in August 1453 Dubrovnik, referring ro the friendship
between them, had paid Radin 400 ducats to maintain the arrnistice.(84)
When Radin returned to Dubrovnik with the peace treaty, he requested
and obtained still more money from the Ragusan council. Whether
Radin was really a double-agent, as Truhelka and Solovjev believe, is
hard to say.(85) Dubrovnik clearly thought he was working in its in-
terests, but he may have been simply a masterful extortionist, per-
suading the town fathers that he was working to help them, at great
personal risk, while all the time loyally serving the herceg, who cer-
tainly would not have ob1'ected to his envoy's bleeding the rich town's
treasury. It is hard to believe that Radin actuaily ever did anything
treasonable against the herceg. Dubrovnik's faith in him, though, is
clearly seen in the sources : In August 7453 when Radin was given 400
ducats, Radovan Yardt6, the secular negotiator, receivecl only 100.(86)
An undated letter from about this time told a Ragusan envoy to discuss
matters with Radin, for the town council had much confidence in
him.(87) A letter of January 145J from Dubrovnik to its arnbassador
told him to speak first with Radin since the council wanted to make sure
that he was favorable about an idea, for the council had hope in him.(88)
In April I45J it was suggested to the envoy that he speak secretly with
Radin and the herceg's two sons about matters before he spoke to the
herceg, who was unfriendly toward the town.(89) In November 1455,
for the love he has shown the town, Dubrovnik presented Radin with a
house for himself , his household and his servants in Dubrovnik. This
shows that Radin didTrot live in the ascetic way that rnight seem fitting
for an ordained "prior-gost." FIe was given the right to come and go as
he pleased and to remain in the town as long as he wanted. lf he chose to
live there, it was guaranteed that he would not be forced by anyone to
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 321
renounce the faith in which he believed, as it has been pleasing to
him.(90)
Solovjev believes that l)ubrovnik's charter was intended to enable
Radin to escape and find asylum if the herceg discovered what Solovjev
believes [o have been Radin's ''treachery. " However, several
noblemen, inclucling RadiE SankoviC and Sandalj Hranii, had been
honored with Ragusan citizenship, titles of Ragusan nobility and even
houses in the town. The right of asylum was always freely granted by
Dubrovnik and Radin surely could have sought it at any time even
without the special grant. We have noted earlier that Pavle ltadilii and
Pavle Klelid both obtained asylum in Dubrovnik and we know that upon
Klelii's arrival the town council voted to give him a house to live in.
The grant to Radin then was a token of Dubrovnik's gratitude for his
good will toward it and the services he had rendered it in acl-rieving and
maintaining peace with the herceg. lf Radin did feel any need to have a
place of shelter which he could escape to, we can suppose it was not to
flee the herceg but to escape from Hercegovina in the event of a 'Iurkish
conquest which was an ever present possibility. The herceg sent Radin
to I)ubrovnik several times in the following years: in Iebruary 1456,
March 1459, March 1461, February I462.(9I) It is clear that relations
between him and Dubrovnik had not changed since in 1462 a Ragusan
envoy was instructed not to discuss a certain matter with the herceg if
Iladin were not present.(92)
X; The Pautoui/i and Patarins in tbe 1450's
The herceg was not the only magnate using Patarins to negotiate with
Dubrovnik in 1454. The PavloviC brothers, Nikola and Peter, made a
treaty with Dubrovnik after consulting their advisers according to
custom ''and with the lord stroiniks of the Bosnian Church. " T'hey sent
andembassy to Dubrovnik which included two stroiniks: Gost Radosav
Bradievid and Starac Radosav. Both these clerics signed the charter but
did not place their names among those who swore to it. In signing, the
starac wrote, "Starac Radosav called grandson by the words of his
order." (unuk rekote po svom redu ri[iju.)(93)
llere we find both a gost and a starac as stroiniks. I'he significance of
the term "grandson" is unknown; the expression is known from no
other source. It is evident that it should not be related to the Cathar elder
and younger sons(94) since the Cathar sons were the seconcl and third
ranking people in their church, and Radosav as a starac was clearly of
lower rank than all the gosts. The Pavlovici obviously still had Patarins
 322 Medieval Bosnian Church
at their court; these Patarins were respected, since they were consulted
bcforc thc trcaty with Dubrovnik was clrawn up. Thus it secms that after
IvaniS returned to the Bosnian Church after his three years of
catholicisnr, his far'ily had remained faithfui to the Bosnian church.
They, the herceg, and possibly also the DinjiEiii are the only families
rnentioned in the sources of the 14)0's which retainccl ties with the
Patarins.
XL' T-lte Herceg's Dealings with
Catbo I ic ism and O rt hodoxjt
While the negotiations between the herceg and Dubrovnik were being
carried out by the Patarin gost, the herceg was flirting
with both
Catholicism and Orthodoxy. His old friend Alfonso of Naples wrote him
in Novernber 145It that he would send suitable Franciscans from south
Italy to teach in Hercegovina as the herceg had requested.(95) We hear
no more of them, however. In I455 the herceg initiated negotiations to
marry Ilarbara, daughter of the Prince of Lichtenstein. She, of course,
was a Catholic, and the herceg agreed to let herbring a whole entourage,
including priests, with her.(96) This marriage never actually took place.
Instead the herceg took as his second wife another Barbara, this one also
a Catholic, daughter of the Dr"rke of "Payro."(97) After her death in
1460, the herceg would make yet another Catholic marriage. Also in
1/t55 the herceg (once again) and his sons were named honorary
noblemen of Venice.(98) Since the herceg had been allied with Venice in
his recent war with Dubrovnik, this honor is not surprising.
The herceg's son Vladislav was also showing an interest in Catholic
cults. In the spring of ltll4 he requested Dubrovnik to make available to
him a boat to take him to Italy so that he could make a pilgrimage to the
Virgin of Loreto. IJis request was granted; we know he went to
Dubrovnik where he was received with honor. We rnay assume that
then he proceeded on to ltaly to nrake his pilgrimage.(99)
ln71t14 the herceg built an Orthodox church dedicated to St. George
in GoraZde.(100) It has been suggested that he built the church in
memory of his Orthoclox wife, who had died late in 1453, but it is also
possible that he buiit it as a sign of goocl will toward the Serbian despot,
with whom he was trying to better his relations and from whom that
same year he acquired a girl (a relative of the despot's wife and of good
Byz-antine farnily, Anna Cantacuzena) to be a bride for son Vladi.slav.
He nright also have built the church to please the Metropolitan of
Milelevo with whom, we shall see, the herceg maintainecl veiy cordial
Bosnia from 1441 to 1463 323
relations. The building of an Orthodox church in Goraide suggests that
there were at least some Orthodox believers in the area. A decade earlier
we noted a Patarin hiY,a near Goralde. Probably the region of Goraide
had a mixed population of Bosnian Church adherents and Orthodox.
ln addition the Kosata farnily (either Sandali or Herceg Stefan) built
two churches beneath their major fortress of Soko, which stands on a
high rise above the junction of the Tara and Piva Rivers, and. below the
riJge of the. Pivska Mountain on which is located village Pi"sle. On the
mountain-side below the fortress of Soko and above S6epan polie (at
Donje Zagradje ispod Sokola) at location "Manastir" stands a church
long known to the natives but recently discovered by scholars. It is
basically Orthodox in style with a few architectural differences. One
might attribute the Orthodox style and variants to the artisans who
worked on it; thus they are not sufficient evidence to prove the church
to be or not to be Orthodox. A ste/akinside the church suggests it was
built as a burial chapel.(i01) Unfortunately there is no inscription on
church or stetakto help us date the church. Popular tradition attributes
the church to Herceg Stefan and this is supported by a second popular
tradition referring to the paraklis as "misa." Professor Kajrnakovi6
pointed out to me that the paraklis is Catholic in style. This fact com-
bined with the Catholic term "misa" suggests that Catholic services
were held in the paraklis while services of a different confession (Or-
thodox or Bosnian) were held in the main church. Since the herceg's
second and third wives were Catholic and we know from his negotiations
with Barbara of Lichtenstein that he was willing to let his Catholic wife
bring Catholic priests with her, we may suggest that at least the paraklis
was built by the herceg and that the church if not built by him was
in use in his time. Whether it was built by
-Sandali or the herceg
- is not
known and we cannot be sure whether the two Bosnian Church nobles
built it as a Bosnian church for themselves or as an Orthodox church for
some mentber of their household. H<lwever, we can make a fairly strong
case that it
was Bosnian, for twenty minutes walk up thc mountain
above the church lies a ntedieval cemetery which includes the stone of
Krstjanin Petko, discussed in Chapter V, who was buried between 1435
anr) 1448 (when the herceg still bore the title voivoda).(102)
About a kilometer below the church just described, the ruins of
another church at the location "Crkvina," "Crkva" or also
"Manastir" on Siepan polje have even more recently been found.
These ruins, probably from the fifteenth century, seem a bit older than
the clrurch on the mountainside.(103) 'fhis suggests that this building
may have been Sandalj's (or Jelena's) work and the upper church the
herceg's. Again we know nothing about the circumstances of the
324 Medieval Bosnian Church
church's erection, or even which denomination used it. One might
suggest, though, that if the upper church was Bosnian, the lower one
might have been Orthodox for the Orthodox members of the KosaEa
houschold.
Xil; I'he Qu.estion of Kudugers
The herceg's good will toward the Orthodox is also seen by the gifts
he gave to some Orthodox monks on Mt. Sinai. Somewhat puzzled by
the herceg's generosity, the monks had written to Gennadius, Patriarch
of Constantinople (12+53-)9), whose reply survives in a sixteenth- or
seventeenth-century Slavic translation. The patriarch began by referring
to a Bishop of Elosnia who had brought many "l(udugers" into
obedience to the Greek church. [{e hoped that many lnore l]osnians
rnight be converted to Orthodoxy since this bishop had the love of the
lord herceg. 'fhe herceg had not yet publicly separated himself from the
"Kudugers" for he feared his nobles. But he supported the activities of
the bishop and in his heart had been for a short time Orthodox. Because
of this, he had sent alms to the Christians. The patriarch told the monks
that they nright accept charity frorn him, and that they might pray for
him , but that they rnust not rnention his name in the liturgy.( 104)
Who was this "Bishop of Bosnia" mentioned2 He could not have
been Bosnian since there were no known Orthodox bishops there;
presumably he was a Hercegovinian bishop. lt is not surprisirUl that the
patriarch should confuse Hercegovina and Bosnia considering that since
its annexation by Bosnia in the l1rth century, the land that was to
become Hercegovina had been considered part of Bosnia, and that in the
fifteentlr century down to 1448 the ruler of this territory bore the title
Vojvoda of Bosnia. Probably the bishop was the metropolitan who
resided at Milelevo, which lay in the herceg's lands. ln 11t(r(r this
metropolitan helped draft the herceg's last will and testament. Perhaps
the herceg's ties with that monastery were already established in the'
14)0's; possibly they originated in L449 when the herceg took the title
of Flerceg of St. Sava. After all, Sava's relics were kept at Milelevo.
What of the strange term "Kuduger" that Gennadius used twice to
describe certain "Bosnians" (i.e., people of Hercegovina)Z The
Byzantine historian, Laonikos Chalkokondyles, writing after the fall of
Constantinople, says that the inhabitants of Sandalj's region were called
"Koudougeroi."(10)) Gennadius and Chalkokondyles are the only
writers who used the term about Bosnia or Hercegovina. However,
early in the {ifteenth century, Symeon the Archbishop of Salonika
Bosnia fron 71+43 to 1463 325
(I4I0-29), who wrote several tracts against heretics in his
- diocese
especially against the Latins and the Bogornils directed one of his
treatises against Bogomils
-
and Koudougeroi, using the ternls
synonyrnously. Flaving tlrentionecl Mani , Symeon states that of his
followers now there still exist the Bogomils, ttre devil's crowd who are
also called Kudugers. They existed near Salonika, pretended to pray a lot
andto honor the Gospels, Acts and Epistles, but reject the remaining
books, and are not evangelical in their practices. The Bogomils secretly
pray to Anti-Christ, reject all the Church Sacraments, baptism with
water, the Eucharist, the Cross, icons, churches, the Ten Com-
mandments, prophets, and the saints. il'hey are against all prayers and
hymns and allow only "Our Father." 'fheir father is the Devil whom
they call "Topaka" of the Earth, which means High Lord of Sin and
Dark.(106) Thus we see that according to Symeon the term Ktrduger
was simply another name {or a Bogomil. 'lhe description he gives of the
Bogomils is perfectly standard, clearly stresses dualism, and is highly
polemical and pejorative.ln 1926 Skarid came to the conclusion that the
term Kuduger rneant specifically those who hated the cross,(107) which
of course coincides with Symeon's description. Thus, the generally
accepted conclusion is that the Kudugers were dualists and thus both
Gennadius and Chalkokondyles meant dualists when they used the word
about Hercegovina.
However, we have had no evidence of any dualists in l{ercegovina.
Since we have found the herceg connected with the Bosnian Church
until now, it is likely that Gennadius is referring to the Bosnian Church
when he says "Kuduger." Yet when he says that the herceg "has not
yet publicly separated himself from the Kudugers for fear of his nobles"
this implies that many of the Hercegovinian nobles were members of the
Bosnian Church, which does not agree with the sources, we have
studied about Hercegovina; they suggest that the majority of FIer-
cegovinian nobles were Orthodox. And tf Kuduger is intended to mean
dualist, we would say also that Gennadius was wrong to apply the term
to the Bosnian Church.
Of course, however, we must realize that the Patriarch of Con-
stantinople was writing as an outsider who had little correspondence
about or contact with Bosnian affairs. We do not know what his source
of information about Hercegovina was, though we may suspect it was
correspondence (no longer extant) with the "Bosnian" bishop whom he
referred to in the letter.(108) If that bishop had spoken of the Bosnians
as Patarins, the patriarch might well have interpreted that term to mean
dualists. Then when he wrote to the Sinai monks he could easily have
dropped this Western word, which he might have expected the monks
 326 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia fron't 1443 to 1463 )27
not to understand' and have substitute<i
the term Kuduger which nray
still have bee' in use in the Greek worl, (and Patarins were heretics rather than schisntatics since in the sarne letter
eve' if not'too commonry
used' which he could have arawn f.o- John of Capistrano states that the Serbs (Rasciani) strayed beyond the
th. Archbishop oi s',,ionitr,, "heresies of the Greeks."(1l2) The Greeks, of course, werc only
writings.)
'l'he_same explanation schismatics. Thus if he misused the term heretic once, he may well have
could probably appiy to Laonikos, use
term' Ilowever, there is arso one other place of the done so twice. This letter, however, does provide a strong argurnent
from which this term against the theory that the Bosnian-Patarin Church was really Or-
nright have conre. Laonikos used the term
in such u g"n".ni.o,*xt that
it need not have referrecr.ro-a religious group thodox; for John of Capistrano notes that Patarins who have accepted
at all. In 'I'urkish the
" term
"giidiici'i' ' (pronouncect kudu ji), uii"t,.a i., -u.,,,r..ip,r Catholic teaching but are prohibited from being accepted into that faith
fourteenth and fifteenth ..n,u.1"r, ,n. by the Serbian metropolitan, would rather die outside the faith than
*.^n, shepherd.(109;.ih."rmuin accept the Serbian faith. Hence it is evident that the Patarins originally
occupation of the population of Hercegovina
was of course raising sheep.
This may well have been what Laonirios had been something other than Orthodox. We may well wondcr how
haa in mind whe' he described
the inhabitants of Herce€ovina as Koudougeroi. this RaYka Metropolitan had the force to prevent their being baptized as
It also would have been Catholics. Perhaps the "others" referred to in the passage were Or-
a more accufate generalization
than one which would make *"
Hercegovina heretics since Hercegovina was a religiously f"opt. of thodox members of the nobility who harassed would-be Catholics.
with most probabiy an orthodox mijority. mixed area l'he letter of John of Capistrano shows that a rivalry was developing
The pn*ir..r, ,irf'rir" rr.r.
heard the term used with its Tur[rsh between Orthodox and Catholics in some unspecified parts of Bosnia-
m.uning about the people of
Hercegovi'a, but instea, of understanding Hercegovina, presumably along the Orthodox-Catholic contact zones,
cupational sense' related the term to
it in the inten<.led oc- in eastern Bosnia between Olovo and the Drina,(113) and along the
the woid for dualists ur"Juy,tr.
Archbishop of Salonika. Bosnian-Hercegovinian border in a region like that around Konjic.
we als'find a sec.ncr'.rkish term similar Either of tl'rese regions cor.rld well have had Orthodox priests in them
Defter of 1J15 the mahara (section of town)
t. K'duger; in the under the iurisdiction o[ the metropolitan in Milelevo.
of Neclzar lbrahim in Although Bosnia is frequently spoken of as a meeting place and even a
Sarajevo was callecr "Kurudger."(r r0)
Unforiunatety tt,. $g,ritl.*..
of this name is not known. But it,oes battle ground between the two major branches of the Christian faith, the
suggest that linguistic stuiry of
fiftee'th ancl sixteenth-century 'furkish ao?u-"nr, fact is that this generalization only begins to become true in the -1440's
in solving the mystery of the word ,.Kucluger.,, might prove fruitful and 1450's. ln the period between the late twelfth century and 7440, we
find signs of actual collision between Orthodoxy and Catholicism only in
XIIL' Cathotic _.Orrhodox Riualry Begins those areas where the Serbian state reached the Dalmatian coast and
in Bosnia thu-s came into conflict with the DaLnatian Catholics, i.e., southern
In his letter Gennadius spoke of ortho<iox Dalmatia and inland as far as the region around Trebinje. We have noted
successes in winning
the populace of ''Bosnia'" brthodox p."t"itttr- was arso the subjectover
of
that when Dubrovnik procured Ston and Konavli, the Ragusans per-
a conrplaint by the Bosnian Franciscans secuted the Orthoclox inhabitants of these regions and forcibly reduced
,o ;of,n of C.pir,.r*l-*'o the populations to Catholicism. However, this conflict did not occur in
wrote to Pope calixtus III in r45i.
He reported that the Ra.ka Bosnia or in most of what is now Hercegovina during the medieval
metropolitan hincrered the catholics
in their work. Many of the B'snian
hererics w'o held the patarin frirl,,.hr;i;; period.(114) Whereas inland I'lercegovina was Orthodox, Bosnia was
hearcl the word of God and
having been converted to more or less a no-man's land between faiths with a weak Catholic
theRomr" friri,".*.e prevente. by the
metropritan and others from being Ratka organiz-ation, which died out in the thirteenth century only to be
9il"::""^|)
Catholic Church. As a result, muny
reconcired wjth the gradually rebr.rilt by the Franciscans after 1340. k is possible that Or-
ai.J outria" tn" faith, preferring to
die outside the faith than to accept thodox and Catholics did have contacts with one another in the region
(Serbian) Orthodoxy.(l 1 l)
Flere is a catholic writer wtro iinr.t between Olovo and the Drina from the late fourteenth century; but
ir,. iuturin, with the Bosnian there is no evidence of quarrels between them. For Bosnia and Her-
heretics, and thu.s states that the
I'atarins *,.." h"."ti.s. r{owever,
nray question whether this letter we ccgovina as a whole, then, the Orthodox-Catholic rivalry began only in
can be used to a",',onr,*litl,',i," the rnidclle of the filteenth century. Once begun it has lasted to the
 Medieval Bosnian Church Medieval Bosnian Church 1?O
328

present day. so, the testimony of this 1456 letter runs counter
to everythinp' we have
foundin recent sources about the Bosnian Church' For the previous
twenty years we have notecl Catholic successes; in
144) and 11150
XIV: 'fhe T'urkisb I'hreat and Proposed l'h1,mas of Flvar stated that there was hope that the
kingdonr would be
Leagues to Meel it purged of Manichee errors and become Catholic; heretics were
,lir.l,p.uring before the Franciscans like wax before fire'
IIe noted that
ln 1456 the 'f urks had demanded that Stefan TomaX surrender four t.r.ry ..*"-inecl only among, some of the barons and noted by name only
support
key towns to them; when he refused Turkish attacks became more H.r.eg Stefan and ihe Paulouidi.(119) Our other documerus
Llosnian Church seems to be
frequent, but even so the king continued to quarrel with Herceg Stefan Ihomis of Hvar. Thus at a time when the
Barbucci that nearly the
ancl witlr Serbia. George Brankovid died in 1416, and his successor in on the decline, we fincl Stefan TornaX telling
14)8. Stefan TomaY took advantage of the disorder in Serbia in 1458 to maiority of his people are supporters of the Bosnian Church'
excuse not to
seiz-e eleven towns along the Drina. Then he made peace with the weak Thus we may suggest that the king used religion as an
ruling family by marrying the deceased despot's daughter to his own son light since fr" i.r...i'a crusading plan woulcl merely serve to stir .the
to their rnercy rvhile
and heir Stefan Toma"sevii. As a dowry Bosnia obtained the key fort of *iath of the'furks against him,-and leave Bosnia
Western aid would siniply never materiaiizc' lt is certain
Smederevo, which Stefan fomaSevi6 occupied in 7459, apparently the king
assuming the title o{ despot. Within a matter of months, the Turks wanted to save his kingdonl. But we can suspect that helvould have
part of the
captured Smederevo. .fhe Flungarian king, Matyas Corvinus, im- liked to see the Werter-n armies before he risked beconring
mediately accused Bosnia of selling the fqrtress to the Turks, and venture. lt is also important to note his statement that sonte Bosnians
pre{erred the 'furks to the Christians (i'e', foreign Christians
rumors of Bosnian perfidy spread through Western Christendorn.(115) and
Papal agents had visited both Stefan TornaX and the herceg to try to was probably 11r'rite truc'
particularly Ilungarians).'l"his as rve shall see
interference at
convince them to put up a united front to the Ottoman danger.(l16) Though the llosiiians would have preferred no foreign
One of these agents, the l)orninican Nicholas Barbucci, visited the all, this was an impossible wish in the 1450's, and it lvas altnost certain
or by l-lungarians' The
Bosnian king at his court in Jajce, where the king had now established that they would be overrun either by f'urks
his chief residence so as to be more distant from the source of 'furkish had had colltact
Turks were not unknown monsters; many B<;snians
beside them
with thern during the preceding fifty years, and had fought
raids. Barbucci's letter
- written from Jajce - about his mission is not were not "good
as allies on numerous'occasions. slnce the
dated, and scholars had generally ascribed it to the years L457-60,but Bosnians
Professor Cirkovii had convincingly dated it 1416.(I l7) Barbucci faith would not. have
Christians," the spectre of Islam as a foreign
reported that he had broached the subject of a crusade against the Turks seemed so important to thern. Catholicism as l{ungary presented it was
preferred the 'l'urks to the
and found the king hesitant because "the Manichees, who were almost ulo fo."ign faith. That rnany would have
the rnaiority in his kingdom, preferred the Turks to the Christians"; "
iung^.iunJ, with whom Bosnia had fought wars and suffered per-
therefore should surprise no
the king was not interested in fighting the Turks without Christian (i,e., ,..ulon for the previous three centuries,
Wcstern) help.(118) one.
We cannot be sure that the king had really used the term Manichee. It
is quite possible that Stef an 'f omaX had spoken of Patarins or ' 'heretics' '
and Barbucci, when rnaking his report, under the influence of Italian XV ; Kotruliit's Euidence
Catholic views on Bosnia, or even under the influence of local Catholic
cultured Ragusan merchant, Benko Kotruliii' rvho
clerics whcl wanted the pope to think the Patarins were Manichees, had had on
In 1458 a
substituted the word Manichee for whatever term the king had used. and ltaly, wrote a treatlse
several occasions served as an envoy to Spain
Even though there seem to have been dualist heretics in Bosnia, it is on tracle. ln the course of the treatise he commented:
"thc Bosnians'
hard to believe that the dualists, so rarely specified, could have been a respcct rich people and very
who follow Manichee customs, especially
sizable enough movement to have been intended here. Thus the king (i'e', hiTas)' rvhiie turning away
hospitably receive them in their houses
to Excltrcling letters
and Barbucci are evidently referring to the Bosnian Church. Yet even the poor."(120) tle evidently refers Patarins'
 330 Medieval Bosnian Church
lJosnia from 11t43 ro 1463 33r
written by Dubrovnik during irs war
with Herceg Stefan, this is the only a seconcl church in Jajce dedicated to the Virgin Mary,(l27) and
source written by a
_contemporary Slav which uses thc word
"Manic'ee" about trre Bosnians. presumably iust cornpletcd at that timc.
whetherhe hacr pickecl up this term The reliis clearly brought clisaster with thern since in 14(r3 Jajcc in itls
on a visit to Italy or whether it hacr
been used pejorativery about
Stefan during rhe town,s I1+5I-53 Herceg trrrn {ell to the Turks thus becoming the third fortress in which the
Kotruljic< was aware
*.. *itf, him is not known. If relics were kept to fall within a decade. At the fall of Jafce, Torna(cvic{'s
of the rear ,rg'iri.o.r." oi the laber
ancl was rrot just Serbian bride Jelena, who had accepted Catholicisrn and assunrcd the
using it pejoratively, then we huu"
had a.lmost certainly travelled "u;d.n..
fro. a Slavic spcaker, who name of Maria, rnislaid the relics in her hurry to escape. f'he l'-ran-
in nor"lu, tiuiut t.ort sorne patarins
certain practices which Kotrulii6 felt ----"'- lhad ciscans rescued them and fled toward Dubrovnik. At Poljice near the
were dualist .(12I) coast, the Franciscans were stopped by a local vojvoda nanted lvaniE, a
friend of the queen, who would not let the Franciscans continuc ivith the
relics without her permission. Meanwhile she was negotiating to sell the
{VI: Cathotic progress in the Finat
relics to Venice while Dubrovnik fired off angry letters to lvanif or-
Years of Stefan Tomay
dering hirn to surrender them. In August I1t63 a letter of Queen Jelena-
'fhe scanty sources Maria showed her anger at the rich skinflints in Venice who had thc
show that catholicism continued
progress in Bosnia, lrut we to make nerve to question the authenticity of the relics. In the end, howevcr, the
cannot learn
-i"",r.a
anything .b;;;;oi"utu. u,- Venetians did buy them and allowed the Bosnian Franciscans to seek
titudes toward the catholic church
what degree the peasants accepted". the Franciscans, or to shelter on Venetian territory. However, the jinx of the relics was to
Cathoiicism, participatecl in its continue: six years later Venice exiled the Bosnian Franciscans, whcr
services, or allowed its priests to'r.rflu"n."
their rive.s. A later rerrort of hadrescued St, Luke, iustone more incident in a larger quarrel between
Piu.s llstares that King Stefan f"rr^X
lr.A-fr;;rr";;r;.;::;"r.i
siclera,le time but'acr abstained_from .r" the Elosr.rian vicariat ancl Dahnatian I;ranciscans, which had lrccn going
the hancls of the legate Gioanni
;rp,it. untir he receive. it from on for the preceding dccades and which has no real relevancc to our
cardinal di s. A'gelo,(122) who visited story. But after the Venetian purchase of St. Luke's relics brought thcm
Bcrsnia in 14i7. All
Catlrolicism seriously. ln,indicati*., ,rgg"" that the king took his into the Italian world a new crisis alose ; St. Luke was already there in
11+61 ,f," pJp?,'at the king,s
rnittecl him to have a portable request, per_ the Benedictine monastery of San Giusto in Padua. The llenedictines
'fhus
ultu.'on which Matins could be ser- taised a terrific howl at the Venetian claims. A law-suit ttrat dragged on
ved'(123) the king, on.u-puign, *ould not
'rices' F'rther evicrence be cleprivecl of ser- for years, more than once appearing before the pope, was instigated to
is provicrei uy-th. religious
f'onra!'s chirdren. f'he.testinro'v 's;i;;'tomaxeui6 upbringing of stefan determine who really owned St. Luke.(128)
Pius Il about his cathoric upbringing
"f ;iil i, ia'Li . ,"0. In 1461 King Stefan Tomal's brother Radivoj completed a cirurch
Orbini also describer the pilgriln.g"-r"
;. discussed below. However, dedicated to St. George at Te5anj,(129) north of Vranduk. f'lte Fran-
r slnedi.tin" church in Venice ciscans too had built at least eleven new monasteries in Bosnia and
by an r"rn-namecl fourteen year old
son of the king in 1tt60. J.he I-lercegovina in the years since 1385, when a vicar's list had noted only
fortunate youngster was take'ill un-
and died ihere; he rva.s buriecl in four. 'f hese monasteries are noted in sources from the first seventy years
Benedictines' cemetery, clear indication the
oi his cathoric ism.(121t1 of Turkish rule. Since the Turks in this period did not allow the
rn rt+58 the pope, referring ," n...rilr-r;",Jlil,;i-r',,1'u'Jr",r,
granted indurgences to all wrro Cathoiics to build new churches where they had not had them
visited ,t," .t,u..t of st. catherine previously, it is probable that all eleven of these monasteries were built
Jaice,(125) presumably.u.!ur:tl .;;r;i;.ompi"te,t in
namedforhis queen's saint. In 1_1r6r by the king and before the {ail of the Bosnian kingdom. We ascribe to the.years between
a pap'ar letter reports that the rerics l38t 1463 (for Bosnia), and 1381'1481 (for Hercegovina) Franciscan
of St' Luke were there'(126) These."ui,
l4)3, rescued from the Constant;nopl" alrrr,", ira come to smederevo in monasteries in: Fojnica, Kre3evo, DeIevica, Zvornik, Sol ('fuzla,
despot's in-laws' T'ev hecarne
by one of the Serbian where two may have been built), Jajce, Jezero, Rama, Konjic, Mostar,
Serbian bride' and afier the farl
rr., ;ii;.;;wry of srefan Toma!evi6,s Liubuiki.(130) The last three monasteries were in Hercegovina. If
of Smed"..uo *"r. brought to Alfonso of Naples did actually dispatch the Franciscans he prolnised to
Later in r1t6l they were transferred Jajce.
frorn the church of St. catherine the herceg in ItlJ4, they were probably sent to one or more of these
ro
332 Medieval Bosnian Church
three Hercegovinian monasteries.
Koniic, we know, also had close by a Patarin hila, as well as an
Orthodox church at Biskup built by the Sankovi6i. Thus, it would have
been an area of contact between all three confessions. The towns of
Fojnica, DeY,evica, and KreYevo were all mining centers, where the
Franciscans would have received support from foreign Catholic
colonists. At Jajce, of course, they had the support of the king who had
made this attractive town his residence.
XVII: Persecution Launched Against
the Bosnian Cburcb in 1459
In the final years of the kingdom, the Catholics prevailed on the king
to engage in the active persecution of the Bosnian Church, which Rome
and the Bosnian Franciscans had long wanted. Some scholars claim that
the king began his persecution of the Patarins as early as 1449 , using as
evidence the djed and stroiniks guaranteeing the herceg's treaty in
14t3. But we have argued above that their guaranteeing this treaty
between the members of the herceg's family need not mean that the
Bosnian Church hierarchy resided in Hercegovina. In addition, those
who want to attribute Stefan TomaX's action against the Patarins tol449
usually claim that the story found in Pius II's Cotnmentariland also in
Orbini that the king gave the Manichees (i.e., Bosnian Church
members) a choice of baptism or exile took place in that year. However,
Pits' Commentariidates this story to l46l , and Orbini dates it to 1459.
I prefer to leave it dated l4J9-60 as the sources state.(131)
In the passage Pius ll (1458'64) described how King Stefan Tomal
gave the Manichees the choice of accepting baptism in Christ or leaving
his kingdom. Pius reported that: About 2,000 were baptized and 40 (or
40,000)or a few more fled to Herceg Stefan. (duo circiter millia bap-
tizati sunt, quadraginta aut paulo plures pertinaciter errantes ad
Stephanum Bosnae ducem perfidiae secium confugere.)(132)
Many historians (and most of the popular books) have interpreted
Pius' statement to mean that 40,000 fled to th.e herceg rather than
accept baptism. Other scholars, such as Cirkovid and Babid, have in-
terpreted Pius' remark to mean that forty fled to Hercegovina.(1 3i) The
Latin is ambiguous and could mean either. However, conditions in
Bosnia at the time argue strongly for the figure of forty. A successful
migration of 40,000 to rocky, barren Hercegovina in the late 1450's is
difficult to imagine. Where would they all have goneT How could they
have supported themselves? How could such a major event have escaped
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 333
4rtf acting, notice in the Dalmatian Sources or in the correspondence
l',,ong ttt" papacy, Hungary and Dalmatia? And if such a large number
f,ra UL" adamant heretics, would the king, anticipating a Turkish
,nurrion, ever have presented them with such a rigorous choiceT Would
ib,OOO uneducated peasants, who cleady did not understand formal
religious matters and who seem to have been relatively indifferent to
torial religion, have sacrificed their lands and their homes for any
creed?
The figure forty, on the other hand, is a very reasonable figure.
Herceg Stefan's barren land could easily have accommodated
that
number, It seems likely, then, that when the Bosnian Church members
were forced to choose , the larger number ' 2 ,000 ' accepted
Catholicism ,
whereas forty (presumably all or nearly all ordained clerics) preferred to
keep their faith and go into exile in Hercegovina.
Whether the figure 2,000 represents just clerics or whether it in-
cludes both clerics and lay membefs of the church is unknown.
But
when we take note of the large 4mount of land in various parts of Bosnia
associated with the krstjani in the Turkish defters, s'e see that
it is quite
possible for all 2,000 to have been clerics.(l34) And if most or all of the
),040*"t"clerics, it would explain why so few people were given the
choice. For to direct an attack upon the clergy would have effectively
destroyed the church and avoided stirring up the popular fesistance that
might have followed an attempt to forcibly baptize the lay population
whlch included armed warriors. If the 2,000 who accepted Catholicism
were clerics, and if they were sincere in their conversion, then
presumably many of their adherents would have followed them to
Catholicism.
The existence of 2,000 clerics h 1460 might at first glance suggest
that the church was not as weak as we have suggested. However, when
we realize that clerics concentrated in specific monasteries would have
been far easier for the king's men to round up than would 2,OOO secular
priests living in an equal number of villages in various parts of Bosnia,
we see that unless the clerics had strong popular support, their numbers
alone would not have provided much strength. In addition, when we
realize that roughly 2,000 still assuming that all 2,000 were clerics
-
-go (out of roughly 2,040) preferred to accept anotherfaith rather than
into exile, we see that the morale of the clergy was bad; clearly the
church suffered from strong internal weakness.
The story about the expulsions is confirmed by two letters of Pius
written on June 7, 1460, which spoke of the Bosnian king exiling
ratarins and of the papal hope that Herceg Stefan could be convinced not
to receive them.(131) Pius' letters thus confirm: 1) the story he
33rt Medieval Bosnian Church
reported later in Comrnentaii;2) our dating the event l4t9-60; 3) my
belief that those exiled were clerics of the Bosnian Church since he
referred to the exiles as "Patarins," the normal term for Bosnian
Churchmen used in Dalmatia and also frequently by Bosnian Fran-
ciscans ; and 4) that forty were exiled since in writing about the ex-
pulsion of the Patarins, he would presumably have made some reference
to the number who had fled had the exodus been on a scale anywhere
near 40,000.
The figure of forty as well as my supposition that the emigr6s were
ordained members of the Bosnian Church is also confirmed by a request
made by Gost Radin to Venice in 1466 to allow fifty or sixty members of
his sect to migrate thither in the event that they had to flee from the
Turks.( 1 36) The similarity of the two figures makes it probable that he
was referring to the same people who had fled to Hercegovina, with the
addition o{ some Hercegovinian Patarins to account for the slightly
larger figure. That Radin's figure only adds ten or twenty to the number
that had come from Bosnia confirms my belief that the Bosnian Church
was not amaior institution in Hercegovina. The djed and his hierarchy,
if they had not moved to Hercegovina earlier, thus apparently came
there in 1459. Their arrival was too late to establish any efficient church
organization in Hercegovina.
King Stefan Tomal apparently took advantage of the departure of the
hierarchy to seize Patarin lands. N. Filipovii, in a very stimulating
article, argues on the basis of the defters that the krstjani had been
successful and well-to-do farmers. I Ie points out that the defters refer on
a variety of occasions to "kristian" land being confiscated by the king.
On the basis of this, he argues that the desire to confiscate the rich lands
of the Bosnian Church may well have been a motivating factor in Stefan
TomaX's decision to persecute the Patarins.(137)We do not have enough
evidence to prove this hypothesis, but the prospect of obtaining these
rich lands certainly could have made the persecution of the Patarins
demandecl by the Catholic Church more attractive to the king. In any
case, the king did obtain for the crown the rich lands that had belonged
to the Bosnian Church. Filipovii cites eighteen folio pages from an
unpublished defter which, he claims, refer to lands that the king seized
krstiani,(138) but he does not tell us where any of these lands
$:[.,n"
The material that Oki6 published inbludes only one example of the
king confiscating land. In the nahija of Neretva in village Orahovica, the
defter reports the "evil king" took lands from the kristians and gave
thenr to the villagers.(139) Orahovica is very near the Patarin hila at
Biograd. What is puzzling about this statement, though, is that this area
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 33J
should have belonged to Herceg Stefan; it is also clear that Patarins
were not exiled from this area, since the hi[a at Biograd is referred to
againin 1466 after the fall of Bosnia. Thus we do not see how the King
of Bosnia could have confiscated land around Konjic. One hopes the
publication of further material from the defters can clarify the matter.
XVIIL' Tbree Bosnians Abjure Fifry Manicbee
Ertors in Rome
In August 1461, Pope Pius II wrote a letter to three Bosnian
noblemen (Djuraf KuEini6, StojYan TvrtkoviC, and Radmilo Vetinid or
Votinld; at the time, en route home from Rome after renouncing
Manichee errors and accepting the Catholic faith.(140) In writing about
the event in his Commentaii, Pius gives more details. Calling them
"three mighty leaders of heresy at the royal court", he reports that the
Bishop of Nin
- who doubtless knew both Latin and Slavic - had
spoken with the three men and had sent them in chains to Rome, where
Pius had relegated them to a monastery to learn Christian dogma.
Johannes Cardinal of St. Sixtus (Torquemada) had then converted them.
The three renounced their errors and went back to the King of Bosnia.
Two remained firm in the new faith but the third returned like a dog to
his vomit and sought refuge with Herceg Stefan.(l4l) Thereafter,
nothing more is heard about them.
We have one more document about the trio since two texts of their
renunciation have been preserved.(l42) Claiming they sinned from
ignorance rather than from malice, the three Bosnians renounced a list
of fifty points drawn up by the aged Cardinal Torquemada who had
never been to Bosnia and almost certainly knew no Slavic language. The
fifty points are similar in content to the two tracts from the end of the
fourteenth century, which RaIki published and we have already
discussed. We suspect that when Torquemada was told that Manichees
were coming to study with him, he simply went to the inquisition ar-
chive and drew up a list of fifty points from the documents he found
there. Thus the document itself tells us nothing about the specific beliefs
of the nobles, for any given point
- or most all the points - could
been drawn from the inquisition archives rather than &om
have
the beliefs
they actually held.(143) And although the two fourteenth-centufy tracts
state that they give the beliefs of "Bosnian Patarins, " it is quite likely
that the errors listed in them were those of Italian dualists, who, though
having some ties with the Slavic world, also were greatly influenced by
Western Cathars.
336 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 337

There is much that is puzzling in this affair and I must admit that I am the three men were surely scared out of their wits
occurred. In addition,
not satisfied with any explanation. Because we have three documents iu the inquisition procedure taking place in a foreign land in a foreign
about the trio, we must assume that three men had actually been sent iinrurg.. Thus it is probable that they would have abjured and signed
from Bosnia to Rome. Then we are told that the three were powerful ,nyltting put before them to renounce. And so they signed the
leaders of heresy at the royal court. Since the inquisition usually Manichee rmunciation
presumably compiled from inquisition archives ;
specifies if a man investigated is a heretical bishop, I think we can thus we put little stock in the text of the fifty points as revealing beliefs
assume that the three were noblemen. Since no Bosnian source men- tobe found in Bosnia. And if the three were Bosnian Church members,
tions them, and though supposedly at court they never witnessed any Gost Radin's will (1466) shows the unreliability of the renunciation,
extant royal charters, I think we can assume that they were members of since his will refutes eight to ten of the fifty points'(l 44) And even if a
the lesser nobility. Thus, it seems probable that Pius somewhat dualist wing had split off from the mainstream of the Bosnian Church to
exaggerates their importance. In addition, we have reason to believe which these three men belonged, the fifty points, because they were
that, prior to 1461, "heretics" had been expelled from the royal court. orobably based on inquisition files rather than the testimony of the
Many scholars believe that the Bosnian Church had been eliminated ihree, would still be useless to determine the actual beliefs of that wing.
from the court in the 1440's; the last mention of a died there is 1446. b) The only reason given in the sources to suspect the three of
And, in any case, in 1459-6O "Manichees" were given the choice of belonging to the Bosnian Church is that it is stated that the three men
baptism or exile. Thus it is hard to believe that this trio could have were leaders of the heresy al court. Because Rome considered the
remained heretics and at court. It is possible, however, that when the Bosnian Church a heresy, and because Patarins had long been present at
others went into exile, these three had been sent to Rome and had spent court (although probably not any longer in L46l), one might argue that
about two years in Italy. Pius does not state how long they had been the three belonged to that church. However, it is not impossible that
there. some real dualists had also been at court; Bosnia has always been a land
We are faced with two alternatives: a) The three were members of the where different faiths co-existed, probably more because of indifference
Bosnian Church, or else b) they were members of the dualist heresy. about such matters than because of tolerance. In this case, the three as
And of course in Bosnia membership in one need not exclude.them from actual dualists would have been correctly labeled ' 'Manichees ' ' and we
'
acquiring ideas or practices from the other. do not have to assume that the Bishop of Nin was involved in a plot' He
a) Since they were never called Patarins, and since they had passed could have interviewed them, learned of their dualism and passed them
through the hands of the bilingual Bishop of Nin, we cannot believe that on to Rome as the dualists they were. Besides, since we suspect that
a misunderstanding had arisen over the term Patarin. Since the Bosnian Catholics working in Bosnia were trying to convince Rome that the
Church had been referred to as Manichee with some regularity over the Patarins were dangerous heretics, what better "proof" of this could
preceding decade, it would not have been strange for members of this they have found than to send to Rome three authentic dualists and to let
church to be called Manichees. Yet it is hard to believe that the three, if the Curia think the three were Patarins. If this had been the aim of those
they were members of the relatively orthodox Bosnian Church, could who had sent the trio, then because a plot had been worked out, we have
still have been sent to Rome as Manichees after being examined by this no reason to take statements made about the three literally. Though sent
bi-lingual Bishop of Nin. Thus, we suspect that either they were framed as "powerful leaders ofheresy at court," the three could actually have
as dualists, with the Bishop of Nin aparty to the plot, and packed off to been real dualists with no association with the court or the Bosnian
Rome in chains as Manichees, or else', despite their membership in the Church all. And although this cannot be proved,
- I strongly lean
Bosnian Church, they held certain dualist beliefs or
- atsecond
toward this
- beliefs that may
may not have been generally accepted by the Bosnian Church which
alternative.
In any case, be it a frame-up of Bosnian Church members, or a case of
-
convinced the bishop that they were di.ralists. Once they arrived in Bosnian Church members following certain dualist practices, or out and
Rome, it is not surprising that they would have been "proved" out dualist heretics, it is evident that Pius (and Torquemada, also)
Manichees. Rome received them as Manichees. The trio surely knew no believed the three to be Manichees, and that Pius, at least, believed the
Latin ; Torquemada surely knew no Slavic. All conversations would three were members of the Bosnian Church. Prior to 1461, even though
have had to be through interpreters and surely much misunderstanding some of his predecessors had, Pius had never spoken of Bosnians as
 338 Medieval Bosnian Church
Manichees. when he wrote letters about the exiling of Bosnian church-
menin 11160, he called them Patarins. But when he sends the three
home in August 1461, he calls them Manichees, and when he writes
about the Bosnian Church in Commentarii and Europa, he without
hesitati6n calls it Manichee. He even changes the word patarin to
Manichee in commentariiwhen he speaks of the Bosnian churchmen
exiled in 1460. Thus we have reason to believe that it was the visit of
these three noblemen and their signing the Manichee abjuration that
convinced Pius of the truth of the allegation that the Bosnian church
was dualist.
XIX: The Turkisb Conquest of Bosnia and Part
Playd b1t Religious Differences
In July 146l King Stefan Toma"s died and was buried at the Fran-
ciscan monastery at Sutjeska. A story sprang up, which found its way
into a variety of Franciscan chronicles, to the effect that he had been
ambushed and murdered by men sent out by his brother Radivoi with
the consent of his son Stefan Tomatevii. However, Cirkovid notes that
in June 1461 Stefan Tomat had sent to Dubrovnik for a doctor, which
suggests that he had been ill.(145) In any case, he was succeeded by his
son Stefan Tomaievii.
If we can believe Pope Pius II's state papers in the re-worked and
edited form in which they were published over a century after his death,
Stefan TomaYeviiin 1461 sent an embassy to Rome ftr a crown, and
requested help for his kingdom against the Turks. He referred to Pope
Eugene offering a crown to his father, who refused it, fearing to provoke
the Turks. His father was then a new Christian, who had not yet exiled
the Manichees (probably Pius' word) from the kingdom. The wording
suggests that by 1461 the "Manichees," (presumably the Bosnian
Churchmen) had already been expelled, and thus were no longer a
problem for the state. The new king claimed that as a boy he had been
baptiz.ed, learned Latin letters and firmly grasped the Christian (i.e.,
Catholic) faith. Therefore he did not fear the crown as his father had. He
wished it sent to him as well as holy bishops (plural). (Whether he
wanted to establish a new bishopric for part of Bosnia, whether a second
bishopric
- €.8., possibly the Srebrnica-Visoko
letters dated 1434 and 1440 still existed
one noted in the papal
had been established, or
whether a bishopric on peripheral territory- like Duvno is intended, we
do not know.) He then went on to speak of the pressing Turkish danger,
and said that the Turks were promising "freedom" to the Bosnian
peasants, many of whom in their simplicity believed the Turkish
propaganda.( I 46)
Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 33e
RaEki believes the account because it gives an accuate picture of the
state of Bosnia; but RaEki also argues that Pius was probably
oaraphrasing the royal envoy's original message.(147)
' The new king's request was accepted and a papal legate crowned him
atJajce on 17 November 1461 on the Day of St. Gregory the Miracle-
Worker, who ten days earlier on the request of the king, had been
proclaimed Defender of Bosnia by Pope Pius II.(148) This coronation
illustrates the tremendous gains made by the Catholic Church in
Bosnia; in fact, in its last days the kingdom had acquired the character
of a Catholic state.
ln 1462 a decade after his first revolt against Herceg Stefan, his son
Vladislav revolted again; unable to capitalize on an existing war as he
had in 1412, he turned for aid to the willing Turks, who launched
massive attacks on Bosnia and Hercegovina in 1463. This time,
however, the Turks came in their own interests, and they were clearly
bent on putting an end to Bosnian independence. Bosnian fortresses fell
rapidly, one after the other. The king fled from Jajce in one direction,
the queen in another and the Franciscans bearing Saint Luke's relics in a
third. The king fled toward Croatia with a Turkish company in hot
pursuit. They caught up with him at the fortress of KljuE on the Sana,
persuaded him to surrender the fortress on condition that he would be
allowed to escape, and then broke their promise. Stefan Toma5evi/ was
brought back to Jaice, beheaded, and buried on a near-by hill from
which his castle could not be seen.
Most of Bosnia fell in a matter of weeks. The speed with which Bosnia
fell surprised every one. Partly this was owing to the clever ruses used by
the sultan, which made the invasion a surprise attack. However, this is
far from a full explanation. Clearly, resistance was lacking. This lack can
be explained in part by poor organization and lack of cooperation among
the nobles and between them and the king. We may also speculate that
morale was low
- though this need not have been due to religious
causes. After all many must have felt that it was merely a matter of time
before the Turks conquered Bosnia. The rapid fall required an ex-
planation, however, and to many that meant scape-goats. Therefore it is
not surprising that, after the event, tales of betrayal were told. The most
fa.1ous, reported by Pope Pius in his Com.mentarii, tells of the betrayal
of Bobovac by ' 'Radak Manichee.' ' If the story had not been added
by a
later editor, then apparently it was making the rounds immediately
after
the fall of Bosnia for Pius died the following year. This story about
the
Manichee who had feigned conversion to Chiistianity was incorporated
mto a variety of chronicles and histories, and even today is frequently
found in serious monographs. It has also become part
of the folklore of
 340 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 341

the Bobovac region, where natives tell of the betrayal and show
the letters that discuss plans to oppose the Turks, and which frequently
stone on which the Trlks, evincing an inflexible attitude toward
traitors mention Bosnia, only two show any concern about the loyalty of the
of any sort, beheaded Radak. present local tradition may of course
be Bosnian populace in the event of a Turkish attack. Of these two,
based on subsequent,school learning derived from a uuri.ty
of seven- TornaleviC's reference to the success of Turkish propaganda among the
teenth-and eighteenth-century accounts; this is quite likeiy ,inl.
no peasantry and Barbucci's letter of 1456, only Barbucci's suggests
other source' written or oral, mentions anythini else about Radak.
religious issues might be a factor in Bosnian loyalty. Not one letter from
any of the foreign sqcular courts * and I am excluding the papacy here
Moreover, Dursum-beg and Konstantin Mitrailovid, who describe
the
conquest and clearly were more closely in touch with these events .- even refers to religious differences, heresy, or persecution in these
than
the papal court, speak of Bobovac falling only after heavy fighdng.(l4l;
years. When the Turkish attack was over, many letters were written by
Another passing remark about L463 which provia", .iut".ilt'of these same parties and in only one of their letters
similar nature to the Radak story is a statement by a bishop, Nicholas" Matyas which does not mention religious matters
- thewas
one by King
a betrayal
Modrussienses (Modruxa), that Turkish aid was being, solicited
in
-
spoken of ; no letter mentions heretics or Bosnians siding with Turks
Bosnia by forcibly baptized Manichee heresiarchs.(1 50) tirkovic
uses against Catholics. The only suggestions of disloyalty beside Matyas'
this source in his history; however, since elsewhere in the document letter are the two stories of questionable reliability noted previously
Bosnia is referred to as lllyricum, a name not used, to the best
of my the one of the ModruYa Bishop and the other about Radak.
-
knowledge, for Bosnia in the Middle Ages but revived as a descriptive Although I have expressed doubt about the reliability of these two
term for Bosnia by Dalmatians at the very end of the fifteenth century, stories about "Manichees" aiding the Turks, I think it quite possible
I
have doubts as to whether this document really dates from that there were cases of members of the Bosnian Church cooperating
the 1460,s.
In fact it might be a distorted version of the iadak story. However, with the ottomans. This would have been a natural reaction for peopre
if
reliable, it suggests that somewhere in Bosnia certain 'patarin who had been persecuted by Catholics. However, the lack
clerics of notice
were favorable to the Turks and were stirring up unrest against given to them as a factor both before and after the conquest suggests that
the now
Catholic state. such Patarin cooperation with the Turks had not been on a large scale
A third reference to betrayal, though it does not mention religious and had not been significant enough to have had any real effect on the
issues, is found in a letter written 27 Jantary 1464, by King Maty'as of outcome of the struggle.
Hungary to Pope Pius II. Matyas states that the Moslem"s had The almost total absence of mention of the religious issue as a factor
been
invited to Bosnia by certain traitors; having noted the ease in plans for opposing the Turks or as a factor in the conquest, then,
and sfeed
with which the Turks conquered Bosnia, the Hungarian king suggests that the religious issue had not been a very important one in
,,r,"r'rhu,
the traitors suffered as. much as those they betiayed.(lri) f"ro;"ri; 1463. A few years earlier the king had told the Bosnian Church clergy
finds Matyas' remarks.hard to believe and suggests that to accept Catholicism or leave; a majority accepted the new faith and a
the Hu.rgr.irn
king was trying to justify his own inactivity. uuuing noted handful went to Hercegovina. Apparently the populace, indifferent
that uZ.io.r,
scholars have believed that patarins or foiced .on*rt, to about the issue, went on living as they had previously, with no great
catholicism
had called in the Turks, perojevi6 stresses that there is no proof indignation against the king or Catholics for exiling a handful of monks.
oi,r,t.
The chief nobleman supporting the patarins was Herceg St"fan,
*ho
opposed the Turks; thus, evidently, there was no Bosnian
Church
policy to assist the Turks.(l52) If there were cases of betrayar, XX: Tbe Position of the Bosnian Churcb in
then
most likely they were by individual choice and probably more'oftet the Last Yearsbf tbe Kingdom
than not for non-religious motives.
one of the most interesting things about the sources concerning the Within a ye^r after the Turkish conquest the Catholics asked the
first half of the 1460's is what is notfowdin them. Here sultan for permission to practice their religion in the new state; they
was Born"ia, u
nation supposedly rent with religious differences and presumably received a charter from him granting them this privilege.(153)
The
considerable anger at the king for the policy of persecution Bosnian Church apparently never did this, scholars huu.
that he had *o.ri".ej why.
initiated. Yet, in all of the papal, Venetian, Ragusan, and Hungarian The answer, I think, is not hard to find. The Bosnian Church, con-
342 Medieval Bosnian Church
sisting of only a lirnited number of clerics (possibly a little over 2,000
prior to 1459) who lived in monastic communities, never seems to have
provided an effective ministry for the people. The only clerics in Bosnia
proper from the schism in the mid-thirteenth century until the arrival of
the Franciscans in the 1340's, the Patarins presumably then had had
the token support of many peasants. But even in this period it is doubtful
that the Bosnian Church succeeded in making itself the center o{
religious life for the peasantry. By the second quarter of the fifteenth
century, the Franciscans had probably won over the token adherence of
many of these peasants. And the remaining Bosnian Church peasants
could hardly have been expected to have taken up arms to defend their
clerics from persecution. By 1459-60 most of the nobility seems to have
been won over to Catholicism except for Herceg Stefan in Hercegovina,
the Pavlovidi and possibly the DinjiEiii; and the last two were greatly
weakened by Turkish occupation of the bulk of their lands. Thus in
14J9-60 the Bosnian Church stood alone without mass popular support
and without the backing of nobility within Bosnia strong enough to
oppose the king.(l)4) So, when the king gave the Patarin clerics a
choice of becoming Catholics or going into exile, he basically destroyed
the church in Bosnia. The fact that the king was able to present the
Patarins with such a choice
- as well as the fact isthat
reaction against the king as a result of his action
we hear of no
evidence that the
-
Bosnian Church organiz.ation in 1419 was weak and lacked support.
That a far larger number of Patarins faced with the choice accepted
baptism, rather than resist or go into exile, shows that even within the
church itself loyalty and interest were lacking.(l15) The few clerics
(only forty of them) who felt strongly about their faith went to Her-
cegovina. This presumably eliminated the hierarchy, at least from the
main centers of Bosnia, as well as the most important monasteries.
When the monks left or accepted Catholicism, the king undoubtedly
closed their monasteries and confiscated their lands. And these con-
fiscations have been noted in Turkish defters. In the period after L46I
we shall find Patarin monasteries within Bosnia in connection with only
two places, both of which are away from the centers of the state -*
Uskoplje (from 7463 subject to the herceg) and possibly Seonica (near
the Flercegovinian border). In addition, it is likely that some of the
"kristian" lands referred to in the Turkish defters (compiled after the
conquest) remained in krstjanin hands after 1460. Some of these lands,
however, may have belonged to lay followers of the church rather than
to clerics. And for much of the defter material published up to now, it is
impossible to determine whether krstjani (be they monks or laymen) still
were connected with the lands in question or whether they were simply
Bosnia ftrom 1443 to 1463 343
figures from the past whose previous connections with the lands had
supplied place names. We can suggest that quite possibly the community
on the Drina at Zgunje, where the obelisk of Krstjanin Ostofa and the
stroinik's stone (discussed in Chapter V) still stand, being beyond the
borders actually controlled by the king, continued to exist. The obelisk-
it perfectly
shape of Ostoja's stone suggests its late date
- though could
well have dated from the 14J0's. We may even postulate that the
"stroinik" had not originally lived so far from the center of the state,
but had fled thither after the king initiated persecutions.
Thus besides the one (or possibly two) known hi/as existing in Bosnia
after 1460, it is probable that certain other krst jani communities noted
in the defters continued to exist. It is to be hoped that the publication of
the defters themselves will allow scholars to decide when at least some of
the krstjani linked to pieces of land were connected with those lands. We
suspect such surviving communities would have been in remote regions
farther away from Jajce and the center of the state.
Such scattered communities, probably lacking contacts with each
other, could hardly have provided any sort ofleadership or have rebuilt
the church, especially since none of the Bosnian nobles apparently had
risen to its defense. Thus, when the Turks assumed power, the Bosnian
Church had no leadership to petition for a charter. Once the Ottoman
administration took over, the Bosnian peasants were faced with
problems concerned with their existence in this world under the new
order. Cleady, this was no environment in which to revive a shattered
church, which even in its heyday had had little more than indifferent
acceptance by the peasants.
In many respects my description of the Bosnian Church resembles
that of fra L. P(etrovi6), who argued that the krstjani were Slavic-liturgy
Benedictine monks in schism with Rome.(156) And if we visualize the
krstjani as a monastic order with a few monks in monasteries, it is easy
to understand how their expulsion in 1459-60 would have eliminated
- and the church from Bosnia. It was like the situation in a
the order
country whose only Catholic-priests are Jesuits; the expulsion of Jesuits
in effect means the end of Catholicism there. Hence when the monks
were expelled from Bosnia, the order was eliminated and with it went
the "church" and whatever specific beliefs it might have had. The
people who had been administered to by these monks were left without
priests, and thus either had to remain priestless, accept Catholic or
Orthodox priests, or accept Islam.
We last hear of the Patarins in central Bosnia on May 4, 1465, when
some of them or not we do not know
- ordained
Franciscan monastery - attackedThe
of Visoko and killed five friars.(157)
the
344 Medieval Bosnian Church
Franciscan obituary notice refers to the slayers as Patarins and not
Manichees. It is ironic that the Patarins pass from the Bosnian scene on
such a violent note, for throughout their history in that land and
throughout the persecution that they underwent on occasions, not once
p.io. it this do we hear of them attacking a monastery or murdering any
'Catholics.
It is also odd that (excluding the defter material which cannot
yet be dated) after this notice, and references to a hiia in Uskoplie -
most probably in the Bosnian YupalJskoplie which was granted to the
herceg in t463 between 1466 and 1470, the Patarins are heard of no
-
*or"ln B.snia. Shortly thereafter we begin to hear of quarrels between
catholics and orthodox in Bosnia, which were to become a common
feature of Bosnian religious life in the Turkish period. The rapid
disappearance of the Patarins would seem to confirm the weakness of
theii church and the lack of popular support for it at the time of the
Turkish conquest. That they disappeared and that the orthodox ap-
peared in such a short period of time is one of the maior arguments
aduunced by those who speculate that the Patarins had been more or less
orthodox all along. I disagree, although I can see why the orthodox
clerics succeeded in their proselytizing in Bosnia: Like the Patarins, the
orthodox had a vernacular liturgy; second, the Turks preferred them to
the catholics; third, the orthodox had not seriously persecuted the
Patarins earlier; fourth, the Orthodox were linked with the Serbs
(fellow Slavs) and not with the hated Hungarians'
The f{ungarians were cleady unpopular with large segments of the
Bosnian populace. Shortly after the kingdom fell, some Bosnian nobles
unnamed) offered
lappare.,ily from the lesser nobility since they were
ih"'kingdo- to Venice. If Venice would not aid Bosnia, then these
nobles preferred to remain under the Turks, but under flo circumstances
did they want to be under the Hungarians.(158)
Aftei the Turks completed their rapid conquest of Bosnia and
Hercegovina, they garrisoned the maior fortresses and then withdrew
the bulk of their armies. This allowed for a partial recovery of some of
the lost territory. The herceg, who seems to have withdrawn to the
coast with most of his troops to avoid the Turkish armies, now marched
back into Hercegovina and quite rapidly recovered most of his fortresses
that the Turks had conquered. Thus Hercegovina was restofed as a state
and was to remain independent until 1481. During these final twenty
yeafs, the Turks constantly attacked it and usually seized territorv_. In
i..t, th. Turks recovered most of Hercegovina in the mid 14(10's. Gost
Radin remained at the herceg's side. Thus the Bosnian Church, though
more or less extinct in Bos-nia, was able to cling onto life for a little
for
longer in Hercegovina. Its days were clearly numbered, however'
Bosnia kom 1443 to 1463 345
flercegovina was
primarily an Orthodox region, and the Patarins had
support here than they had had in Bosnia'
.u.n l"rt popular
XXI: Mention of Religion in tbe
Hungaian Banate
of Jajce
While the herceg was restoring his state, Hungarian armies stormed
in from the north and recovered a large part of northern Bosnia (in-
cluding Srebrnik in Usora, Doboj, Jajce, and KljuU on the Sana). This
northern territory was incorporated into a Bosnian banate under
Hungarian tutelage. Herceg Stefan and his son Vladislav had sent ar-
mies to help the Hungarians recover Jajce. The Hungarians also
recovered the regions of Zavr\ie and part of the Krajina which included
most of the land between the west bank of the Neretva and the Adriatic
coast.
In December 1461 the herceg and his son visited Matyas (probably at
Jaice), and Matyas issued them a charter granting them the
"zu'pa of
Rama, with Prozor, the "zupaor Uskoplie on the Vrbas, Livno, and the
town of Vesela str{za.(159) Thus the herceg was able briefly to add
considerable territory to his holdings.
Gost Radin's will, drawn up in i4(r(r, left, among other things, a fur
robe he received from King Matyas.(160) It seems probable that Matyas
had given the robe to Radin on this occasion. Thus we may suggest that
Gost Radin had accompanied the herceg to this important meeting with
the Hungarian king. That the herceg received this extensive territorial
grant and the gost this gift indicate that Matyas, the zealous defender of
the Catholic faith, did not find Radin's piesence offensive. It is hard to
believe that Matyas did not know who and what Radin was; thus we
may conclude that he did not consider Radin a heretic.
The following year the Turks returned and laid siege to Jaice, but the
Hungarians were able to hold out. This Hungarian Banate of Bosnia,
though constantly losing territory to the Turks, was able to survive
until 1 127.
Now that Catholic Hungary had occupied this Bosnian territory we
might expect to find reference to persecution of heretics or schismatics,
or action to convert the populace to Catholicism. However, one looks in
vain through the letters about the banate by King Matyas Corvinus, and
through letters between him and his governors in the banate, for
reference to any of these matters.
The lack of Hungarian concern about the religious issue confirms my
belief that the Bosnian Church in 1461 was no longer an institution of
)46 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 1443 to 1463 347

significance in Bosnia. This absence of interest also confirms rny nf he Byzantine State, New Brunswick, 1969 and many other scholars have not
contention that the Bosnian Church was not dualist. For were there ilen convinced by Halecki's arSuments. I do not wantto enter the controversy
,nd haue stuck to the traditional view.
dualists around
- even if their numbers
were small
- we would expect 7. AB, P.183.
the Catholic Church in characteristic fashion to have carried out a maior
8. AB, P' 184.
campaign to reduce them to Catholicism. In fact, the one piece of in- g. AB, P. 187.
formation from Hungarian sources that does exist, instead of depicting 10. Thginer, MSM,l, P. 388; AB,p.l98.
the Bosnians as dualists, presents them as orthodox in rite. I t. S. Cirkovii, Herceg Stefan . . ., p.90.
Peter Ranzanus, who describes the Hungarian conquest of northern 12. Theiner, MSM,l, p. 396; AB, p. 202.
Bosnia in 1463, gives no hint of any heresy among the people. He states lJ. Theiner, MH,ll, p. 264.
14. Europa Pii Pontificis Maximi nosfiolum temporam aarias continens
that the inhabitants of Bosnia worshipped Christ according to the rite of
historias, P. xxiii'
the Eastern Church.(161) Clearly, Ranzanus was describing Bosnia and 15. Resti, P. 188.
not Hercegovina. It is also obvious that the majority of people about 16. The Dragiiii of the 1446 charter (Pavle, Marko, and Iuri sons of lvani!)
whom he had information were not Catholics. And since there is no should not be confused with.stjepan, Radosav, and Ostoia Dragili6 KosaEe. On
evidence of any C)rthodox penetration this early into the area that was thelattersee,Li.Stoianovi6, Staresrpshepouelieipisfia,l,2,Pp.94,96,97.
However, we do have confirmation on the existence of our 1446 charter
made into the Hungarian Banate of Bosnia, it seems that Ranzanus Dragili6; I in l4(rl Knez Marko DragiSiC with brothers witnessed a royal charter
must have been speaking of the Bosnian Church. Thus this testimony lSrojanovii, ol, cit.,l, 2' p' 164).
from the final year of the kingdom re-enforces my view that the Bosnian 17. Miklosich , pp. 438-4O.
Church had been a Slavic liturgy church , relatively orthodox in theology , vit, Stari srps ki zapisi i natpisi, SKA, Beograd, l, 1902, p. 47 .
l 8. Lj. Stojano
19. See Chapter IV.
that was derived from the Catholic organization in the thirteenth 20. V. Vrana "KniiYevna nastojanja u sredovjelnol Bosni," in Poaiest B i
century. A Hungarian finding Slavs using a Slavic liturgy would H, Sarajevo, 1942, p.814.
naturally have identified their faith with the Eastern Church. 21. On Gomiliani-pravica see, Radimsky's Topogralija: ArbeotoYki lehsihon
Ranzanus also shows that the Bosnian Church had not died out (arranged alphabetically). This work exists in manuscript only and is to be found
completely in Bosnia. Perhaps a few Patarin priests still existed in this only at the Zavodza zaYtitu spomenika kulture in Saraievo.
22. Dini(. p. 204. No. 59.
region, more distant from the centers of the old state and thus more 23. G. dremo(nik, "Ostaci arhiva bosanske franjev#ke vikariie," Radoui
immune from persecution. If so, their days were obviously numbered; NDBH, III, Saraievo, 1955, p. 38.
their hierarchy was in exile, and after the establishment of the 24. Jorga ll, p. 420"
Hungarian banate they would have found themselves under hostile 2t. M. Vego, ' 'Patarenstvo u Hercegovini u svjetlu arheoloYskih
foreign rule. spomenika," GZMS (arh), n.s. 18, 1963, p. 207.
26. Jorga ll, p. 420. Radivoj is called Count of Vranduk. Thus it seems
pobable that he had been granted lands in this region after he had made peace
FOOTNOTES TO CHAPTER VI with his brother the king.
l. See above, Chapter III, note 9. 27. Theiner, MH,ll, p. 230 ; AB, p. 203.
28. AB, p. 208.
,2. The narrative ponions of this chapter unless otherwise noted follow 29. Cited from the Dubrovnik archive by M. DiniC, Za istoriia rudarstua . . .,
Cirkovi6's Istoija. . ., and his monograph lterceg Stelan . . . Any matter that is
disputed or controversial will receive a special footnote; otherwise the reader I dm, Beosrad, l9rr, p. 38. Also amidst the ruins of the Pavlovii court at
BoraE is a location calied "Ci%" which Mazali( believes is derived from
may assume that an event or fact mentioned is generally accepted in the
historical literature. Matters related to religious questions will in all cases be
"chiesa"; he suggests that once a church had stood on that spot. Since an
Italian word is used, we may assume that the church, if in fact there had been
docume,nted.
one, had been Catholic. quite possibly it was built during Ivanit' Catholic
3. Resti, p. 290.
period and our priest had served in it" On the location and the word derivation
4. Jorga ll, p. 399. Stefan Vqktif had also Sent a Franciscan as an envoy to see, Df . MazaliC, "KradiYlanci i rasprave, " GZMS,n.s. IV-V, 1910, pp.223'
Genoa in'thecourse of 144) (S.iirkouid, Herceg Stefan . . .,p.74).
24.
). L. Thalloczy, Studien zur Gescbicbte Bosniens., ., pp. 3r7 -J8.
(r. Fairly rec'ently O. Halecki, Tbe Crusade of Varna, New York, 1941, has 30. Jorga, ll, p.426, note l.
advanced the view that the ten-year peace had never been ratified and thus the
31. Jorga, Il, p.420.
crusaders should not be accused of breaking the treaty. G. Ostrogorsky, History
12. AB, p. 205
 348 Medieval Bosnian Church
33. AB, p.2A5.
34. AB, pp. 204-O5, Nos. 863-866; Theiner, MH,lt, pp. 233-34. M.
Yego, Naselja bosanske., .,p. 136, suggeststhat "Verlau" refers to Vrili near
"Kupres," GZMS,n.s. VIil, 19J3, p. 340, agrees.
Kupres. Dj. Basler,
35. Dinid p. 198, Nts. 46-47.
36. Theiner, MH,ll, p. D7. Shortly prbr to this letter of Nicholas is
letter attributed to Eugene IV dated November 144J which refers to Manichees
in Bosnia and gives details similar to those of the late fourteenth-century Italian
inquisition tracts. I am convinced that this letter published by Farlati ( 15, Vol. 4,
pp.256-)7) just before he gives an account of the bogus Council of Konjic, is a
forgery. See the discussion about this letter in ChapterII.
37. Theiner , MH,lI, p. 264.
38. AB, p. 207.
39. Raynaldi, AE, 1449, No.9.
40. Theiner, MH, lI, p. 25).
41. Wadding XII, original pagination pp. 111-112.
1r2. Theiner, MH, II, p. 267 .
43 " A B, p. 208 ; Raynaldi also cites this letter (1449 No. 9).
44. Th.einer, MH, ll, p. 264.
41. S. cirkovii has pointed out that this title passed through these two stages;
seehis Herceg Stefan.. ., pp.l06-08.
46. L. Thalloczy , Studien zur Gescbicble Bosniens . . ,, p. 36j,.
47. Digi(, p.229, no.27.
48. S. CirkoviC, Herceg Stefan . . .,pp. l14, 129(note 4g).
49. Dini(. p. 229, no. 28.
50. Cited from the Dubrovnik archive by p. Andjeli/, ,.Srednjevjekovni
gradovi u Nerervi," GZMS, n.s. XIII (arh.), l9Ig, p. 1g0.
51. See Chapter V.
See S. RadojciC, "Reljefi bosanskih i hercegovaEkih stedaka," Letapis
-,12.
Matice srpske (Novi Sad), Jan. 1961, knj. 387, No. 1, pp. 1-15. Besides giving
much interesting material on the cultural and artistic level of the courts of the
nobility (Ragusan artists hired by Sandali, and a goldsmith from Bruges in
Belg.ium by Herceg stefan), RadoiEi6's article is one of the most stimulatin'g and
solid about the meaning of ste/cimotifs. on actors and musicians. see th"e in-
teresting article of A. Babii, "Fragment iz kulturnog Yivota srednioviekovne
Bosne.) Radoui(Filozofski fakultet u Sarajevu), Il, 1964,pp" 325-336.
5J. Cirkovi6. Istorija . . ., p. 312. ,
)4. Cited from the Dubrovnii archive by Cirkovil, Herceg$refan . . ., p. I3I.
For a full discussion of these events the reader is referred to Cirkovii's excellent
account in Chapter VI of his work.
tt. Ibid., p. 131.
56. J. Gelcich and Thalloczy, Diplomatariilffi ., p. 483 and J. Radonii,
Acta et diplomata Ragusina, Beograd, 1934, p. j23. Radonii has rendered
"manieri" as ''manicei.'' Though his rendering may well be what the Ragusan
author intended to write, the form "manieri" is what he did write. ihave
checked the original document.
17. Dinii, p. 201. No. )3.
58. Dinid. p. )02, No. 14.
19. Lettere e Commissioni di Levante (1449 l4j3) Fol. 164, 2) May 1,461 .
"Patarinos et manicheos." In all other cases my citations to documents in the
Bosnia fuom 1443 to 1463 349
Dubrovnik archive have been to works in which the material has been published
for that is more useful for reference. This one reference, however, I have not
seen cited anywhere else.
.60. The best account of the herceg's war with Dubrovnik is to be found in S.
iirkouicl Herceg Stefan .. ., Chapters seven and eight.
a 61. Dinid, p. 203, No. 5J.
62. Dinid, p. 203, No. J7.
63. DiniC, pp. 203'04, No. 58.
64. DiniC, p.204, No. 59. The content of this message is also given in G.
Gondola (Gunduli6) Cronicbe . . ,,p.321. This chronicle has a detailed account
of the whole war and the concomitant diplomatic activity.
65. Some merchants, knowing that theherceg's elest son Vladislav sought a
bride, brought a girl of low-reputation but o{ great beauty from Siena to the
herceg's court. They claimed she was of noble birth, and hoped to be richly
rewarded. Vladislav liked her but the herceg immediately made her his mistress.
Angry words were exchanged between father and son; Vladislav was imprisoned
for a few days until some nobles freed him , a{ter which he and his mother, iealous
over the Siegese beauty, left the couft and joined Dubrovnik in war against the
herceg (S. Cirkovii, "Vesti Brolla da Lavelo kao izvor za istoriiu Bosne i
Dubrovnika," Istorijski tasapis, XII-XII, 1961 , pp. 169-70). In addition to
rbe contemporary Italian account summarized above and recently discovered by
CirkoviC a variety of early chronicles discuss the girl, and she is also mentioned
in various contemporary documents. A 1451 Ragusan protocol, sending
greetings to the herceg's court, includes a "Domina Helisabeta" who most
probably is our girl. We might note here that the Sienese concubine was to
remain at the herceg's cguft even after peace was concluded between the herceg
and his wife in 1413. CirkoviCfound mention of her in a Ragusan document
from December 1453 (Herceg Stefan , . ,, p' 163, note 78)' For additional
material on the gkl and the family quarrels she stirred up, see J' Radonid,
"Herceg Stipan Vuk[i6 KosaEa i porodica mu u istoriii inarodnoi tradiciii," in
Zborni! u slauu Vatrostaua Jagiia,Berlin, 1908, pp. 406 14.
66. C. Truhelka, "Testament gosta Radina pitanju, "
GZMS, XXIII, 1911, p. 362.
- prinos patarenskom
67. Miklosich, pp. 447 50.
(r8. Theiner, MH, ll, p. 26).
69. J. Gelcich, and Thalloczy, Diplomatarium , . .,p. 121.
70. I. Voie, "Sitni prilozi za istoriju srednioviekovne Bosne," GID, XV\
19(11, Sarajevo, 1967 , p, 281.
7l. Ibid.. pp. 281-82.
72. Dini(, p. 199, No. 48.
73. Dini(, pp. 20) 06, No. 60.
7t+. Dini(, pp. 206-07, No. (r1.
7). Theiner , MH,Il, p. 264.
76. AB, p. 218.
77. Miklosich , pp.457 -60; Stojanovii, l, 2, pp.66 69.
78. Miklosich, pp. 460-63; Stoianovid, 1, 2, pp. 69 72.
79. For example this view can be found expressed in A. Soloviev, "Nestanak
bogomilstva i islamizacija Bosne, " GID, I', 1949, p. 47 , and in A. Babid,
Bosanski heretici, Sarajevo, 1963, p. 116.
80. For example this belief can be found in F. Ratki' Bogomili i patareni, p.
t22. D. Mandii, Bogomilska crkoa, pp. 216-18.
350 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia from 7443 to 1463 3tr

81. On negotiations see Dinii, pp. 208-10 ; Gondola, Croniche, . ., pp. 333- ,n: V Skari6. "Kudugeri," Prilozi,Vl, 1926, pp' 107-110'
/t6. Forthe text of the treaty see Miklosich, pp. 465-69 - iXo' ri"*.u".. if the-"Bosnian bishop" were Gennadius' source of in-
82. For these inquisition charges, see document given as Appendix A for this
chapter, article numbers 14, 11, 44.
8J. Pavle Radenovil, most probably also a supporter of the Bosnian Church,
also refers to God's only son in an invocation to the Trinity in a charter he
issucd in 1J97. See Miklosich, p. 229. f,l#n;friix'ir,:x:,-,r,':,:::YnY,s#!#:;{t:i,!;
i'j#;il urine ttt" t.r. from a ms. of the fourteenth century. For dating of
8rt. Dini(, p. 209, No. 61+. ,,1"11"
81. C. Truhelka, op. cit., p. )62; and A. Solovjev, "Gost Radin i niegov v"r. r. o] xvt. The term is used again in Vol. ll, p. 472, and a second
testament." Pregled, ll, 1947, pp- 310-318. H";;;t;;c it'i, giu-.tt; this time it is ta[en from a fifteenth-centurv ms' For
8(r. Dinii. p. 209, No. 64.
87. Dinii, p. 2ll, No. 70.
l;iit
:lllt"n.iiiol :l rt"t;,i"f-"' razvo j sara jeva, " Ralo ui (N DBH), x',
88. Dinii, p. 2ll, No. 72. 1960, P' 107'
89. Dinid, p. 212, No. 73. tll. AB, PP. 224-26.
90. Miklosich, pp. 472'13. 12. AB, P.22J.
il. riyirrri time it is possible that o-rthodo-x were settled tt f":*:",.t: YI:
91. Dinii, pp. 231-33, Nos. 34-42.
92. Dini(, p. 233, No. 43. b";; ii*; is t traditio" that Angelo Zvilezdo't.ii' a prom inent c^hg.l:.tl"i'
93. Miklosich, pp. 169'72. i,i ir,. r".ona half of the filteenth century, had l"* l9t: iltgr'n.'tt.l_o13l
91t.The organization of each Western Cathar church was headed by a bishop, f-tl: IV;b"*. ft"';;;-t;in in ,t. rbo'0. il;
':;:;';';', o ioioni ia
M. Batinid, FranieaaZki
beneath whom was a filius maior (usually rendered into English as elder son) and xtv xX,Tasreb, r9r3' p' 129' This tradition
'toti"lo to win over
a filius minor (usually rendered into English as younger son). When the bishop ,iro'iiiu*rrr"r the attempts - here successful
- of Catholics
died, the elder son became bishop and the younger son became elder son. Orthodox believers.
"'ii;.]; the earlier medieval period we even noted signs 91. cooperation b€t-
Specific cases of this system in practice can tre found in the tracts published by A.
the Orthod.x
Dondaine in " La Hierarchie Cathare en ltalie,' ' Archiaum Fratrum *."" if,. Orthodox and Cathofics. For example in the 1290'spope to send him
Praedicatorum, XIX, 1949, pp. 280-312, and XX, 1950, pp. 234-324. The .fet and Usora, Stefan Dragutin, requested the
best work on the Cathar church and its organization is A. Borst, Die Katbarer,
"inn.:".
Franciscans.
Stuttgart, l953. lD. AB,p' 240; Theiner, MH,ll,P'33O' .--
91. Thaltoczy, Studien zur Gesclticltte Bosniens . . .,p. 401. iia: Prd legates visited the hercig ,rr--Il)7., 14J8 and 1462 to discuss
96. lhid., pp. 175-76. pr"t..,t ot, ..uiua" against the Turks (iee S' Cirkovii, Herceg Stefan ' ' '' pp'
'Zii, Ufr1. Such embaisies clearly show that the pope considered the herceg
part
97. S. e irkoviy' , Herceg St p. 218.
e/an . . .,
9S. Liqbii, Listine, X, pp. 75-76. of the Christian world'
99. S. Cirkovit'. HercegStefan . .,p.2o9. I 17. 6irkovic', Istoriia , , , , P. 381.
1 00. Di. Mazalii, "Hercegova crkva kod Goraida i okolne starine, " GZMS, 18. Thalloczy, Stui"n zur iescbichre Bosniens ' ' ',pp' 415 l^6'
LIl. 1940, pp. 27'43.. 19. Wadding, XII, original-pagination pp' I I l-11 2; AB'p'208'
rn p r-^.i.,-r: 'Della
lK^r""lii/iMercatura et
Dolln Mercaty! el del
del.Mercante
Mercan perfetto,
lnl. 7,. Kaimakovii, Zidno slikarsrao u Bosni i Hercegouini, Sarajevo, 120. B. Cotiugli tf<",i"fiiii.
1971, pp. )(r-)7. Much of the description Igive here, however,-comes from my Brescia, l(r02. On ttris *ork s"" M. Vuji( "Prvo naudno delo o trgovini
visit to S{epan pol je and environs with Professors KajmakoviJ and Palavestra. DubrovEanina Benko Kotrulit&," Gtas (SKA), 80, -1909' pp' 21-123' Ov
102. Further evidence of Patarin activity in the vicinity of Soko also suggests merchant author is frequently also called Kotruljevlc'
121. Further evidence of ho.stility being felt by Ragusans toward the
Bosnian
the church might have been Patarin. On this activity see the discussion in
Church (Patarins) is provided by a couri.case of ) February 1457 in which.
a
Chaptcr V and especially note 192. In addition on the Pivska Mountain, a seven
Ragusan woman ,u", u relative for insulting her; he had called her a
whore and a
hour walk {rom the church, is village Pilte at which the treaty between the
herceg and his family, and guaranteed by the Bosnian Church, was signed. "wet-nurse of Patarins" 6;t;; J. iurtiinitj' cited bv K' JireEek' Istoiia
l0l. 9.t1 communication from Z. Kaimakovi{. Srba, ll, p. 278, note 129.
104. L. Kovai.evi6, (ed.) "Odgovor carigradskog patriarha Genadiia na 122. Pius, Europa, xxtii.
pitan ja sinajskih kaludjera, " Glasnik Srpskoga utenogo druitua, LXIII. 188t, 123. Theiner, MH,ll, PP' 37t+-75.
pp. t2 13. 124. Orbini, p. )70.
101. L. Chalkokondyles, Bonn ed., 1843, p.249. t2t. AIl, p. 238.
10(;. A. Soloviev, "Fundajajiti, paterini, ikudugeri u viz.antiskim iz-- t26. AB, p.243.
vorima," ZRVI (Beograd), I, 19t2, pp. 130-33. 127. AB, p. 244. /
128. For the amusing adventures of these relics, see C' Truhelka' Kralieuski
352 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia frorr' 1443 to 1463 353

grad Ja.ice, pouijest i znamenosti, Saraievo, 1904, pp.5)-56.

129. AB, p. 242. Previously we noted Radivoi. as lord of Vranduk (see above p'*"i*:"iffi::$;1xT11xJff 'ilfi:1#'1"xil':il#';liff T:i:
note 2(r) and suggested that he had been granted this territory as his own p..-
rcnal holding by the king. [ii:H*"il".'"',*"im::l:i,.Xfi :f ,1,'#;;;ifi ',ff :"|1i'f#:'il,1il:
to use the
1 30. D. fr,f andii, HercigouaZki spomenici fraflieadtkog.reda iz turskoga d6ga, :|ff:.::ru;.il"1,. iiirii, should be the ca'se, we have even less cause
Mcrstar, 19)4, pp.7-21. Of course 1481 was the date of the conquest of the lasi
parts of Hercegovina. Most of Hercegovina fell to the Turks in the earlier part of
;:[l t ;l;.,";. 1'y'f':lj ;1, *:l':i,.u,, thos e t h at cre ar rv do
T' i.r',i xH
1461 8t. tt *til as those that could have relevance'
for Bosnia'
I 3 I . One co uld connect the initiation of persecution with the king 's deiire to
"":;;;;;;lfince
""iii. iittoui(, Istoriia ' ' ' p' 323'
prove his Catholicism to the pope and papal allies in the face of Hungarian iaL.pi"t, Commentaii (l)84, ed'),pp'Xl'476'77 p.' )-47'
slander about Bosnia's disloyalty to Christendom after the fall of Smederevo to ili i. nt;t i, Bosornili i patareni, '

the Turks in 1459. We know that in 14)9 the king sent an embassy to justify ia8. fh"in"t. MH,ll, p' 37 l' , ,..,-^ r^..-r .:*. ^{ {.fire
himself to rhe pope. Perhaps, he initiated persecutions to strengthen the case of r /o Prof. Andielic, *ho fi""*t"uated the
Bobovac ruins' found signs of
;;;iare had occurred (cited by I. Bojanovski, "Stari
his envoy, or perhaps the envoy returned with a papal order to persecute thq _n1:; #;;;;;;;h., VIlt, p' 88)' Bojanovski'
Patarins, which the king, in his present difficulties and needing Western aid, felt orad Bobovac r n,egova *ont"tut.i;t," Naie starine'
the?ccounts of fighting and the Radak
unable any longer to resist. f,:'JJ;, ;;i"f.',oltut (ibid., p. 87)'that
t*tiu'iu"; Radak could well have betrayed the
I 32. !ius, Commentarii,(Ed. lt84) Y, p. 227 ; Orbini, p. 369. haraval need not -utu'ily
ll3. Cirkovid. Istorija . . ., p. )20, dating the expulsion l4t9'61; A. Babii, l"*r'rt t some severe fighting had occurr,ed'
IJosanski beretici, Sarajevo, 1963, dating the expulsion 1449'10. '"i'io.-d. il.-tii. "N;;; ui'i" *ptt Niccolo Modrussiense" in opera
M'inori,lV , Studie Testi,LXXIX'
131t. Or possibly a combination of clerics and laics (servants and peasants) 1937
'p'-2I8'
Itl. L. Thalloczy unJ Hotuuth Ciaex Diplomaticus partium Regno
serving at the Bosnian Church monasteries. ' et oppidum Jaicza): Monumenta
131. Thejner, MH,ll. pp.3)8 )9. H;;;;r;; o'irnroru* (Banatus, castrum XL, Budapest' 191)' p' 14' Excluding
r 14. nn. Sun jic?. "Jedan'nou; podatak o gostu Radinu i njegovoj sekti," GID, ;:::;;;;Hlstorica oipro-"i".it, vol'
l" the Bishop of .ModruYa, the onty reference in our
XI, 1960, pp. 261 ;t:8. ;:'rr;;il';ii"i"a ti63
137. N. F;tipoui{ "Osvrt na poloiai bosanskog seliaitva u prvoi deceniii in fr-om the Turks is to the herceg's son
;;;;;;eone seeklng'aid
Matyas was thinking of him: first'
uspostavliania osrnanske vlasti u Bosni," Radoui (Filozofski fakultet u Vladislav. However, it is doubtfuithat
Sarajevu), III, Saraievo, t961 ,p.6(t. This view about the king's motives was Vladislav did not suffer iil tit"tit ftot the Turkish campaigns. of' 146'3; and
alreacly suggested by Orbini who said that Stefan Tomas acted to prove his t*"J, woulcl
r"rLy.s tpottn thus of one who was in his good graces
religinn "or maybe, as many believe, he was motivated by greed" since the
"oitt"".h;l' i"8 helped M atva"
:;;;'h;A' i v rraiti,",
in December ".':,u:t,l'i::: -Yi^5*of
1463 in possession
, .ot',t' ""'iit'
lands of those who left went to the state. (Orbini, p.369). That the king may mnfirmed by Matyas
from tnt futtt (on this confirmation' see below' Section
also have needed to prove his religion, as Orbini sugBests, confirms the ;;;;";;".;"ered
suggestion made above in note 131 to this chapter that the king found himself in xxI).
serious difficulties as a result of Hungarian claims that the Bosnians were 1J,2. Pouiest BH, Saraievo, 1942' p' 170'
disloyal to Christianity and had not tried to defend Smederevo. lls...TurskidokumentioBosniizdrugepolovineXVstolieJa,',Islodsko.
138. Ibid., p. 6(r. For the benefit of those with access to the defters I quote pii) i (pravni f akultet), 2,.i 9 49',pp.' 209 91',
rn ; k, Saraievo
- ^ - of -..
^, Hvar's
zb o

Professor Filipovii's footnote: "Defter 0-76, page 16v, 17v, 26r' 29v, )Or, l)4. This view is .""ii-"J uf nuynaA't rend"iing of Thomas some ot the
that only
30v,32v,35r, 39r, 46r, 47r,48v, 6lv, 82r, lQ7 r-v, 138v, lJJv." The 141r9 letter, see Raynaldi," ii, V'q'),No. 9.,
which states
original defter is in the "Belediye Kiittiphanesi" in Istanbul. The Oriental barons and nobles (noting;;;;;;H;i 3t"rtn and lvanil Pavlovi6) remain
Institute in Sarajevo has a microfilm of it. infected with heresy .t i""t;j il;;t ;;;e called "religiosi"' Thus in 1449'
' only some of the nobility and.the (Patarin)
139. M.1'. Okiq, "Les Kristians (Bogomiles Parfaits) de Bosnie d'apr?s des the papal legate to gorniu {"lrttat
documents Turcs'in6dits, " Sildost-Forschungen, XIX, 1960, p. t28' clergy rem ainea n"."ti.r.Tt-ornu. niHutt certainlv tlss::.:il,ti-tlfit:tt::" "t
weakened and anticipates
*;;;;;;*bly that it would
11r0. Theiner, MH,ll, pp. 36)'64. the Bosnian Church
l1rl. Pius, Commenlarii, Y , p. 227. become even more so in the years that followed'
1 42. D. Kamber, "Kardinal'Ttrquemada i tri bosanska bogomila (1 46 1 )" . 111. This o-f
';;;'
utiu*"t that 40 and not 40'000 fled to
CroatiaSacra,lll,1932,pp.27 93; a.".ond,mrn,rscript in slilhtly abbreviated "rgu-"n,,
Herr'sg $1sf2n' This issue"ias-U""n Attuttta above' I am absolutely
convinced
form had been published pieviously by F' Ralki , "Dva nova priloga za poviiest that Pius did mean 40.
bosanskih patarena," Stirine, XIV, 1882, pp. l-21. See Appendix A, Chapter f lft. ftu f-. P . Kri/ani bosans ke crkue 'saraievo ' 1913
157. J. Jelenii, "Necrologium Bos131 -Argentinae prema
- kodel(su lran'
VI, for the )0 points as extracted by Kniewald.
143. In addition in a renunciation prePared for dualists, one would expect the k;'i,l:tk;i
,J- Czus' Xxvttt' 19t6 p'
' 317 '
ii;. "ffiil;:
ievatkoe samosrana
'- :
" virriJiriull"ni poste 1463," Istoriski ghsnik,
inquisition to make the heretics renounce not only beliefs they were known to s ,, Bosni
354 Medieval Bosnian Church Bosnia fuom 1443 to l46j 355

19t1t, pp. 123 31. , APPENDIX A FOR CHAPTER VI

_
l19. On the herceg's a:sjst^an:e to the.H*ungarians see, S. iirkov;i, Herceg
.Stefan . ., p. 2)8; and V. Stefanovii, ,.Rativanje kralja Matije u'nor;i,,,
Le1o.l1s Matice.srpske, 332, 1932, pp. 1.95-213 , especially'pp. 2Oi-03 .
160. See below, Chapter VII, SCction III.
L. Thalloczy and Horvath , Codex Diplomaticus partium Regno
. -161.
Ilungariae adnexarum (Banatus, castlum er apiidum
Ilungariae Historica Diplomataria, XL, Budapesi, t9iD,'p. i.
Jajczi); lr,lorru-"'n,"
Tbe 50 Points Renounced before Cardinal Torquemada
and Tbeir lrreleuance for the Bosnian Cburch
The fifty points renounced by the three Bosnian noblemen before
Torquemada in 1461 : from Kniewald, "Vierodostoinost. .," pp.
178-8r.
1. There are two Gods, the one supremely good, the other supremely
evil.
2. There are two principles: one spiritual and bodiless, the other
corruptible, with a body or visible. The first is the God of light, the
second of darkness.
3. Certain angels are evil by nature, and cannot help but sin.
4. Lucifer ascended to heaven, fought with God there and brought
down many angels.
J. Souls are demons imprisoned in bodies.
6. Evil angels imprisoned in bodies, by baptism and purification and
repentance may return to heaven.
7. They damn and reject the Old Testament, saying that it originated
with the principle of darkness.
8. They say the Angel appearing to Moses on Mt. Sinai was evil.
9. They do not accept all the New Testament, but only certain parts
ofit. They do not believe that Christ was born of woman and reject
Christ's geneology.
10. They condemn the patriarchs and prophets of the Old Testament.
11. They condemn John the Baptist, saying that there is no devil in
hell worse than he.
12. The tree of knowledge of good and evil was a woman. Adam knew
her, that is, sinned with her and was expelled from paradise.
13. The blessed Mary was not a woman or female creature but an
angel.
14. The Son of God did not assume a real body but a fantastic (i.e.,
apparent) one.
15. Christ did not really suffer, die, descend to hell, or ascend to
heaven. Everything he did was only seemingly done.
16. Their church is that of God.
17. They are the successors of the Apostles; their heresiarch is
Bishop of the Church and successor of Peter.
18. The Roman Church is condemned and excommunicated'
19. All the popes from Peter to Silvester were of their faith; and that
Silvester was the first to apostatize from it.
20. They condemn material churches, saying they are synagogues ol
356 Medieval Bosnian Church
Satan, and that those who worship in them are idolaters.
21. That the use of images in churches is idolatry (i.e., against
worship of images).
22. The sign of the cross is a sign of the devil.
23. They condemn the mas and church singing as being opposed to
Christ's Gospel and doctrine.
24.They ridicule and damn the veneration of holy relics.
2). They ridicule and damn the worship of saints done in church,
saying that only God should be worshipped and adored.
2(r. Their leaders allow the people to adore them, saying they are holy
ancl without sin, and that they have the Holy Spirit within them.
27 . They damn ecclesiastical sacraments.
28. They renounce baptism with water, saying it is John's baptism,
and by itno one can be saved.
29. They maintain Christ's way of baptizing without water, by
placing the Gospel on the chest and with the laying-on of hands.
30. Through their baptism, anybody may have his sins remitted and
become as holy as was St. Peter.
3l. That a boy before the age of discretion cannot be saved.
32. Complete holiness and the power of baptism comes to the baptized
only through the merit of the baptizer.
33. As often as the baptizer sins, the souls of those whom he has
baptized fall,from a state of blessedness in heaven, to hell.
34. As often as the baptizer sins, all those baptized by him must be
remitted by re-baptism.
35. They condemn the sacrament of confirmation.
3(r. They deny the sacrament of the eucharist, saying that the body of
Christ cannot be made into bread, and if it could, we should not eat it.
37. They condemn the sacrament of repentance, they say sins are
remitted by re-baptism.
38. They condemn the sacrament of extreme unction.
39.They condemn the sacrament of ordination (for a priest).
40. Bodily marriage is adultery.
41. All sins are mortal.
42. They deny all authority to the Church, saying no one can be
excommunicated.
43.They condemn the eating of meat, saying that whoever eats meat,
cheese or milk cannot be saved unless re-baptized.
4/1. They deny resurrection, saying that no body that dies now will
ever be resurrected; it is the spirit that will be resurrected.
Bosnia trom 1443 to 1463 317
45. They deny purgatory, saying there is no middle road between
heaven and hell'
46, They condemn church prayers for the deceased'
47. It is a mortal sin to kill animals, birds, or to break eggs'
48. They condemn capital punishment by secular powers'
49. They condemn all oath-taking.
50. They prohibit all acts of charity and mercy'
All these points could well concern western cathars, which makes it
Cathars.
possible thai they were drawn from inquisition records about
The following of the 50 points are contradicted in Bosnian sources:
(The documents most frequently cited are the herceg's treaty in 1453
guaranteed by the djed and 12 stroiniks (Chapter VI, Section IX), Gost
iadin's will of 1466 (Chapter VII, Section III), and the Gospel
manuscript of Krstianin Hval from 1404 (Chapter V, Section II)'
1,2) There are two Gods or two principles: Radin's will and the
herceg's 1453 treaty both refer to omnipotent God.
Z, a, f O; They damn the Old Testament, Moses' Law, the Prophets
and the Patriarchs: Hval's Gospel contains the Ten commandments,
the Psalms and Songs. We also find a favorable reference to the Patriarch
Abraham on the gravestone inscription of Gost Millien (Chapter V,
Section XI).
9, 13) They do not accept all the New Testament, they do not believe
Christ was born of woman; Mary was an angel: Hval's Gospel
manuscript contains the complete New Testament. Herceg Stefan in
14i3, swears before Mary, Mother of God"
1l) They condemn John the Baptist: Hval's Gospel has a com-
plimentary picture of John.
20) They condemn material churches: We have presented a number
of reasons to suggest that the Bosnian church did have churches. Here
we shall simply note that in I472 money had been taken, according to
wishes speciiied in Radin's will, to build him a sepulchre and chapel
(Chapter VII, Section IV).
22) They condemn the cross: Though it can be argued that the
Bosnian Cirurch may have reiected the cross in the thirteenth or
fourteenth century, this certainly was not true in the fifteenth century
and the l0 points were compiled in 146l - the djed's letter of 1404
-begins with (Chapter V, Section III)' so does the herceg's 1453
"..or, will. Radin's will also has a large cross down the left
tr.rty, and Radin's
...gi.,. The 1453 trqaty also has the herceg swearing before the life-
 358 Medieval Bosnian Church
giving and venerable cross. This last phrase suggests that he and the djed
and stroiniks accepted christ's actual resurrection and also bodily
resurrection for mankind. Thus we probably have good reason to also
reject point No, 5 which says that christ only apparently participated
f 21) The use of images in churches is idolatry. This point seems to
in the events of his passion, and No. 44 which says they deny btdily
resurrection for mankind. And i{ christ's passion becomes real, thsn vys
eliminate No. 14 which denies Christ had a real body. The herceg's
1454 treaty issued to Dubrovnik (Chapter VI, Section IX), statirg
"God sent His only Son to great suffering in order to deliver Hii
(people) from sins by resurrection" also contradicts points 14, lj, 44.
Though no Patarins witnessed the document, the herceg's adherence to
their church probably is sufficient justification to cite this treaty
as
evidence for the Bosnian Church's position.
2tt) They condemn relics of saints: We find Sandalj 's Orthodox
widow leaving relics to her grand-nephew, almost certainly an adherent
of the Bosnian church (chapter v, section VIID . we also find Herceg
stefan leaving relics in his will (chapter VII, section II). The herceg also
accepted the cult of St. Sava (Chapter VI, Section VII).
25) They ridicule the worship of Saints: The herceg in l4j j swore by
all the saints. Radin's will requests prayers for his soul on the Days of st.
Peter, St. Paul, St. Stephan, and St. George. He even notes that he
celebrated St. George's Day as his slaua.
4l ,46) All sins are mortal, they condemn church prayers for the
deceased: Radin requests prayers by both krstjani and by catholics for
his soul after death, and speaks of God forgiving sins and pardoning us at
the Last Judgment. Thus he clearly believed that sins could be remitted
after death and that prayers for the dead were of value. Thus by ex-
tension we can eliminate No. 37 which says sin can only be forgiven
through re-baptism.
)0) They condemn all charity: Radin's will not only leaves money to
be distributed to poor and crippled of his own faith, but also to poor and
crippled Catholics.
Thus, immediately 1) of the 50 points can be shown not to pertain to
the Bosnian Church in the fifteenth century. And if we make a logical
extension to No. 22, we add three more to that figure, and by extending
Nos. 41 ,46 we add a fourth. Thus it is reasonable to say that 19 of the
50 points are irrelevant.
The following points seem somewhat ilaccurately expressed in the 50
points, but we cannot be certain:
18) The Roman Church is condemned and excommunicated. The
Bosnian Church clearly had broken away from Rome, and was con-
demned by Rome. How strongly the Bosnians attacked Rome is
Bosnia fuom 1443 to 1463 3J9
unknown. Relations certainly were on the whole friendly between
patarins and Catholic Dubrovnik, and in his will Radin asks for prayers
in Catholic churches and leaves money for charity to crippled Catholics.
Thus this point seems somewhat overstated.
refer to worship of images. Serbian anathemas state the krstjani refuse to
bow down to images. The Bosnian Church clearly did not reiect
religious pictures since its Gospels were illustrated with them' Various
lay members of the Bosnian Church also possessed icons. It is possible,
though, that the church while allowing religious pictures, did prohibit
the worship of them.
23) They condemn the Mass and church singing. Once again, we
cannot be sure. We have one ritual (Radosav 's Chapter II, ' ' The Gospel
Manuscripts"), which is similar to (but shorter than) a Lyons Cathar
ritual. Thus the Bosnian Church may have had its own service that
varied from the Roman. Whether this means they condemned the
Roman is unknown, as are their views on church singing. However, we
also have two sources suggesting they had a rite similar to the Serbian
Orthodox, which would include a Mass and singing: The Franciscan
Symeon in 1322 (Chapter IV, Section I) and a Hungarian writer in
146) (Chapter VI, Section XXI). And Radin in his will requests
Catholics to light candles for his soul on Sundays and holidays which
needless to say are times when the mass was being served.
28) They renounce baptism with water: In 1404, King Ostoja,
almost certainly a member of the Bosnian Church, having conferred
with the djed, wrote Dubrovnik to recall Kleilf. He dated the letter, the
Dayof theHallowingof theWaters(ChapterV, Section III). Ostoja also
in 1401 had one son baptized, and Dubrovnik's calling the ceremony a
baptism suggests it was an orthodox (i.e., with water) baptismal
ceremony. (Chapter V, Section III). Radin's will refers to baptized
(krlteni) krstjani, though we do not know how they were baptized.
Though sufficient evidence to prove the point is lacking, the above
shows the Bosnian Church had some sort of baptismal rite and suggests
it was with water.
39) They condemn the sacrament of ordination. While it is likely that
the Patarins had a somewhat different procedure of ordination from the
Catholics, they clearly had some rite of ordination for their clergy. This
is seen from Radin's will which refers to krstjani (i.e., the ordained) who
were "baptized in the correct way." And since the krstjani seem to
have been a continuation of a Catholic monastic order, it would not be
surprising if their ceremony was quite similar to the Catholic.
40) Bodily marriage is adultery: Though the Bosnians did not look
1,60 Medieval Bosnian Church
upon marriage as a sacrament, there is no reason to believe they con-
demned marriage or sex. It seems the krstjani were celibate; however,
Catholic priests were too. Lay members married.
43)They condemn eating of meat, cheese and milk. We know that
the Bosnian Church clerics kept some sort of fasts since Radin mentions
fasting in his will, and speaks of fasters and "mrsni" (non-fasting)
people. However, we do not know whether the ordained Patarins kept
fasts all the time, or only long ones during certain periods of the year.
We also do not know if they eliminated all the items noted in No. 43
from their diet. It is also evident that only the ordained kept the strict
fasts; lay member's diets, as far as we know, were not regularly
restricted.
Only the following four points accurately describe some Bosnian
phenomenon. The first two are not doctrinal or in themselves heretical
and would apply to any Christian Church of that day.
16) Their church is that of God. Every church believes that of itself.
17) They are the successors of the Apostles: Radin's will refers to
krstiani of the Apostolic faith.
26)The (heretical) leaders allow the people to adore them. The pope
in 1373 quoting Franciscans (Chapter IV, Section V) states some group
in the vicariat had believers adoring heretics. It is not stated that this
refers to the Bosnian Church. We do not know if the adoration was
similar to that of the Cathars. The 1373 letter never states that it was
believed that the heresiarchs were in possession of the Holy Spirit. We
also find a visiting Catholic bishop more or less adored by Bosnians in
the 1430's (Chapter V, Section VI).
49) They condemn all oath-taking. It is clear that the ordained
Patarins did not swear oaths (Chapter V, Section III). However, on
occasions they were able to endorse a document or testify in court ac-
cording to their own customs, whatever that means. Lay members of the
Church freely took oaths.
Thus of the 50 points we find l5 do not apply to the Bosnian Church,
and if we make logical extension of the information found in our
sources, we can raise this number to 19 ; 7 more most probably do not
(though one may want to question point No. 43 on fasting); and only 4
(or 5 if we place the fasting point here), 2 of which are of a non-doctrinal
nature, apply to some Bosnians; 3 or these 4 clearly are true for the
Bosnian Church. And since all 4 (or 5) of the relevant points also pertain
to the Western Cathars, we cannot be sure that they were placed on the
abjuration as a result of any knowledge about Bosnia.
The other 20 points are not mentioned one way or the other in non-
inquisitional sources. Thus, in addition to the reasons given in Chapter
Bosnia lrom 7443 to 1463 J61
1[, for rejecting the details of these inquistion or polemical documents,
the irrelevance of the contents of the l0 point renunciation the most
of these documents and the only one about which
-it could be
detailed
argued that its author had had contact with some real Bosnians
-
supports my contention that these documents cannot be used as sources
for beliefs of the Bosnian Church.
But though we believe that all evidence indicates that the Bosnian
Church was an orthodox church, we believe, as we have said before,
that these inquistion and polemical documents are not pure fantasy.
There were certainly dualists in Bosnia, but their movement, probably
very small in size, was distinct from the Bosnian Church. Could the l0
points give an accurate picture of the beliefs of these Bosnian dualistsT
For after all, we have suggested in the text, the three noblemen who
renounced them were members of this heresy and not of the Bosnian
Church. Unfortunately, we cannot come up with any sort of answer to
that question. We simply do not have any detailed sources other than
inquistional and foreign polemical sources about Bosnian dualists. And
we have already in our discussion of inquisition sources (in Chapter II)
as well as in our discussion of the three noblemen in 146I (in Chapter
VI) given sufficient reasons why we should be wary of the contents of
this inquisition material, much
- if not most - of which was c'brtainly
drawn from the beliefs of Western heretics. Thus we can only use this
material to demonstrate the presence of dualists in Bosnia. Of the
specific beliefs of these dualists we must sadly admit our ignorance until
such time as some sources providing reliable information about them
should be discovered.
r-tl L

CHAPTER VII
HERCEGOVINA FROM 1463T0 1481

L' Patarins in Hercegooina After 146 j

After the Patarins who were expelled from Bosnia in 14J9-60 took
refuge with Herceg Stefan, we begin to find increased numbers of
Patarins in Hercegovina in the 1460's. This, however, was to be a
phenomenon of short duration. Even if the Turks had not annexed
Hercegovina over the next twenty years, we would expect to see the
number of Patarins in Hercegovina decline when the generation of exiles
died out. For without popular support in Hercegovina, there would not
have been many Hercegovinians ready to be ordained to replace them. A
Slavic liturgy church, linkedonly to a state that had fallen, could not
have expected much success in a region the rnajority of whose populace,
being Orthodox, already had the Slavic liturgy.
In the defters we find considerable land associated with the krstjani in
certain limited regions of Hercegovina; for most of Hercegovina no
source indicates their presence at all. Lands of krstjani were chiefly
found in the regions of Konjic and GoraY-de, both near the Bosnian
border, and both areas having hiYas in the 1440's. Presumably, some of
these lands mentioned by the defters were connected with these hiZ,as.
Doubtless when the Patarin exiles left Bosnia, they migrated to regions
of Hercegovina where their co-religionists were already established.
They may have joined the existing hilas or have formed new ones in the
vicinity. Also, quite possibly, they were granted lands by the herceg.
'Ihus,
from our limited sources, we cannot be sure any krstjan land in
Hercegovina (other than some of the land around GoraYde and Biograd-
Konjic) belonged to the krstjani prior to the late 1450's.
In addition to the hiias that we have met and those that we shall meet
in written sources aboutHercegovina, a Turkish defter (Istanbul No. 5)
written shortly after 1588 reports that part of the tiftllt< of Mahmud and
his father Radko in the village of Kunovo, nahi ja Soko (i.e., Sokolgrad at
the iunction of the Tara and Piva Rivers) had been bought by the family
during the reign of the herceg from Cvatko Gost.(1) We do not know
whether these lands had been Cvatko's private estates or lands attached
to his hiia.
364 Medieval Bosnian Church Hercegovina from 1463 to 1481 365

The entry also shows that the family who bought the land had n.,hrovflik in 1466 as an envoy for Gost Radin.(8) Thus we see that the
retained it under the Turks even though they had not converted to Islam :;; (;"", if he did not have a hila) had in his service Patarins whom he
until after the middle of the sixteenth century. The father Radko was l^,,ti utilize to perform tasks for him'
clearly a Christian while the other owner. son Mahmud, had obviously
""Th" h".."g died in 1466. Had he become a Catholic prior to his
accepted Islam. We meet Cvatko Gost in no other source, thus we a.ri[, O"l-vnik, the papacy' or the earlytraditions
chroniclers presumably
noted down in
popular
cannot date his sale of the land more precisely than the period between i,*ta nuu" mentioned it. Unreliable in various parts of
centuries
1435 and 1466, the years of Herceg Stefan's rule. if,.-frr. nineteenth and early twentieth
A more reliable story
H.r..gouin" would have it that he was Orthodox.
reports that the
i,,.."ia"a by the traveler Ramberto in the I J 30's, who
a small church
II: 'fbe Herceg's Relations witb Dffirent inirUl,"",t around Kljui in Hercegovina pointed out
services.(9) This church was probably
Faiths in His Last Years o,i.r. tn" herceg had attended
a mosque and said
O.rl"ao* fuossibly the same one later converted into
The herceg maintained his relations with the different confessions. In i" tradition to have been built by Sandali's orthodox wife Jelena). Yet
be sure
1465 Catholic Venice awarded him, "for the good of Christendom," .i.n if the herceg occasionally did attend this church, we cannot
the land it had held near the mouth of the Neretva, as well as part of the ie belonged to iis rite. And it is possible that in the herceg's day the
Kraiina which it did not feel strong enough to defend in the event of a The published defters do not speak of Patarin
.t ur.tt h*ad treen Patarin.
Turkish attack.(2) Gost Radin remained at the herceg's side and served lands here; but a court Patarin could well have
performed services for
him as envoy to Dubrovnik in 1465.(3) In December another Patarin, the herceg in this church.
Tvrdisav Krstjanin, accompanied by a secular envoy, represented the Orbini Iails Herceg Stefan "schismatic,"(10) which, in his history,
herceg in Dubrovnik.(4) In that same year the herceg drew up and usually means Orthodox. However' Orbini also speaks
of Gost Radin as
deposited his will, drafted by the Orthodox Metropolitan of Milefevo, the herceg's confessor and a monk of st. Basil (i.e., orthodox).(l1)
David, before a Ragusan court. He left, among other things, some rilics Since we fnow Radin was not a Basilian monk, Orbini is not reliable
and a gold and silver icon decorated with pearls to his son Stefan. here. It is probable that orbini's soufce for these remarks is the herceg's
Whether these items had any religious meaning for the herceg or will; Orbini, seeing Radin's name next to Metropolitan David's' could
whether he kept them for their monetary value, we cannot say. well have assumed ihat the herceg and Radin belonged to the same faith
However, it is worth noting that these items were among the effects of a as the Metropolitan of Milelevo'
man considered to have been a supporter of the Bosnian Church. The Lacking evidence to suggest Herceg Stefan was received into either
herceg also left a sum of money for the good of his soul, without the Catholic or Orthodox Church, I conclude that he died a member
specifying which church should receive it. The will shows that the (not necessarily a devout one) of the Bosnian Church' However' this
herceg was still keeping contacts with different confessions. Both Gost affiliation did not affect Dubrovnik which took, from the money the
Radin and the Orthodox metropolitan classified together as ordained herceg had deposited there for safekeeping, the 10,000 ducats he had
monks (redounici)
-
witnessed the will.(1) That an Orthodox left foihis souf and presented the money to the pope. Thus if the herceg
-
metropolitan was willing to participate in this venture with the Patarin had had any doubts about which church to leave the money to'
gost seems to me further evidence that Radin could not have been Dubrovnik efficiently resolved them for him'
dualist.(6)
The following summer (1466) Herceg Stefan deposited a large sum or
money in Dubrovnik for safekeeping in the event that the Turks might IIL' Tbe Testament of Gost Rodin
conquer his lands. This transaction was dlso witnessed by Metropolitan
David, this time in the company of various people including two On January 1 , 1466, Gost Radin deposited his will in Dubrovnik.( 1 2)
Patarins, Krstianin Tvrdisav and Krstjanin eerenko.(7) Once again the This document has a large cross down the left margin of the first page;
Orthodox bishop seems to have been satisfied with the company in this is not standard form, for no other will in the 1467-7 I folio where
which he was included. This same Krstjanin Tvrdisav also came to Radin's will is placed has such a cross. Thus Radin did not reject the
 366 Medieval Bosnian Church
Hercegovina from 1463 to 14g1 367
cross. At the head of the text is a second cross, followed by the
statements that Radin_wrote before omnipotent God and the Ragusan orising to find peasants after ordination continuing to work in the
nobles, that he was of sound mind, and that certain Ragusan ,ioUtu, rrnn"r to which they were accustomed.(14) ln a poor and barren area
(i.e., catholics) would serve as his executors. Radin's ieference [ke Hercegovina, where the maiority of the populace was poor and
omnipotent God suggests he believed in one God, and hence was
to probably also belonged to the Orthodox faith, we could hardly expect the
not a Patarin monks and nuns to live off charity.
dualist.
He left 600 gold ducats for his soul in the service of God, i.e., These krstjani, on each holiday, holy Sunday, and holy Friday, were
to help
the unfortunate. Half of these 600 ducats should be turned over to pray for Radin's soul, kneeling on the ground and reciting the Holy
to his
nephew Gost Radin seoniian; his name shows he had some connection Lord's prayer that God forgive us our sins and pardon us at the Last
with Seonica, a village not far north of the Neretva above Konjic. Judgment at the end of time. This shows that
the Patarins considered
Fridays and Sundays holy, that they believed there was value in praying
whether seonica was his birthplace or the location of a hiy.a he
ministered is not known. The nephew with pure motives was
ad- for the souls of the dead, that they prayed in a kneeling position and
to
distribute this money to properry baptized .orr"it krstjani-peasants particulady valued the Lord's prayer, that they believed that God
of forgave sins, and that they believed in a Last Judgment.
both sexes, who were of the correct apostolic faith (dobrie.i n"iino.n,
kr5teniem koi su prave vere apostolske praviem' krst'janom' kmetem, Radin further prescribes that the gost, his nephew, is to give money
i toelderly peasants who have led good lives and to krstjani and krstjanice
pravem' kmeticam' krstjanicam'). rhe word "krYtenie" is a regular
term for baptism; but whether it refers here to a rite of b"pism, who do not like sin, and to those of our law (presumably those following
initiation or ordination is unknown. since Radin called these individuals the prescriptions for ordained members of the Bosnian Church) who are
"krstjani" evidently they were ordained clerics. In every other siavic blind, lame and crippled in different ways. This shows that Radin
source about the Bosnians, the term krstjani has been sirictly used believed in charity and alms. He also mentions old peasants (kmeti)who
to have lived good lives, i.e., lay-members of the Bosnian Church. Since he
designate r:nly ordained clerics. And later in the will, when Radin left
money to ordained individuals, he uses the term "krstjani', in does not call these peasants who are lay members of the church krstjani,
the we find confirmation for the view that the "krstjani kmeti" were or-
standard way as a title for the ordained; and when he speaks of people _
dained. He makes reference to ''our law" which shows that there was a
including some other peasants (kmeti) who aie obviousty tuy_
members of the church, he does not cail-them krstjani. Thus,
rule for the order (which contradicts what was said in the 1433 letter
since sent by Dubrovnik to the Council of Basel).
Radin here is speaking of ordained churchmen, we can assume
that Radin orders next that money be given to unfortunates among the
these individuals had first undergone some rite to become members
of "mrsni ljudi" (i.e., people who do not fast).(15) This passage in the will
the^church, and subsequently a second rite of ordination. The term
generally has been interpreted to mean that ordained Patarins kept strict
"krYtenie" could thereftre refer to either rite. If Kniewald is correct in
dietary habits not followed by ordinary believers, who are therefore
deriving the term for ordained clerics "krstjani" from the verb ,,kr-
referred to as "mrsni."
stiti" (to baptize),(13) then the fact that not laymen but only ordained
Radin directs that the alms be given at the great holidays: Christmas,
clerics are called krstjani, suggests that "krltenie" must reflr to their
the Annunciation, Easter, St. George's Day his slaua (na dan
rite of ordination. we also see that the patarins traced their faith and -
svetoga Georgija moga krsnoga imena), Ascension -
Day, St. Peter's
practices back to the apostles. The will states that both men and
women Day, St. Paul's Day, St. Stephan the first martyr's Day, Mikhail the
were ordained as monks and nuns, and that some of them worked the
Holy Archangel's Day, the Day of the Virgin, and All Saints. Cleady,
land like peasants (hrneti). It is not surprising to find both nuns and
the Patarins honored all these holidays; thus they must have believed in
monks. The text does not say they co,habited the same hiias, as they
and honored the saints. Like the Orthodox they observed both a St.
had at Bilino polje. In fact, the will tells us nothing about their living Paul's Day and a St. Peter's Day as opposed to the Catholics who
arrangements. we find that certain monks and nuns farmed the land
celebrated the two saints on the same holiday. We also see that Radin in
themselves, and that a regular term for peasant (hmet) was used for
them. The reference to these peasant
ime.lthink this means that he celebrated his
Serbian style had a krsno
-onk, agrees with material in the slauaon St. George's Day, and thus had that saint as his patron. If we
Turkish defters about kristian lands. In a peasant society it is not sur-
want to follow M. Filipovi6's interpretation of the significance of this
 368 Medieval Bosnian Church
Hercegovina from l46j to l4gl 369
term in medieval Bosnia, then George would have been the
church were celibate. As members of a monastic organization that originally
name Radin received at his baptism.
Radin then goes on_to instruct the.Ragusan nobles to give had been Catholic, this too would not be surprising. Among the
these 300
ducats to Radin's n"pl"y, the SeoniXan gost, for the neJds relatives receiving money are; Vukava Krstjanica, the daughter of his
of the faith cousin; his nephew Gost Radin SeoniEan; another Vukava Krstianica,
that he believes in and the fasts which he observes. rr,i, *gg"ri, a
tt servant; Vuk5e Krstianin, Radoe Krstjanin and Mil'sava Krstianica;
differences did exist between patarin and Ragusan cathoric
c[iistianity."t Radan Krstjanin (whose title is repeated twice but this surely was a slip
A similar expression.was used in the Ragusan privilege to Radin
145), which stated that no one would foice him to gii" up tt. in of the pen); his cousin Gost Radivoj ; Vuk Gost ' 'Uspopalski. "
tuith
which he believed in. once again reference is made to the paiarin All of this shows how closely Radin's family was tied to the Bosnian
fasts.
Radin then calls on his nephew to carry out his last requests Church, supplying several ordained members, including four gosts (if
if he wants
to go' at his death, with peaceful soul before the Lord High we count Radin himself) all known to be alive in 1466.
God and
the t{oly Indivisible Trinity. Thus we see a solemn adjuratioi "Uspopalski" is usually interpreted ds an error for Uskopalski (i.e.,
akin to an
oath, although no oaths appear in the will. Radin surely believes Uskoplje). Scholars have located this gost at the Uskoplje close to the
in a town of Hum near Trebinje. But since we have no (othet') evidence to
personal judgment by God and in an indivisible Trinity,
The other 300 gold ducats are to be distributej ly ni, Ragusan suggest that there were Patarins in this area, and since Trebinje had
executors for remembrances for his soul to the brind, the crippled] both Catholic and Orthodox organizations, and lay under the scrutiny of
ana
other unfortunates of Dubrovnik, who wilr right candles to, nuai.r'l coastal bishops, I doubt the gost lived here. I would suggest the gost's
,out
in the temples (bram)of God on the great holidays named above, hiiawas in the Eupa Uskoplje north of Rama near Bugoi;o. This region
on is much nearer Bosnia and earlier Patarin centers. In addition, the
each holy Friday and each holy Sunday. The Ragusan poor
who "nd
would
light candles for Radin's soul were catiolics, anJthe temples material from the Turkish defters published by Okig refers to kristian
(hram)in
which they were to remember him were clearly catholic .tru.ln"r. land in four different villages in the Turkish nahija of Uskoplje.(18)
There were no non-catholic churches in Dubrovnik. yet even Because of the region's remoteness, the clerics of this hila may well
though
the Ragusan poor were catholics, Radin leaves alms to them as have escaped being exiled in l4J9-60.It is also possible that the gost had
well as beenexiled from Bosnia and only came to, or returned to, Uskoplje after
to the Bosnian church poor. Radin clearly berieved that prayers
for the
dead and lighting candles for the deceased, even by those'of December 1463, when that iupa was given to Herceg Stefan by the
another
faith, would have a positive influence on the fate of hls soul in the Hungarian king.
other
world. That a Patarin gost should request this suggests that his Finally Gost Radin leaves to"our friend Knez Tadiok Marojevi6" (a
church
had beliefs and practices similar to oi even identical with the Ragusan noble Thadeus Marini de Nale) an expensive fur robe given to
catholic him by King Matijas (i.e., Matyas Corvinus) and 140 ducats for a
church in regard to the dead. If the Bosnian church had grown out of a
catholic monastic order in the thirteenth century, as we have "temple" (hram)and grave for his bones. The gift to Radin from the
suggested, such similarities in beliefs should not seem surprising. zealous Hungarian Catholic king further argues against Radin being a
That
Radin wanted candles lit in catholic churches also shows that he dualist. We have suggested above that King Matyas had given this robe
ias not to Radin in December 1463 when the herceg and his son had met with
opposed to church buildings.
In the next clause of the will Radin disposes of money Matyas and been awarded with a considerable portion of the territory
to a whole series recovered from the Turks. The presence of this robe among Radin's
of relatives' Truhelka thought that ceriain of them
irad been Radin,s effects is the only evidence we have that Radin had attended this historic
children
_Td Ihyt apparen"tly Radin had ieen mrrried prior to or_ meeting.
dination.(16) Solovjev originally agreed with
this int"rp*tutior,, Uu,
subsequently has concluded that these suplosed What Radin had in mind by a hram (temple) is a matter of dispute
children ;;;; ;;h"*r,
nieces and cousins.(l7) Ifsolovjev in his iecent among scholars. Some would have it an elaborate mausoleum and others
articre is correct, then it
is accurate to say that we do not have one a {uneral chapel. Earlier in the
will Radin used the word hramto refer to
example of a child of an or-
dained Patarin. Thus, unless further evidence a Catholic church. A I472 source, which we shall examine, refers to a
appears, we probably
should follow the universally accepted opinion sepulchre and chapel built for Radin, as ordered in his will. Since his will
that Iiosnian churchmen
 370 Medieval Bosnian Church
says temple and grave, and since in 1472 we hear of a chapel aq6
sepulchre, it seems evident that Radin by brarnmeant a chapel. And if
it
was a chapel, then we have one more piece of evidence in favor of
the
Patarins having churches. [n any case, Radin was leaving a large sum
of
money to erect an elaborate monument for his remains, which is not
what we would expect from a dualist who should have scorned the body
as material and valued only the soul and the other world. However,
i1 ;s
just what we would expect from a man who clearly valued the riches
and
glory of this world as Radin did.
Truhelka has calculated that in his will Radin left a total oI 5,640
ducats, which clearly made him one of the richest men of his times in
Bosnia or Hercegovina.
IV: Patarins in Hercegouina After 1466
Quite recently, Professor Sunjii, while working in Venice, c?l'€
across another documenton Radin from 1466. On March 10, 1466,
the venetian senate voted on a request from Gost Radin that he and fifty
or sixty of his sect and law be allowed to settle on venetian territory
without fear of unpleasantness. Radin describes himself as a leadin!
baron and councillor of Herceg stefan. sixty Venetian senators voted to
accede to the request, with seven opposed and fifteen abstaining,(19)
but as far as we know, no Patarins ever took advantage of this per-
mission. We can assume that the request was made for the purpose of
finding asylum in the event the Turks conquered the rest of Her-
cegovina and Dalmatia. That the Venetian Senate voted so heavily in
favor ofthe request argues strongly against Radin's group being dualist.
We have speculated that fifty or sixty included the majority of ordained
clerics in the church. Most of them, by now, presumably lived in
Hercegovina, where they probably had come under the influence of the
leading Patarin there, Radin. Radin's request confirms my view that the
Patarin priesthood's numbers were by this time small, and that the
Bosnian Church was nearing its end. The death of the herceg surely
dealt the church a further blow. And when, upon the herceg's death in
1466, Radin left Hercegovina and went to Dubrovnik, we suspect that
the organization of the church more or less broke down. We hear no
more about stroiniks, or church admintstration, or organizational ties
between hiZas. In these years we can picture the members of the exiled
Patarin hierarchy from Bosnia, now in Hercegovina, with little or no
general leadership, living out their sheltered lives in a few hilas .-
farming their lands and occasionally taking in travelers who sought a bed
Hercegovina kom 1463 to 1481 371
br the night.
In october 1466 Radisav Patarin, a member of the society of Belosav
pfiarinin the Neretvaregion of Bosnia (i.e., the herceg's lands) on this
(the southwest) side of that river below "Belgrad", appeared tefore a
Ragusan court to ask a layman Rusko TvrdoviC to return a sum of
money deposited with him. Radisav testified that he had deposited
$enty perperos with Rusko, who denied that he had ever received such
a deposit. The judges asked Radisav if he had any witnesses and he said
that he did, a certain cvjetko (Zvietchus) one of his patarin colleagues
from the above named society. When interrogated by the judges,Cvjetko
swore by the oath that was their practice, as was their custom, that he
knew nothing, had seen nothing, and had heard nothing about the said
matter. since his witness could not support Radisav's accusation, the
iudges said they would free Rusko, unless Radisav would support his
accusation with an oath. since Radisav was unwilling to sweai it, the
case against Rusko was dropped.(20)
This case refers to Patarins of the Bosnian church monastery at
Biograd on the Neretva, where in 1449 the merchants had been robted.
At that time the monastery had been under obiien patarin; now in
1466 Belosav was leader. Since on neither occasion, do the Ragusan
sources call the leaders gosts, we suspect that this hiia was headeJ by a
man of lower rank than gost; possibly even by an ordinary krstjanin.
Two other monks of the monastery (Radisav and cvjetko) are named.
we still find that ordained Patarins bore popular names. we also see that
at least some ordained Patarins in hilas had private money. From a l47o
case (not involving Patarins) we learn that Rusko Tvrdovid was
a citizen
of Dubrovnik.(21) Hence we see why Radisav had brought his complaint
before a Ragusan court.
The matter of oaths in this passage is important:
Radisav throughout
refused to take an oath, even to recover
a serious financial loss. This
agrees with our earlier evidence that patarins refused to swear oaths.
However, his witness, also a patarin,
swore some sort of oath that was
according to Patarin practice and
custom. we do not know what sort of
oath thrs was, but we recall
that in 1403-OJ Ragusan envoys were told
to get oaths from secular figures
but to let the patarins subscribe to
treaties in any way they
ch*, o. according to their custom.(22) We
may suspect that by the fifteenth
century the patarins, in order to have
practical dealings with
the world, had irad to find a substitute for the
they reiected. Thus a prescribed ,ry of giving one,s
llll,llt'.n
otner than the usual oath, had been found. Whatever
word,
thi! compromise
Ras-1sa_n envoys had accepted
11s' it earlier in the century, and in tqie
we even find a Ragusan court willing
to accept patarin t"rtirnony giu"n
372 Medieval Bosnian Church Hercegovina from 146) to 1481 373

this way. This shows that Ragusan courts must have tried more Patarin despite the rash of references to various gosts and krstjani during 1466-
cases than we have records of, and that Ragusan courts, in accepting ZO, we hear no more about Bosnian Church clerics' However, since we
testimony according to Patarin religious custom rather than under have no evidence about any persecution, we
may assume that Patarin
traditional oaths, were surprisingly tolerant. However, it seems that all ,onrra"ti"r continued to exist Hercegovina at least until 1481, when
in
Patarins did not accept this compromise-oath, for Radisav even to by the Turks'
,h" lrt, parts of Hercegovina were conquered
recover his lost money refused to swear it. We may suggest that the Bosnian Church throughout the 1470's was
Gost Radin died in 1467, initiating a series of court cases over his declining in numbers and influence, We have no direct evidence that
large estate. In July 1467 Gost Radin SeoniEan, his nephew, collected a patarins were to be found as advisors and diplomats at the courts of the
sum of money deposited in Dubrovnik by Radin. With him was a Radiz herceg's sons and successors, Herceg Vlatko and Vladislav.
Vlatko was
(Radii2) Krstianin.(23) In March 1470 two gosts, Radivoj Priljubovii closely tied to Venice; all his hopes to maintain what was left of his state
and Vochus (Vuk) Radivojevid testified that prior to Gost Radin's death, or to recover what had been lost depended on Venice' Yet a 1481
they had entrusted sums of money to him; now they sought to recover Ragusan document refers to him as aPatarin.(26) Thus it seems that up
this money from his estate. These two gosts sent letters to Dubrovnik by ,o t4gt Vlatko had not ioined either the Catholic or Orthodox Church,
the same two envoys, a secular figure named Tvrtko BrajanoviC and a that the Bosnian Church still existed in his lands, and that quite possibly
Patarin, Cvjetko Krstianin Radinovii. Gost Radivoj Priljubovii dated some Patarins could still be found at his court. After the fall of Her-
his letter from Bielo, and Gost Vuk Radivoievii from Uscopia cegovina in late 1481, Vlatko retired to Venice.
(Uskoplje).(24) These gosts are presumably the Vuk Gost the third son of Herceg Stefan , also named Stefan, who had been left
"Uspopalski," and Gost Radivoj mentioned in Radin's will. Gost holy relics and an icon in the herceg's will, went to Istanbul in 147 3 or
Radivoj maintained ahiia at Bijela, not far south of Konjic. Thus in l4i4 and became a Moslem, taking the name Ahmed. Known as Ah-
1470 we hear for the first time ofa Patarin monastery at Biiela. med Hercegovid, he rose rapidly in the Turkish administration and
Thus in the vicinity of Konjic in the fifteenth century we find three twice would serve as grand vizier under Selim I (from 1J03-06, and
(and possibly four) hiZas: 1) In 1418 not far north of Konjic in Bradina 1510-14). Unlike many of Selim's grand viziers, Ahmed died a natural
in Bosnia. 2)ln 1449 and 1460 at Biograd on the Neretva just above death in 1119. Stefan-Ahmed not only exemplifies the phenomenon of
Koniic in Hercegovina. 3) In t47O in Bijela also in Hercegovina. It is "Christians" accepting Islam, but also the fact that Bosnians of the
possible that there was also a fourth hiLa at Seonica which lay in Bosnia highest families at the time the Turks were conquering their land had so
not far north of Konjic and the Neretva. Gost Radin's nephew was called little animosity against the Turks that they willingly accepted the
"SeoniIan"; which could be a surname indicating his birthplace, or a Turk's religion, joined them, and served the sultan loyally.(27)
nickname indicating the locality of a hiia he administered. Since we do
not hear anything about the Bradina hila after 1418, it may no longer FOOTNOTES TO CFIAPTER VII
have existed in the 1460's. Thus other than Seonica (if a hiia existed
L Okig, "Les Kristians . . .," Sidost-Forschungen,79, 1960, pp. 127-28.
there) and excluding the undated defter data all of the monasteries which 2. Liubii, Listine, X, p. 346.
sources mention in the period after the 1459-60 exile were in the 3. Dini( p. 234, No. 4(r, 47.
herceg's lands. 4. Stoianovii, l, 2, p. 78.
ln 1472 a lay nephew of Gost Radin named Tvrtko testified that he 5. Puci/, ll, pp. 12430; StoianoviC, op. cit.,l, 2, pp. 87'92.
(r. We recall a similar event back in 130) when Djed Miroslav witnessed a
had received the dinars deposited by Radin for the "sepulchre and
grant to a Kotor monastery in the presotce of Orthodox and Catholic bishops.
chapel" (pro sepultura. . . et pro capella) provided for in his will.(2J) 7. Miklosich, pp. 49)-98.
We can assume that these two structures had been built. Frorn this 8. Dinii, p. 23.1, No. 14.
testimony in I47 2 we see that the gost ih his will by the word "hram " 9. P. Matkovif, "Putovanja po balkanskom poluotoku XVI vieka," Ral
had intended to have a chapel. Thus we see that beside his tomb Radin (JAZU), CXxlv, 1895, p. 82.
wanted (and presumably received) a small chapel, which I think is 10. Orbini, p. 385.
evidence that the Bosnian Church did not reject church buildings.
11. Orbini, p. 38S. Orbini calls him here Rasi gost but it is evident that Radin
is intended since Orbini goes on to tell us that Rasi Sost took the herceg's
After the I472 notation about Gost Radin's burial arrangements, and testament to Dubrovnik, and we have noted above that Radin was involved in
)74 Medieval Bosnian Church

thc drafting of Herceg Ste{an's testament.

12. t-. Sto janovi(, o1t. cit., I, pt. 2, pp. 1)3-5(r.
13. D. Knie wald, "tlierarchie und Kr.rltr.rs IJosnischer (,hrisrcrr, ;lr.
carlemia Nazionale dei Lincei, Problemi Attuali di,scienza e di Crlturr,ltunr,
1961+, pp. t9293. CT{AP'I'ER VIII
11t. Bosnian Orthodox monks, at least in the sixteenth centurv, also llrrn*l Itlll.lGlON lN IIOSNIA AI.TER TFIE I'UIIKlSIl CONQUEST
-I'he
the land. traveler Zeno reports that the Orthoclox rnonks of I\lilt'inr'
worked in the field^s after services in addition to making their own brrarl nnrJ
wine. See, P. Matkovic', "Putovan ja po balkanskom poluotoku XVI r.it,k,r.'" L' Patarins and ()tber Ileterodox Cbistians
Ilad (JAZU), Vol. LXII, 1882, p, 98. in the 'l'urkish Period
11. Mrsni is the antonym of the word "fast." 'llo the prcsenr d;rr rn
Jugoslavia meals on religious holidays are either "postna" --- fastinp, no nr.;u. lk'ft'rcnces to Patarins or other heterodox Christians (excluding
- or
but fish cooked with oil "mrsna"
unrestricted diet.
- meat, lard used in cooking. nrixtrrrers hetween Christianity and Islam) in sources other than the
1(r. C. T'ruhelka, "'festament gosta Radina . .
dclters (rvhose information cannot yet be dated) after 1463 in Bosnia
366 67. ,tnd alter l48l in I'Iercegovina are amazingly few. After the murder of
17. A, Soloviev, "[-eTestament du Gost Iladin," Mandi'cet zbornih,I\,rne , thl five l'r'arrciscans by Patarins in Visokcl in I46J. and references to a
l9(r5. pp. l4l 116, c'sp. lltB )5. tlis argrnrents are intricatt' antl I <
lort irr Llskoplie in l1t7(). rvc do not rncct thc terrn Patarin again in
jrrrlqr
^rrrr,r
whilt tcn)ls of relatiorrship, c<ulrplicaterl clrough in the twcrrlictlr tcrrtrrrv. nrrrnt
irr thc filtt,enth ('r:ntlry,'l lris problc'nr I shall not evcu g() irrto, hrrr shrrll rirnJ,lr rr'[r'rt'rtct's to l]osnia.(l) After thc Ilagrrsan rt:fercncc to Ilerceg Vlatko
krllow Solovjev's re-evaluation. i,[ llclccgovina as a Patarin in 11lf]l, no known source uses the word
I B. Okig, "Les Kristiarrs ., " Sildost-l;'orscbungen, l!, l!60, 1,. lJl rqlin uutil thc sevcrrtct'ltl] ('t:lltury. No sixtt'entll cclr(ul y tlavclcl'
(fortress Novi near VinEac), p. 127 (village Skrobovi6i), p. 129 lvill;rgc Ztlrrn nrfntions any religious group in Bosnia or Ilercegovina other than the
ci). p. l2J (village Krrti). ()rthorlrrx, Catholics, and Nloslems.
19. M. Sunjii, "Jedan novi potlatak ogostu Radinu ...,,' GID, Xl, l9(,{}, p '[
267. lrt'rr, in 16O5, a Croatian prince in Vinodol wrote that some Krrn-
20.I)inii, grp.215 l(r, No. Bl. I'hrri Vlat'hs (fronr ttre region of Krnrpota near l-ika) rrrade the short
21. l)irrit', p I13, No. 30(r. nrilllliorr irrlo thc (r)astal regioll of Vinodol , just south of the junction
22. Sr.r.;rltovt.. (.lr;rl,tcr V. ol llrr nurinland with Istria. 'I'he Vlachs canre as Christian believers (i.e.,
2J. l)ini(1. I'p.2l(r 17. No.82.
'24.Dinit!, p. 219, No. B/t. It l.atholics), allegedly at the surnnrons of St. .fohn. who hacl appcarecl tcr
is rr.t k'.rvn whcthcr this Krsr jrrrrirr (i'j.rlo rr
the sante Cvletko who testified before the Ragusan court in J466. lrr rhrrt tht,rrr irr tlrc rright.'l'he Vlach lea(lcr state(l that thr:y had r:onrc fronr
documents we leam that the fanrous Gost Radin bore the last narne o{ l}rrrk.r,rf, Parirrin land to Christianity.(2)
25 Dinil. n. 2l(r, No. 82. IJccarrse the Vlachs had made a short lnigration within an area which
26. J. 1'adic{, "Nove vesti o padu [lercegovine pod tursku vlast. " Zi,,rrrrl had long hacl Vlach shepherds, we have no reason to connect thenr with
L'ilozoJi Aog.fakulteta, Beograd uniuerzitet, VI, No. 2, 1g(t2, l. | 4 \.
lJosnia.'l'lreir Catholicism also argues against their being Bosniani by
2T. A second exampleof this was Sigismund, the son of Stefan l,nr;ri lrnrl thr
hcrceg's daughter Katarina thus a younger half-brotlrcr .f stc[arr 'l .rrr,rirrri thc srvt'rrtccnth century, most of Bosnia's Vlachs were Orthodox. It is
I le rvas taken by the 'furks in 11t63 to Istanbul ; he also con'errt'rl r. lrhnr rlvr rrorth notir)g that no nleclieval source rnentions Patarins or heretics
Llnder the of Ishak Kral ogli (lsaac the King's son), he st'rv.rl irr r,1[r7 rr
-l'hus
in lhis rcgion. we clo not krrow hoq'I(rrnpota coulcl have conle to
sandiak beg 'anre
ior Karasa in Asia NIinor. I'r t alk'rl [)atarin land"
ln lttt)) a Venetiatr lrriest visiting Dainratia noted the settlernents of
lhurirurr arrtl I Iercegovinians in I)alrnatia. Ile said that these people
nlrcof thrce t.ypes. The majority were l-atins or C]reeks (i.e., Catholics
nrOrthorlox), but there were also Christians of a third sort who were in
rn,'rrrnfrrlco'ldition, scl blindecl in matters of faith that it is only the fact
th,rt tlrt'y \\'crc not circlrrnciz-ed rvIricl'r rnatle them Christians (i.e., that
rhlr ivclc rrot Moslr:rns or Jews). 'I'he y lived in full clarkness and lacked
rll torrcr t hclief.(3) Ilesicles the fact that these people belonged to a tlrird
376 Medieval Bosnian Church
group of Christians of Bosnian-Hercegovinian origin, we have no
cornpelling evidence to connect them with remnants of the Bosuian
Church. The description tells us nothing about their faith, cxcept that
they were ignorant of all correct belief.(4) These people might well have
been descended from medieval Bosnian Churchnren or heretics, brrt
they could equally well have been descended from any group of
-lutkish conquest, had fallen into
Christians who, subsequerlt to the
t:rror -- possibly owing to the lack of priests or to tltc ittflttt'ttcc of lslartr,
ln 1703 a visitation repclrt frotrt thc rcgion of 'l'rebinje says thilt thc
schisrnatics there were Patarins,living accorcling to the crrstotns of thc
Greeks. They followed the rules of their priests and Basilian monks,
who were ignorant and illiterate. 'fheir rite was Greek Patarin, and their
errors consisted of reiecting the autl.rority of the pope, the process of
the iloly Spirit. Purgatory, atttl (()ns('('ratiort witlt rtzyttrt's.(5) lt is
evident that the "errors" o{ these "Patarins" consisted of those
nratters that distinguished the Orthodclx from the Rornan Church. T'his
fact, conrbined with the fact that their clergy inclucled llasilian (i.e.,
Orthodox) nronks, shows that these people were Orthodox believers.
f'his has been used as an argument that trtedieval Patarins had beerr
more or less Orthodox as well;(6) however, it could equally well mean
that these people were descendants of medieval ' 'Patarins' ' who
converted to Orthodoxy but, despite their acquisition of new doctrines,
had sornehow rctained their forrner nante. In any case, by 1703 so tnuch
time had passed since the 'l'urkish conquest of lJosnia that we cantlot
rely upon a report such as this to give us an accurate picture of the
beliefs and practices of medieval Patarins.
The time interval also detracts frorn a visitation report from 175l for
T'rebinje and western Hercegovina by S. Iudisif, which says that many
of the Greek schismatics also practiced errors of the ancient Nlanichees.
'I'heir errors consist in: affinning that Ilell's sufferings are tlot eternal,
and that Jesus Christ did not die on the Cross to save hutnanity but that
Archangel Michael rlid.'l'hey belicvc in two tylrt's of <'rectl , hal<'th<r
(lirtlrolics grcirtly attrl rc brrlttiz.t' {ltost' wlro att'cpt ilrt'ir faith. 'l lrt'y
apparently professed the Greek rite but hacl their own special rites.(7)
l'he beliefs of these schisrnatics, not surprisingly, were a synthesis of
a variety of beliefs. Tudisi'c's accuracy may also be questioned, since
presumably he clrew his information ttot from t[:re schisrnatics thern-
selves but from Catholic peasants in the area who could not be expected
to have unclerstoocl or even cared ahout the beliefs of their schismatic
neighbors. Presurnably TudisiC had teacl that the nre dieval Bosnians
were Manichees, and he rnay well have assurned that deviations in the
beliefs of these un-educated schismatics would have been derived from
Religiorr after'l'urkish Corrquest 377
this former heresy. T'he beliefs he describes do not seem dualist. The
reference to the archangel is not related to any known medieval belief,
rhough Archangel Nlichael is a popular figure in South slavic folklore
and has long been connected with taking human souls upon death. His
Day was also an important Orthodox Church festival and on it was
celebrated the slaaa of many {amilies. Hatred for Catholics after the
ccnturies of rivatry in the Trebinie region between the Orthodox and
(latholics is not ocld at all. Visitation reports frotlr the seventeenth ancl
cighter:uth ccnturies d9, front time to titne, report Orthoclox pf iests and
liranciscans re-baptizing converts frorn the other faith.'fhus this
practice, though against canons, does not necessarily reflect heresy.
Unfortunately, we afe not told how the rite of these schismatics deviated
-I-hus
frorn that of the Greeks (i .e., Orthodox). this teport car only be
trscrl to sltotv ltetcrotlox bclicfs existirrg irl tlrc t'ightcettth cctltttry.
I'-inally, n 1737 and 1739, the Bosnian chronicler Fra Nikola
l.alvarrin mentions old believers (starouir'ry)in the Vrbas region.(8)
Unfortunately, since he tells us nothing whatsoever about their beliels,
we clo trot know frorn which, if any, of our nledieval grotll)s thc olcl
bclievers rnight have bccn clescenclecl.
'I'hese, then, are the references to Patarins and heterodox sects in
Bosnia-Hercegovina after the 'I'urkish conquest. I have not included
clescriptions of syntheses between forms of Christianity and Islam. In the
ninetccnth century traclitions about Bogonril families begin to be
reportecl. T'hese traditions were discussed in Ctrapter lI' Since there we
showed that these traditions were not actual medieval survivals
- the
term Bogomil was not used in medieval Bosnia - but were based on
tales told by priests who had learned about Bogomils frorn books and
schooling, we do not discuss these traditions here.
Iirorn the above we would argue that the Bosnian Church and any
other clissident movernents that might have existed disappeared very
rapidly after the fall of the rnedieval states of Bosnia and l-lercegovina.
()r'hirri rlrrtes llrc crrrl o{ llte l)ttaritrs irr 152{),(c)) bttl sitrt:r'rvc Itltvc
slrown tlrlt hc obtainccl this date frotn the date of tltc cotrvcrsiotrs of
PaLrlichiani around Nicopolis during the Austro-T'urkish war, we
maintain that he was not speaking about the Bosnian Church'
IL' Main'I-rends in Bosnian Religious
IIistoryt 1463' 1600
tlriefly, I shall now point out sorne o{ the main trends in Bosnian
religious history frorn 1463 to 1(100, for no study of the Bosnian
Church would be complete without it.
380 Nledieval Bosnian Church
Bosnian state and the diminution of the Bosnian church clergv, the
Serbial hierarchy, preaching the same - or almost the sarne - dctc
trines, was accepted by the lay memtrers of the Bosnial Chgrch. W.
have arguecl that, although the Bosnian Chtrrch may not have clifferctl
grcatly in rite frqnr the Orthotlox Chrrrch, it was not Orthoclgx: tht'
Serbian sinodiks anathematiz-ed it ancl John of Capistrano's letter re{ers
to Orthodox trying to convert Patarins.(12) It also sh<luld be stressed
that references to Orthocloxy in Bosnia aftet L463 only gracltrallv
become more and ntore frequent. We find re{erences to it occasionally irr
'l'|c
the l4g0's, ancl only with real frequelcy in the sixteenth celtury.
grailualness with which Orthodoxy appearecl in Bosnia at this tirnt:
'I'urkish conquest there had beett fe$'
l-onfirms r-ny belief that prior to the
Orthoclox [elievers in l]clsnia, an(l thus argues against equating tht'
I|rsniirrt (llrtttt'h rvith Ortlrorloxy. ltt fat't, Ortlr6rloxy al)p(',lrs at tlte t'rtc
wc would expect if its appearance had been causecl by graclual tlliSriltiolr
into Bosnia and by conversions from other denominations'
Altfiough immediately upon the Tlrkish conquest the Franciscans
requestecl ancl obtained frorrt thc sultan perrnissiolt to exist ancl practicc
their religion, it is evident that the'I'urks preferred the Orthodox to the
Catfiolics.'l'he reasons for this preference are not hard to find.'l'|e
Serbian-Orthodox Church hierarchy residt'-cl in
(Jttr ntan o<:cttpierl
territory. f'he Catholic Church leadership dicl not. Besides, the pope arrrl
part of northern Bosnia in 11t(t1
the I-lupgarians (who had recovered a
an{ hel{ it into the sixteenth century) were the leaders of Christian arrti
'l'urkish crusading ventures.'l'hus the Catholic Church was viewecl its a
fi{th colurnn with close ties to a {oreign and clangerous elrelny'
Ily the sixteenth century we find Orthodox believers in most regiotrs
9f Bosnia. 'I"heir spread is seen by the nurnber of Orthoclox lnonasteries
erected in the sixteenth centuryl €.8', Tavna, Lomnica, Papra"ca,
Ozren, and Gostovi6 .ln lJ33 the Orthodox also received permission to
build a church in Saraievo. The privileges that allowecl the Orthodox to
build new churches in these years contrasts sharply with the
prohibitions against Catholic church building, which were strictly
enforced. Orrly occasionally did the Catholics receive perrnissioll to
repair or rebLrild a ruined or danraged church that hacl existed in the
sanre spot previously, and then on condition that the restored clturth
not exceed its earlier dirnensions.
Particularly interesting are the numbers of Orth6dox found in t[c
r.egion of Bosnian Krajina between western Bosnia and I)almatia (in t[c
regitrn of Glanroi and Duvno)(l3) where there was no evide'ce.{
Orthoclox bclievers in the rnedieval period. Ilthnological researt'lt rttttl
investigations of the defters have shown that most of these Orttrodox trad
R.eligion after Turkish Conquest 381
cornefrom Hercegovina, and that the bulk of newcomers were nomadic
Vlach shepherds whose migration routes had followed the path of their
seasonal journeys with their herds.
After the T'urkish conquest of Bosnia in I463, the earliest f'urkish
cadastral surveys (defters) in 1468 show a large number of abandoned
-I'he
villages, and others which were greatly depopulated. forrner
populace had either been killed or captured by the Turks, or had fled.
Many Catholics did flee from Bosnia into the Hungarian Jaice banate,
into Slavonia and other Croatian lands, or into Dalnratia. These events,
of course, led to a reduction in the nuntber of Catholics in Bosnia' The
defters front the l4B0's show many of these villages repopulated' In
some cases the new populace was Moslem. We do not know whether
these were Moslems brought from outside Bosnia and settled there by
ttre 'I'urks or whetlter they were Christian converts transferrecl from
clscwhere in l}osnia or llerrcegovina to the abalrclotted villages.(l1l) ln
some cases the new populations were Christians; the defters do not
usually state whether Catholic or Orthodox. Again we cannot be sure
whether these newcomers were chiefly frotrt internal migrations within
lJosnia, wl.rether they had {reely corne {ronr l{ercegovina or Serbia, or
whether they had been forcibly transferred from Serbia by the Turks.
Iior rnost people to move legally within the Ottornan areas of the
Balkans it was necessary to receive "Vlach" classification or privilege.
'l'hus a Serb peasant could receive the right to rnigrate only if he received
Vlach status. After receiving this status, the peasant had to pay a tax of a
ducat in cash insteacl of the usual payments in kincl. Most of the legal
nrigrants and new settlers in Rosnia and Hercegovina in the first century
-I'urkish
and a half of rule were Orthodox "Vlachs." 'fhus we find that
the term Vlach has acquired new meaning;(1t) hence care must be
exercised be{ore drawing any conclusions about "Vlachs" referred to in
the sources. These ''Vlach" migrations occurred gradually and steadily
throughout this century and a half, and had alarge role in repopulating
villages. There is little evidence of massive migrations occurring at
single times. Flowever, it must be stressed that many, if not the great
r.naiority, of these "Vlachs" were real Vlachs (i.e., shepherds), since in
nrany regions such as the Krajina we find a great increase in the number
of shepherds compared with the number of settled farmers. Serbs, who
had acquired Vlach privilege, presutnably upon their arlival at their rrew
honres would have worked the land. The majority of Vlachs coming into
Bosnia and the Krajina were Orthodox, and we have noted earlier that
the great majority of Hercegovinian Vlachs in the Middle Ages had
been Orthoclox. The large number of actual Vlachs that rnust have
migrated is also shown by the general picture we obtain of Bosnia in the
382 Medieval Bclsnian Church
seventeenth and eighteenth century. Then we find Moslerns, Jews,
other llalkan and Anatolian people living in towlls, Moslenrs and
Catholics in the valleys and flat farmland, and Orthodox in the
nlountains. Because the populace of the mountains is chiefly pastoral
this strongly suggests that many Orthodox immigrants into Bosnia had
been pastoral people.
Aiong with thcse "Vlachs", a number of Moslerns al,so settled" Most
of these settlers be thev Nloslern or C)rthodox
- replaced
who had fled to Catholic regions not under the -I'urks.
Catholics
Catholics, cer
tainly, would not have come in any significant numbers from outsirlc
IJosnia at this time. Flowever, presun.rably, a certain amount of internal
movement of Catholics fronr one place to another within Bosnia clid
occur.(l(r)
'l'lrt'rc is rto cvitlcrrt'r' tlrrrl llrr"l'rrr ks
1rr-t'ssrrlcrl Pr'oPk, lo (.()nv(,tl
(cxcclrt lor spt:cific slrort pcriotls uttdcr'lrarticular larratical puslrls).
Whenever a Christian accepted Islam, the'furks suffered the loss of thr:
special "infidel" taxes collectecl from christians. Nor did christials
need to accept Islam in order to retain their lancls. lVlany Bosnian,
Flercegovinian christians retained their estates and their christianity. A
prime exar'ple is the orthodox Vlach family of Miloradovi6 from trre
Stolac region in [-lercegovina. Not only did this family retain its
enorrnous estates in this area and its leaders serve the 'l'urks at grcat
pcrvrnal gain, but its leaders even built orthodox churches, inclurlirrg
the famous monastery of ZitomisliC.
In the earliest censuses of the l4(r0's we still find references to kr-
stjani. It is not always evident whether they still retained the lands with
which their uarlres were linked or whether, as former owners, thcir
nanle.s hacl become place nanres for the lands in question. It is probablc
that both of these circumstances did occur. ln I1+69, a clc'fter cxtract
which okig published lists eleve' villages inhabited excl'sively by kr-
stjani.(I7) Since the families are listed as so many households and so
n'lany unmarriecl n'rales, it is evident (as we have argued earlier) thlt
"farnilies" refers to nrarriecl cor.rples. If they were all ordainecl rnorrks,
cveryone lvoulcl have been a cclibate nrale (<lr fernale). '['hus it is eviclerrt
that here the defters refer to believers in the church as opposed t.
monks. Possibly in some cases thesd villages belonged to the Bosrrian
chrrrch. Yet the overall picture obtained from the clefters of the 1460's
(and rnore so from the 11180's) is that llosnia was by then a rancr of
christians (catholics and orthodox). And since the land had long becn
catholic (as opposed to orthodox) and since we have no evicle'ce of
large-scale orthodox migrations yet, we may presume that the rnajority
of these Christians was still Catholic.
Ileligion after'I'urkish Conquest 383
ancl ln these years we see the beginning of the conversion of part of the
population to lslam. Frequentiy in court and legal documents from the
{irst century of f'urkish ruie we see the father having a Christian or
,
popular Slavic name, showing that tre was a Christian, and the son
bcaring a Moslern name, showing that he had accepted Islam.'Ihe
defters, too. sometinres illustrate conversions by referring to fathers
with Slavic narnes being succeeded by sons bearing Moslem names; the
rlcfters also on occasions refer to people as "New Moslems", indicating
Iecent cor)versions.(18)
'l'he clefter statistics published by vSabanovi6 on confessions arouncl
l-epenica itt central Bosnia also show the gradual acceptance of Islam by
ttre populace there.(19) ln l4(r8 we find 279 householders and 61 adult
:iinglr: males. All of them were Christian. [n ] 1t85 we fincl 329 Christian
Irrtrrsclrolrlt'rsrrrrtl()2(llrristirrrr utlrrll rrrrrrrirlrit'rl rrrirlcs. urith lB N'loslcrrr
lrrrtrst:ltolr.lct.s arttl 2(r rrrurralrietl Nloslcnr lrralcs. 'l'his sholvs botlr thr:
itrcreased population of the area through resettlement and the beginning
of tlte acceptance of Islam. Of course, we do not know whether the
Moslc'lns tnentione(l were recent converts or long,tirncl Moslenrs
brought in frorn elsewhere. If they wcre converts, we see that the rate of
acr:epting lsiam over these first twenty years of f'urkish rule was slow.
't'he l/+89 census notes 165 Christian families and (r5 Nloslem.'I"his
shows that there was either a decline of population, possibly owing to
cpidcnrics, or else that the'I'urks had re'classifiecl the villages in the
area, assigning many lorrner free villages to timars. In 1509 we find that
thc populatiorr hacl risen again ancl by now the Nloslems are the
rnajr:rity: 393 lVloslern families to 1(r0 Christian. l{owever, because rhe
nuttrbcr of Christian farnilies was essentially unchanged, it is possible
thatnrostof these Nloslernsappearingberween 11+89 and 1509 hadbeen
hrouglrt in fronr elsewhere. Since the Christian figure has decreased by
only five farrrilies, we can argue that the rrumber of actual conversions
during these twenty years among the local populace of Lepenica was
srnall. Even so, tlrough, lJosnia was clearly becorning rlore Moslern in
character.
We also find that the rafio of Nlloslerns to Christians varietl from place
to place. In some areas we fincl rnany Moslems and in others alrnost
rrone.'l'his is clearly shown by the 11t85 defters fcrr central Bosnia.(20)
Orrce again we do not know how many of these Nloslems were old-
tinrerrs cclnverted to lslam and how ruany were new settlers. lJowever,
wltcn we find an early Moslem cernetery on the site of a medieval
cernetery, tlien we are justified in concluding that the buried Moslems
wr:re relatives of the rnedieval deceasecl ; in such cases, then, we are
facecl with conversion rather than migration. It would be an interesting
384 Nledieval llosnian Church
proiect to determine whether the villages noted in the defters as con-
taining Moslern families have old cemeteries, arrd if so, whettrer sle/-cl
and nilani are found at the same sites.'I'he only time a nrigratiorr has
obviously occurred is when we see a great increase in the actual
population. Unfortunately, horvever, the defters rarely tell us fronr
where the new settlers have conre. N4igration is a rnost irnportant
subiect that requires a great deal niore work. It is necerssar"y {or
'l'urkologists rvho have access to the defters to extract all the relcvant
material, so that their results may be incorporatecl with the work clone
by .f ugoslav anthropokrgists on popular traditions about nrigrations arrrl
about place of origin of farnilies.
The defters, then, show that conversions to lslatn occurred but that
the rir.te of conversion varied frorn place to place and that in many placcs
tlrc rrrtc rrI acccptirrg lslatn was skrw. 'l'ht'rlcftcrs of l528l29 givr: tlrt'
lirllowiug fitrlurcs for the nutttber of Clrristiarr (including botlr Catlrolic
and Olthodox) ancl Nloslenr Ltou.re/tolds; for thc Sanrli.nk of llosrrirr,
19,619 Christian an<l 16,931 Moslern; for the Sandlak of Zvornik,
13,112 Christian and 2,65/+ Moslem; for the SandZak of Hercegovina
(probably not the whole Sandiak) 9,588 Christian and 7.077 illoslern.
Onc, should probably muitiply these figtrres by five or six to alrive at the
total nurnber of inclividuals.(21)
-l'he
defter data is supplementecl by thr:
('()ntents of ccrlaitr Catholic visitatiorrs.(22) l)t'tcr Masalcchi statt's thrrt
irr lJosnia in 1624 there were abor-rt 900,000 Moslerns, 300,000
Catholics, and l)0,000 Orthodox. His figures, though of course ap-
proxirnations, do not inclucle l{ercegovina.(23) Athartasirrs
Georgijevii, writing in 1626 cloes not agree. He states that there wert,
250,t)00 Catholics, that the number of Orthodox exceecled that of thc
Catholics, and together the two Christian faiths outnunlberecl thc
'f urks. 'I'he fact he had the Orthodox exceecling the Catholics probably
can lle attributed to the fact that lre inclrrdcd Ilerccgovirra. ilis srrralk'r'
e.stirlate for Nlosleurs is interesting. Irr l6)5 Nlarijarr NlaraviCslresscs
thc c'<lnvcrsiotts thal hacl occurrercl ancl statr.:s that thc tnaiority rvt'rt'
Moslcnrs. As a rcsult of cortvcrsiorrs arrtl Iliglrt (sornt: 2,(XX) (]atlrolirs
hacl flecl to (lroatia in the last rlecadc), the trrrntber of (latholir:s irr
[3osnia, hc savs, hacl fallen to 73,(XX). I Ie rnt'ntions the prescrrce of Jcws
in Sarajevo and Gypsies everyrvherre.
Although we firtd conversions to lslarn in this periocl, we fin<l
evidence in seventeetrth century visitatiorrs that clranging religiorr n'as a
multi directional phenornenon. Catholics abancloned their faith to both
rivals. We learn of Catholics accepting lslam or Orthodoxy in the regiorr
of 'l'rebirrje in the I(:>20's.(2t+)'l'he rnain cause for abandoning
Catholicism noted by the visitor was the sholtage of priest.s, thc
llcligion after'l'urkish Conquest 3U5
ignorance of the existing priests, and the indifference of the local bishop.
Bernard Pomaz.aniC, a Capuchin, traveling in Gacko in 1)29-30, found
many former Catholics, who, owing to the lack of priests of their faith,
had convertecl to Orthodo xy .(T)'I'hus we see the importance of having
an effective clergy to retain believers ancl keep them from errors.
'l"he dying Ilosnian Church lost all its believers to other faiths. We
have seen in Paffiarch Gennadius' letter that some Bosnian Churchmen
acccpted Orthodoxy.'fhe reports of Pius II clearly show that other
I}osnian Church believers accepted Catholicism. lt is only when we try
to show llosnian Churchmen accepting lslam that we hit a blank.
Professor N. FilipoviJ, having observed that for years scholars have
re{errecl to adherents of the Bosnian Church accepting Islam en masse,
notes that the 'lurkish sources do not show such a mass conversion. FIe
str(':iscs that in all ttre clcItcrs h<: coulcl rrot firtrl a sitrgle case of a krstianin
or a son of a krstjanin converting to lslanr. I'le could only fincl cases of
purpk: , livirrg in villagcs in whiclr krstfani livc, cotrvctting.(2(r) but
thcrc is lr() !\,ay of knowing rvht'thcr or not thcse convcrts ha<l bcen
aclhcrents of the llosrrian Church. In the getreral atmosphere of changing
religion, we can be certain that there were many Bosnian Church
nrcmbers converting to Islanr; but it is iror.ric in the face of the
-
generally accepted opinion that this cl'rurch supplied the largest number
o[ ncw Moslt,rus that l]osnian Church nrcrrrlrcrs ar(' thc or)e groul)
which cannot be showrr on the basis of our sources convcrting to Islatn.
'l'he Orthodox, despite their successes, also lost believers. The
visitations not only speak of Catholics accepting Orthodoxy but also
show Orthoclox believers turning to Catholicism. The Orthodox also
corrvertecl to Islam; we find an inscription frorn a Psalter in the Holy
T'rirrity Church in Plevlje, dated Sarajevo 1517, which states that in
these days in this land (Bosnia?, the Sarajevo region?) there is a great
irrcrcasc in tlrc nunrber of Moslerns, wlrile the Orthodox Christian faith
in llris llncl ltirs beconre greatly reclucc'<l in rrumbers.(27)'l'hus we find
thirt in onle l)arts of Bosnia, the Orthodox religion, which by rnigration
:rrrtl corrvcr-siorr lracl ret'cntl.y increasctl it.s rnctnbcrship, was ttow in tlte
cally:iixteenth century su{fering losses to lslarn.
'l'hrrs rr,c set' that changes of religicln lvere a general attd ctlmtrttltt
occurrence at this tinre, and that the widely discussed "lslarniz.atiort"
r.l'as onlv one aspect of this ltroader phenomenon.'I'lre onlv direction
tllrl t'orrversiorr tlitl not go olrcnly was lrot.n Islanr to Clrristianity.'l hc
rea:ioll for this was the {rightful penalty {or apostatiz"ing {rotrt lslarrr.
Itorvevr:r, the visitatious do repurt that Moslerls frequently lrecanre
secret Christians.(28) 'fhus, on the sly, converts to lslam or their
dcscendants also reverteil to Christianity.
)86 Medieval Ilosniau Church
Whv ditl sonlallv chatrges irr religiotrs ()ltfessiol) oc('rlr in llosnia arrtl
llercegovina and not elsewhere in the llalkrurs (excltrditrg Albarrirr.)?
'l'he reason I suggest is trot hard to fincl artcl has nothing to tlo rvith thc
content of beliefs of the forrner heresy. even though such a view has
frecluently been aclvanced. 'l'he other Balkan states hacl orte rlttttrinitttt
forrn of Christianity. 'I'hey hacl had and contirtued to preserve trtrclr:r thc
'l'urks fairly cfficient antl territoriirlly orraniz-etl chtrrch arlntittistratiotrs.
llosnia, unlike thern, had hacl cortrpeting faiths. Arrd as a result of its
religious history no faith in lJosnia was able to establish an eflicit'rtt
territoriallri based organization that could bind believers to ils chut clt
lre it through belief or throtrgh a settsc of trrtntnttltity.'l'lrus llosrria's
(lhlistians, of whatever cott{essiott, lrad hatl little <:ontact rvillt rtltv
llrrrrllr, rrrrrl lr.w llrsrriirtrs nt'tc tlt't'ltly lll:tcltt'<l lo rrrrv lt'li1ii()tts (()rll
rltrrrity. lrr tIt: [/t50's arrtl early' l /t(rO's lttatty lJtlsttiatts ltatl Itt't'tt
forcibly brought to Catholicistn. 'I'hese converts certainly ltacl not Irad
tinrc to bccotnc strong lrelievirrg (]atlrolir:s, lltey probably latkc<l itttct'cst
in (latholicisnr, arrdnrany nlay ltave tesettlctl bt:ing lort:t'd to acccl)t tllat
faith. 'I'hus rnany l)osniilns were rllore or less bctwectt faitlrs - havirrg
renrnrnced an earlier faith arrd ll()t )fet cornrnittetl to the tterv cxte - rvitlr
rro dccp belief itr any.
After l1l(r3, Islanr -'a clynatttit'arttl well-prc'a<:ltt'cl trew rttligirltr'-
:rppcaretl. It had the aclvantagt'of bcing the religiorr of tltc colt<ltrctilrll
state, rvlriclt gave its rnt'ttrburs rtll sotts of rvorldly aclvirttlitgt's. Irr llr'
carly vcars r,f 'l'urkish rule tlu'Ottlrorlox ltacl ttot yct ha<l tinre trr htrikl
an cf{ective orgatriz.atiort in ntttclt of []o:irria anrl I lerccgovirra ; th<'
(latholic organiz-atiott in this periotl was efk'<:tii'e otrly spol atlit allv.
'l'lrrrs, irr a locality rvhcrc (lhristiartity '"vas pool ly otllitrrizcrl rrrtrl
gcrlerally inclfectivcly preacltcd, it is trol stlll)risillS to Iirltl 1rcr,1rk'
rvithout any strong religious attaclttllcrlt acr:<'pting a rrerv laitll. Arrrl
[cr-ause t]re []6snians hacl long been shaky Cfiristiarls wlrg ha<l tlt:alt
rvit[r thc'l'urks f9r half a c:t'rrttrry lrt'ftlre tltc c<tlltlttest, tltt'v ltatl rro
strong preiudices against Islatn as clid 1re<lple frottt ntost other Clrristirrrt
lancls.'I'his general situatiorr rvas sttrely intensified by their getttlral
feelings of [atred towarcl I Itrtrgarv which r:nany plobably itlentifietl rvitlr
Catholicisnr. ln additiorr, \\'e (AIl lte certaitt lhat frr:qtrerttly r'cligiorrs
lnotives were not the rrraior otrcs rvhir,'h deterrltined otte's act'ept;tttcc rtf
a nelv faith. Arrd finally, a(('cl)tallce is a trtore accllrate tt:rttr tltrttt
convcrsion for what oc<tttrrtrtl in Iloslria. I)robably fcw Ilrstriarrs irr
accepting lslam unclerwent ally dcep changr:s in pattertts of tlrprrgltl ttr
way of life. NIost of those wlto bec'ante lVloslerns probably liverd as tlrt'r'
always ha<l . retaining most of their dotrtcstic cr-rstollls as rvell its ttlalrv
Christian l)ractices. 'l-hey atlopted norv a ferv lslarnic practi(t:s, lvhicll
Ileligion after'l'urkish Conquest )87
quickly would acquire great synrbolic vah.re and which would soon corle
to bc viewerl as t[rc. essentials of lslant.
'l'hrrs the llosniatt Church sitnply
l)assed arvay. Probably only in thc.
days of the nativistic reaction in the rniddle of the thirteenth century,
when llosnians fought to rnaintain their independence from the
Ilungarians, hacl the llosnian Church had much significance for sizable
nunrbcrs of llosnians. I'hroughout the fourteenth and fi{teenth cen-
tut'iers, the llosnian Churchnren
- excluding those who lived ancl served
at secular corlrts -- seem to have spent rnost clf their time in their
nronasteries; they did not build a territorial organiz-ation or atteml)t to
establish close ties with the peasant populatiorr. l[hus wtren other faiths
bcgan to proselytiz-e and put pressure cln the rulers tc'r persecute, there
rvcrt,fcrv wtro cared t'nough ahorrt thc lJosrrian Church to dt'fencl its
t lclics. With thr:'l'rrlkish c()n(lu('st arrrl tlrc rrt'rv or.rlt'r cstablishcd hy it,
the irrelevance of the llosnian Church to llosnian life becarne complete,
aud the Ilosnian Church becarne extinct. I-listorical selection parallels
nirtrrrzrl selection.
'.lhrcuglrout this strrcly rve have stresscd that tlre lJosnian Clrurch
cxertecl relatively little infltrence on political developntents or upoll
society. And as an inefficient religious organiz-ation existing in the
rrricl<lle of a peasant society <1uite inclifferent to religious lrlatters, its
tcligiorrs attcl tnoral influence was also srnall.'l'hus the legacy of the
lJosnian (lhurch is nil. Ancl though frequently historians have used tlre
llosttian Chtrrch to explain the Islamiz-ation of llosnia, it is nrore ac-
('rlrate to <:xplain that phenonrenon by thc. allserrce of strong Catholic,
()rthoclox, or even Rosniarr C'lrurch organizations.
At tirncs, subsequt:nt historians have nragnified the irnportance of
tlris rrrerlicval church, giving it an irrfltrcntial role in thc clevclo[)nr(]rlt of
thc rrrertlieval state.(29) C)thers have madc it into a rornantic synrbol of
IJosnian inclependence in the face of its preclatory neighbors. Apparently
its crrrterrrporaiies clicl not rr.sually find it so.
li0o'l N() I I1S IO CtIn Pl'liR VIll
1. Ancl of <rrurse Uskoplje, in ttre years followin g L467, had become part of
the territory belonging to the ruler of Ilercegovina.
2. 11. l.aszowski, "[Jrbar Vinodolskih irnanja knezova Zrinskih, " l/2A, 17,
l9l 5, 1'. lt)7.
3. Li. Stanojevic', "Jedan ponren o kristianirrra u Dalnraciji iz l(t()2 godine,"
(;//). X [, l9(r{), l. 2]3.
4.'l'lre ignoranceofthe IJosnians aborrt nratters of faith is also illustrated by
thc fa<t ttrat after l)90 when the Catholic Church introcluced the (irt-,gorian
calendar in llosnia, many Bosnians, thinking tlre change in calenclar signified a
388 Nledieval Bosnian Church
change in faith, preferredto stick with the old calendar than the sacraments and
convilrtecl to Oithodoxy (l). NIandi6, Iltniika pottijest IJosne i IIercellot,inc,
Ilornc, i9(r7, p. 1+71).
1. Pandiii, appendix, p.132, presenting text of 1703 visita-tion of A' Righus
^'iPatarenstuo
6. M. Vego, u Hercegovini u svjetlu arheoldkih spomenika,"
GZM,\ (arh), n.s.18, l9(r3, pp. 209-11 .
7. l'rrrrtliicl. a1,Pc'rrtlix , 1t. l1t7 , l)resenting tcxt ()f visitation of l75l ttf S.
'l udisi6.
- "s.
i,|,toyrlt lia Nikote Lr/suaninaU. Jeleni6 ed.) Sarajevo, 19i(r, pp 76,1B'
9. Orbini, p.313.
i0. And Uskoplje hacl been under the ruler of Hercegovina since l)ecefnbcr
1463.'I h's, since we only hear of a hii-a there between l 1t66 and 1 1t70 we r' ust
consicler the possibility that the hiia did not date from the Bosnian kingdoril. It is
qtrite possible that Bosnian Churchmen, under the protection,of the herceg' had
,rr,,ucd t,, there after Uskoplie hacl bee n granted to Herceg Stefan '
ll.l\'1 .lldtinii, I;r,tn jct,,til'.i tdttt().tl(ttt u litinici rt,l r!oljclt X/l/ XX, Z:r1[tb,
lgl l, p. J 29. I lc, of r:ourse, would bc arr exarrrplco{ an orthockrx bclievcr lrt'irrl'
,,,rrru"rtcd to Catholicisnt in thc period prior to the collapse of the ntedievitl state.
1 2.
'l hat the Bosnian church was not a branch ofthe Serbian is also suggested
by the great difference in character and spirit between the two churches.'fhc
Bosnians, thor.rgh they fornted their on'n church. nevef attempted to have a
Bosnian saint with his own cult like the Serbs' Sava. l'he Bosnians were not
chlrch oriented; churches of all denorninations in Iloslia were srnall anfl not at
all likt: tIc nritguificent Ilt()nastery chttrcltcs huilt in Scrbia l1d sttplxrrtcd bv
cxtelsive land grants ancl costly gifts fronr the rich rvho saw tltese dottatiolts as a
cgltural and religi6us cluty. T'he fJosnians do not seern to have felt such an
obligation parric;larly strongly. ln adclition we find the Serbs giving gifts to
f,r..ign ."ui...of Orthodoxy, particularly Mount Athos. lf the Bosnian Churr:h
Iacl been Orthodox we would expect to fintl ties betwectr it or its rich a<lheretrls
and sonie of those foreign centers. Exclucling the hcrceg's gifts to t|e Silrti
rlonks (and the source referring to the Sift specifically states that he was not 1't't
Ortlrockrx) u,c havc tto evidcnce of any llosniatr giving to any foreign Ortlrcrrlox
'l
r.c1l1r. lrt, IJ6srrinrr (lhurch wir:i nr()lrirstic, but if ir w('re at1 otttgrttwllt rlf lltc
Scrbian Church rve would cx[)ect it to have ties rvith Serbia arrd to arctluirt'sotttt'
oI the characteristics of Serbian n]onasticislll.'l'hat it did not and t]rat the
Serbian Church anathematized the krstjani seems to rne sufficient eviderlce that
thc B6sniau Church, though more or less orth6dox in its theglogy, lvas not
(Jrtlto do x.
ll. Nl. Vasid, "Etnitke pronr jene u Rosanskoi kraiini u XVI v," GID, l7'
t9(r2, pp. 233 49.
l/t. On a few occasions the defters do infr:rrrrr us, in the nlanller they narttt'
in{ivitluals holding lalcl, that a Nloslerl lanclholcler was a newcomer lrottt
bcyond the lxrrders of Bosnia (e.g', llyas of [ilorina). Okig, "Les Kristiarrs ',"
p. 119 gives a fairly long list of such exanrples. Urrforlunately thc narnes arc OI
inciividr.rals, rhus we cannot say whether they had arrived inclividually pr
whcthcr they came as parts of a large migration from one place (e.g., in the cited
case front Florina).
I ). 'l'hough the term Vlach originally referred to a specific ethnic arrcl
linguistir: group of pcople, the linrited evi<lcnce we ltave ahotrt Vlachs itr []osrri.r
irld llcrccgovirra in thc Midcllc Agcs suggcsts that they rr'ere alrcadv Sllvic
'l
spcakcrs, anrl alrearly interrnarriccl with Slavs. lrtrs in ntctlieval sotttccs for
Ileligion after 'furkish Conquest 389
IJosnia and [lercegovina the term "Vlach, " regardless of the origin of the word
ancl the fact that the majority of Vlachs were of non-Slavic origin, had come to
clesignate "shepherds"; the new significance gained under the Ottoman's
" Vlach' ' status was the right to resettle and pay a set tax in cash rather than in
kincl. 'l'his then would add to the "Vlach" category some non-shepherds. On
thc Vlachs in llosnia and I lercegovina, see Sitnltozijun o srednjot'jekounom
Iittunu, rrlited by l\lt. Filipovid, Sarajcvo, Poseb. iz"d. NDIIII' ll, Sarajevo,
l9(r3. 'Ihe fact that the Vlachs lrecame Slavicized in language and racially mixed
with Slavs did not eliminate cultural differarces between the Vlach shepherds
and the settled Slavs. 1"hus, probably owing tq the fact that rnany if not most of
the rnedieval "Vlachs" were of common ethnic Vlach origin, "Vlachs" have
preserved to the present day a variety of practices not found among other peoples
in the Balkans, some of which may well date back to classical times. Some
exanrples can be found in M. Wenzel, "'Ihe Dioscori in the Balkans," Skuic
Iltt'iett', 26, 1967 , fp. 3(,3 39t.
l(r. Orr thc problcrn of rrrigratiorrs I atu tuucit inclcbted to the fruitful con-
versatiorls I was able to have with the anthropologists at the Zemaliskimuz-ei in
Saraievo, particularly with Professors M. Petric{ and V. Palavestra. See also NI.
I'etri6's biief but .*..11*t article on nrigration, "O rnigraciju,r," ,trnouniituu u
flosni iFlercegovini," GZMS,18, 1963 (etn). pp. 5 l6-.See also the pioneer
r,,'orks of J. dedijer, "Porijeklo bosanskog i heiceg,tudtkog stanovni'stva, "
Pregled,l, 191I , p1t. 1t20 30, and V. Skari6, "Poriieklo pravoslavnoga narocla
u sievpr()zinadnoj Rosni ," GZMS, XXX, 1918, pp. 2.19'261 . Also thc
v,,lrrnrls ol thc (.vijif. Ncsclja i lnreklo sldnouniittd scrics, 1'arlicularly J.
Dediler's excellent work on Hercegovina and l\{. Filipovi6 on Visoko. I also
greatly profited from rny discussions about nraterjal in the'l'urkish defters and
inigruikitts in the early Turkish periocl with H. Sabanovi6 at the Oriental In-
:ititute in Saralevo. See also note 13.
I 7. Okig, " I-es Kristians . . .," Siidost'Forschungen, 19, 1960, p. 122
"
tR. thid , pp. llB 19.
I9. ILSaharrovi6, ''I-epenicauprvonrstoljeduturskevlaclavine,'' in NDBI{,
lxrscl>. iz,d. vol.1, Leltenicrr, Sarajevo, 1963, pp. l% 207, esp.pp. i95 96.'I'he
lrrrrtktl,,wrr ol irrdividual villagcs, p1t. LL)7-2(17 .
20. H. Sabanovii, "llosarisko kiaji3te l4rt8 1463," GID,IX, 1918, pp.
I7l-220. I here choose exantples fronr 148) of certain larger villages that well
illustrate the great variation in the ratir:s between Christian and Nloslern
households: I)olac (near 1'ravnik): 84 Christian, 1J Nloslern. Hodidjed (the
fortress above Sarajevo): 3) Christian, 9 N{oslern. Glavogodina: 3 Christian,
29 I\Ioslern. Several villages which together compose Doliani : l9 Christian, 16
Nloslern. Butmir:21 Christian, 111 l\{oslen. Otes: 3 Christian, 17 iVloslem.
arrcl Presjenica: 38 Christian, 79 Nloslem.
2 I . O. L. Ilarkan, " Essai sur les Donn6es Statistiques cles Registres de
Ilccerrst'rrcrrt rlans 1'lirrrpire Ottontan aux XVc ct XVIc sit)cles," Journal o/
ltconomic and Soc'ial I listor'| o.l tbe Orient,l, | , 1957 ,1t. 12.
22. For references to all the visitations that follow, see Chapter II, note (r11.
23. N'lasarechi also specifically notes conversions from Catholicisnr to Islam,
rncrltioning that recerrtly sonre 7,()00 Catholics from the vicinity of Sutieska in
ccntraI IJosnia had acceptecl lslanr.
.l i. lirr t,x:rrrr1,lc, sce the interesting article and texts l)resented by K.
lrr,rg,rrr,,vri, "'lirlr,,Tnjastjcpanskabiskupijaullercegovini," CroatiaSacra,T,
390 Medieval Bosnian Church BibliographY

1934. op. 29-58. esp. pp. 3t, 40' 42, 5O't1. INFORMATION ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION
25. D. Mandi (., Etni/ka pouiiest Bosne i Hetcegouine, Rom-e, 1967, p: 460. OF THE BIBLIOGRAPHY
Mandid emphasizes the fact that in the seventeenth century CatholicS all over
Bosnia and Hercegovina convefted to Orthodoxy. He cites as reasons Turkish
favor and the shortage of Catholic priests. Under Primary Sources (A: Written) are included all docurnentary
iNapomene o islamizaciii u Bosni i Hetcegovini u )1y period. Since certain early modern histories
26. N. Filipoyii, sources from the medieval
viieku," Godilniah, Xn|. Vlt, Centar za balkanolo'Ikog ispitioania, Kni. S include documents now lost (and therefore primary material), we have
(AN i U, B i H). I970, PP.1t1, 161. to draw an arbitrary dateline between works classified as primary
' 27.Pip Stjepa and V.'trifkovi6. Saraiet'sha okolina,.l: So-*t:!?.polie(SKA,
had
and secondary. Thus as primary sources we have included all post-
SEZ, vol. XI, i\aselia srpskih zemaliavol. V, general editor J' Cviii6), Beograd,
rnedieval histories from 1463 up to and including the work of Junius
1908. o.61.
28. i(. Draganovi6, "Tob#nia stiepanska biskupiia ' . .'1' p. 35. Also Resti (1669-1731). The eighteenth century historians, such as Farlati
illustrating the-desire of Moslems to retufn to Christianity is the fact that during and Raynaldi, despite their presentation of certain documents not found
and after Austrian-Turkish wars, Moslerns as well as Catholics sought asylum
in Austrian territory; these Moslems upon arrival accepted Catholicism. We
ebewhere
- some of
which are of doubtful authenticity
- afe included
also have data on Moslems migrating to Dalmatia to accept catholicism.
with secondary material.
2g . The tendency to exaggerate the importance of religious issues in medieval Archaeological works have presented a problem. Straight descriptions
Bosnia -_ as well as in many other medieval states is a natural one since such of cemeteries, gravestone motifs, excavations of medieval churches,
or
-
alarge proportion of our sources were written by churchmen who were, of texts of inscriptions are cleaily primary sources. However' rarely is
course, concerned with these issues. archaeological material presented in a clear-cut manner. Frequently the
archaeologist, in addition to providing descriptive data about a site, will
devote considerable space to theorizing about the meaning of motifs. We
also find new inscriptions or gravestones announced in more general
secondary works. Therefore, while certain archaeological works may
clearly be categorized as "primary" or "secondary," there are a vast
number of works which fit both categories. Thus' if one wants to avoid
listing many titles twice, one again must be arbitrary about classifying
works under Primary Sources (B: Archaeological and Epigraphical) or
Secondary Sources. The bulk of these difficult to classify works have
been placed under the Primary heading, hence the reader interested in
the views and scholarly judgments of able archaelogists who have
worked on questions connected with medieval Bosnia are referred to
Section B of Primary Sources.
For descriptions of sources, and what texts appear in particular
collections, the reader is referred to Chapter II of this study which is
devoted to problems connected with the sources.
Under the secondary literature are included works on a variety of
topics. These include works on Bosnian history, religion, ethnography,
folklore, and culture as well as recent travel accounts. Also included are
a variety of works on related fields that I followed up in the hopes of
discovering links between Bosnian and foreign phenomena (e.g., works
$
t on Eastern and Western dualism). I have also included a variety o{
! Anthropological works, whose contents have nothing about Bosnia, but
$
t* which were read for methodological reasons to find questions to put
to the Bosnian sources. -
*
*
i
i
)
392 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bibliography 393
Works on Bosnia fall into three categories and once again
distinctions between the categories are frequently- blurred' *o.kI
of
quality and relevant, works of quality on various topics of Bosnian
history, but which did not contribute specifically to this study, and
works which are chiefly polemical. of course, lines between these
categories are frequently hard to draw; a polemical work of little
scholarly value may occasionally have an important insight. since BIBLIOGRAPHY
judgments on the merits or demerits of many of these works are put
KEY TO ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY
forward in the course of the book and its footnotes, the bibliograihy
makes no attempt to evaluate the secondary works.

AFP, Arcbiaum Frarrum Praedicatorum (Publication of Instituto storico

Dominicano, Rome, I, 1930-.
AHID, Anali Historijskog Institata a Dabrouniku, Dubrovnik, l, lgj2-.
BAN, B'lgarska f.kademiia na Naukite.
CEC, Cahiers d'Etades Catbares, Arques, l, 1946-.
FFS, Filozofski Fakultet u Sarajevu. Have a
publication, Radoui.
Fontes: Fontes, Pontificia commissio ad Redigendum codicem iuris canonici
orientalis, Rome.
GEMB, Glasnik Etnografskog muzeja u Beog1qdu, Beograd, l, 1926-.
GID, A Journal originally entitled, Godiinjah Istoriskog druYtua Bosne i
Hercegouine and now entitled, Godiinjak Draitua-islotiy'ara Bosne i
flercego uine, Sarajevo,.J, 1946-.
GNC, Godiynjica Nikole Cupiia, Beograd, l, 1877-lg4l.
GSUD, Glamik Srpskog atenog druitaa, Beograd, I-LXXV, 1847-1892 (first
18 volumes entitled Glasnik Dru{tua srbshe slouesnosti).
GZMS, Glamih Zemaljskog muzeja, Sarajevo, l, 1889-1943; new series, I,
1946-.
l(,, Istorijski tasopis, Beograd, l, Lg4B..
lG, Istoriski glasnik, Beograd, begun in 1948; for some reason with volume
numbersonly within a year and not by year.
IJKSN, Istorija, jezik i knjilevnost srpskog naroda. A sub-title for a periodical
and a series of documents issued by a department of the Serbian Academy of
Sciences. The document series is Zbornik za IJKSN; and the periodiial,
Pilozi.
JAZU, Jugoslavenska Akademija znanosti i umjetnosti. Zagreb. The Academy
of Science and Art in Zagreb. Has many publications: Two periodicals,
Starine, and Rad. Also publishes collections of documgnts, see MSHSM. In
, addition see alo the ethnographic publication, ZNZOJS.
llC, Jugostouenshi istorishi {osipii, Beograd. A periodical that began in lg?J
and expired before World War II began.
-_
MSHSM, Monumenta spectantia histoilam Slavorum Meridionalium. The
source publication series of IAZU, initiated in 1868.
-NDBH,
Nautno druYtvo, Bosne i Hercegovine. Institute in Sarajevo.
Publications include the periodical Radoui;it also publishes two seriis of
monographs: Diela, and Posebna izdanja.
 394 Medieval Bosnian Church
Bibliography 395
NS,,-NaYe-staine, Organ of the Zavod za zaltitu spomenika kulture
for the
Republic of Bosnia and Hercegovina. Sarajevo, '1, lgt?,-. PRIMARY SOURCES
Pos. izd. Posebna izdania. hgi"-,!y]I"nographs. The heading for
monograph
series of both SAN and NDBH. A. Written
Pr ilozi. Pri h zl {iKSN; Periodical issued by SAN, Beo gra d, I, lg
2l -.
sAN^, Srp-ska Akademija Nauka i umetnosti. serbian l..i*y of sciences and Amati, G. "Processus contra Waldenses in Lombardia Superiori anno 1387,"
Arts. Has many publicatio-rs. The monograph series, pos. iza. Cotf".tions Arcbiuio Storico ltqliano(Firenze), Ser. III, Vol, II, pt. 1, 186), pp.3-61.
sources Zbomik za.IJKS-N. As well aJ journals nriUri t1XiN,-"nl ot Anonj'mi Spalatensis, in Scriptores Rerum Hungaricaram, DalmZiicaram,
Zbornik radova series of the various institu-tes...see_alsoi snz' tn.
ib"iowl, Croaticarum et Slauonicaram ueleles ac Genuini,III, Vindobona (Vienna),
Before World War II the Academy was the Serbian noyat'Ac"Jemy, 1748 (ed. I. Schwandtner).
,f_
breviated SKA. BajraktareviC, F. "Turski dokumenti manastira Sv. Trojice kod Plevlja,"
sEZ' srpski etnografski zbomik. A multi-volume publication. In addition Spomenik (SKA), LXXIX, 1935, pp. 25-85.
to
monographs, it publishes the series on migration and settlements Bartholomaeus de Pisa, "De Conformitate vitae B. Francisci, " Analecta
of
populations on an area.to_area basis: Naselja i poreklo rt"rrounfftu,
.-. . Franciscana, IV, f 906.
well as the volumes of sEZ devoted to ethnogiaphic studies of particurar ", Benedict XI, see Delorme and Tautu (eds.).
customs or panicular areas: Xvot i obiYaji narodni. Benedia XII, see Tautu (ed.).
sKA, srpska kraljevska Akademija. The pre-revorutionary name for sAN. Bertrandde_laBroquihe, Le Volage d'Outremer(M. Rajiti( V. Rabotin eds.),
:SNSBH' srednjevjekovni. nadgrobni spomenici Bosne i Hercegov're. Beograd, 1950.
The
monograph series of which each volume is devoted to medieva-l cemeteries Boniface IX, see Monumenta Vaticana Historiam Regni Hungariae . . . .
of a particular location..Begun in r9J0. originally published bf the Chalkokondyles, Laonikos, De Rebas Tarcicis, Bonn Corpus, Vol. 48, Bonn,
Zemaljski.muzej in sarajevo, publication has iecently been undel t843.
the
auspices of the Zavod za z.aKtitu spomenika kulture BH. La Cbanson de la Croisade Albigeoise (ed. E. Martin-Chabot), 3 vols., paris,
YY, Vizantijskij uremennik, Moscow, 1894-1927.New Series, I, Ig47_. 196r.
VZA, .Vjenik zemaljskog. arkiaa, Zagreb, I_XXil, rcgg-tdZO. n"rrlrn.a chronica XXIV generalium ordinis Minorum, Analecta Franciscana, ril,
gnder title Vjesnik drYauni arbiu 1925-4). 1897.
zNZOJS, Zbonih za narodniYiuot i obi{aje julnih slauena. The ethnosraphic cledat' L. Le Nouaeau Testameat, traduit au xIIIe si\cle en rangue prouengale,
-d--.r
__z,nd_folklore putlication of JAZU, Zagieb, I, lg96_. suiai d'an rituel Catbare, Paris, 1887.
zREr' zbomik radoaa Etnografskog Institlu, sAN, Beograd. Clement V, see Delorme and Tautu (eds.).
Journar of the
Ethnographic Insitute of SAN- Beograd, l, IgrO-. Clement VI, see Tautu (ed.).
ZRFFB' zbornik radoaa Filozofskog fakurteta u Beogradu. Journal of the CotrugJi, B. Della Melcatura et del Mercante perfetto,Brescia, 1602.
Filozofski {akultet ofthe University of Beograd ,1, Ig:4g_.
-listina
Cremo(nik. G., ed. "Nekoliko dubrovaEkih iz XII-XIII stoleCa,"
zRYr, Zbonik radoua vi,za-ntoto'tkog Institara, sAN, Beograd. G7.MS, Xllll. l93l , pp. 2)-54.
Journal of the "
Byzantine Institute of SAN. Beograd, l, l9|2_, eremoYnik, G., ed. Istoriski spomenici dubroaatkog arbiua, ,,Kancelariski i
notariski spisi 1278-1301' ' ; (SKA, Zbornik za istori ju jezik i kn jiZevnost
u srpskog nareda, Ser. III, 1 sv.), Beograd, 1932.
CremoKnik, G., ed. Spisi dubrouatke iancelarije, kni. I, "Zapisi notara
Tomazine de Savere 1278.82," Zagreb (jAZU). 1951.
"
Cremo5nik, G., ed. "Ostaci arhiva boianske franjevaEke vikariie," Radoui
NDBH, III. 195t, pp. 5-)6.
DaniEid, G., ed. "Hva19v rukopis," Strarine,III, 1871 ,pp. l-146.
Danilo. Arhiepiskop. 2iuot K)atjeua i Arbiepisiopa Srp'siib(L.Mirkovid, ed.),
Beograd, 1931.
Davis, G. The Inquisition at Albi, 1299-1300, New York, 1948.
Delorme, F., and Tautu, A., eds. Acta Romanorum pontifcum ab Innocentio
V ad Benedictum XI (1276-1304), in Fontes, Series III, Vol. V, Tom. II,
Rome, l9)4.
Delorme, F., and Tautu, A., eds. Acta Clementis PP, V (1303-1j14), in
Fontes, Ser. III, Vol. VII, Tom. I, Rome, l9)).
DiniC, M., ed. Odtuke uela Dubroaatke Repabtike, I-II (SAN, Zbornik za
* UKSN. I5. 21), Beograd. 19rl . 1964.
Dinii. M., ed. Iz dubrouatiogarhiaa,f-ilI (SAN Zbornikza IJKSN), Beograd,
396 Mcdieval Bosnian Church llibliography 397

MSHSM 2). Scriptores 2, 7't'greb. l8r))'

1957 ,1963, L9(t7.
Hadlihegi6. ll. "Bosanska kanun-nama izl)61 ," GZ\IS' n.s III, 1948, pp.
Dinii, M., ed. "Nekoliko 6iriliEkih spomenika iz l)ubrovnika," Pritozi, XXIY
(l 2), 1958, yt1>. 91+'710. 201,222.
Dlrrgosz, J. Historiae Polonicae, XI, in Opera Omnia, XIII, Cracow , 1877. HaluY8ynskyi, P. T'., ed. Acta Innocentii PP. m (1198'1216)' in liontes, Ser.
Diillinger, l. Beitr'ige zur Sektengeschichte des Mittelahers, I (sources), III, Vol. lI, Rome, 1944.
Munich, 1890. Hanrm, J. "Apokalipsa Bosanskih krstiana," Sltttto,IX-X' l9(r0, pp.1t3'7{)/t.
Don<lairre, A., ecl. Lln traid N/o-Manichien du XIIIe si.cle, Le liber de duobus H. Hoberg, 'l-axae fro Communibus Seruitiis ex l-ibris Obligationum tb anno
principiis, Rorne, 1939 (1'his volume also includes Rayner Sacchoni's 12951sque ad annutn 1495 confectis, Vatican (Studi e'I'esti' l/t/r), 1949.
Summa, pp. ('>t+-78). Flonorius Ill, see 1'autu (ed.).
Dondaine, A., ed. "Les Actes du Concile Albigeois de St. Felix de Caraman," Iiorvat, K. "Monttmenta Historica Nova Ilistoriam Bosnae et Provinciarutn
Miscellaneae G. Mercati, V (Studi e testi, 12t), The Vatican, 19/+6, pp' Vicinarum Illustrantia," GZMS, XXl, 1909, pp. I 104; 113 42tt; in-
324 55. dex.505-18.
l)ondaine, A., ed., "Le Manuel de I'Inquisiteur I23O-1330," AFP, XVll, Innn..nt lll. see I Ialu#ynskyi (etl.).
l9/t7 , pp. 8t-194 Innocent V, see Delornre and Tautu (eds.)'
Dondaine, A., ed. "La Hidrarchie Cathare en Italie," AFP, XIX, 192+9, pp. Innocent VI, see Tautu (ed.).
280-312; XX, 19t0, pp. 234-324. The first contains "De lleresi Jagi(, Y. "Analecta Romana, " Archiu.filr slauische Philologie, XXV' 1903'
Catharorunr in Lombardia" (ca. 1210), the second, Anselm of Alexan- pp. I 47.
dria's "'fractatus de hereticis" (ca. L270). Jelenid', J,, ed. "Necrologium Bosnae Argentinae -- prema kodeksu fran-
jeuai*og samo$ana u Kr. Sutiesci ," GZMS, XXVIII' l9l(r' pp. 337 t7'
DragancrviC, K. "ToboYnja Stjepanska Biskupija u Hercegovini," Croatia
jrlenid. J., ed."Dva letopisa Bosne Srebrene," GZMS, XXX, l9tB' pp. 1l)-
Sacra, YII , 1934, pp. 29-)8.
I)raganovif , K. "lzv je$Ce fra Tonre Ivkoviia Biskupa Skradinskog iz godine 28.
1(r10, " Croatia Sacra, YlI, 1914, pp. 6)-78. Jelenic',J., ed. "spomenici kulturnoga rada bosanskih f.ranjevaca (I/+37'
Draganovic{, K. ' 'Izvie\6e apostolskog vizitatora Petra Masarechija o prilikama 1878)," Starine, XXXVI, 1918, pp. 8l-162.
Katolitkih naroda u Bugarskol, Srbiji, Srijemu, Slavoniji i Bosni g. 162) i JeleniC, J., cd. "Lletopis franjeva[kog samostana u Kr. Suticsci"' GZMS,
1621t," Starine, XXXIX, 1938, pp. l-48. XXXV, 1923, Pp. 1-30; XXXVI, 1924, pp. i-26.
Diurdiev, B. "Kanun-nama Bosanskog sanr,aka iz godine Ir3O," GZMS, n.s. Jelii L., ed. "Discorso del priorato della Wrana di Giovanni Marnavich lJosnese
Ill, 192t8, pp. 189-200. Canonico di Sibenico," GZMS, XVIII, 1906, pp. 279 3O5.
Esposito, M. ';Un Auto da FJ ) Chieri en 7412," Rer.,ue d'llistoire Ec' JireEek, K. .sltomenici Srps,tl, publishedn Spomenit, SKA' XI' 1892'
Joannis de Segovia. Llistoria gestoriln Ceneralis S1:nodi Basiliezsls
(ed. E.
clesiastique, XLII (3 4), L9tt7 , pp. 422-32.
Fej6r, G. Codex tliplomaticus ITungariae Ecclesiasticus ac Ciuilis,lX, pts. )-7; Birk), in Monumenta Conciliorum Generalium XV, Conciliunr Basilecnse,
X, pts. l-8, kI, pt. l. Budapesr, 1829-44. (Since Smiiiklas, CD, in- ll, Vindobona (Vienna), 1873.
corporated all relevant material from Fejer up to 1378 (through F-ejer, IX, Jotrn XXII (Joannis), see Tautu (ed.).
N. No-tes et E)ctraits pour sr)rir'i I'Hisloire des Croisatles au XVe sicle,
pt. 4), I began to use Feier at the year at which Smiiiklas' collection Jorgu,
stopped.) II, Paris,1899.
Fermendlin, E., ed. "Chronicon Observantis Provinciae Bosnae Argentinae Kaier, P., Vuletid-VukasoviC, V. "Listina Stefana Tomu"sa od 14)0, " GZ|S,
Ordinis S. Francisci Seraplrici, " Starine, XXII, 1890, pp.l-67 . XVII, 190t, pp. 2)3-J6.
Fermendlin, E., Acta Bosnae, JAZU MSHSM, 23, Zagreb, 1892 (Ab- Kamber, D. "Kardinal Torquemada itri bosanska Bogornila," Croatia Sacra,
brcviatc'd throughout as A ts). II,
1932, pp. 27-9).
Fitipovii. N. "Jedria kanun-nama Zvotnitkog KosanoviC, S. "Belelkao Bogomilima," GSUD, XXXVII, 1873, pp. 179-88.
1948, pp. 223-34. Kova[evii, L. "Nekoliko priloga z.a crkvenu i politilku istoriju juYnih
Gelciclr, J. andThalloczy, L. Diplomatariam relationum Reipublicae Ragusinae slovena," GSUD, LXIil, 1885, pp.L-40. (Includes "Odgovor
cum Regno llungariae, Budapest, 1887. Carigradskog Patrijarha Genadija' (I4t3-t9) na pitanja Sinajskih kalud-
Glassenberger, Chronica Fratris Nicolae. Analecta Franciscana, II, 1887, pp. Yera," pp. l1-14.)
178 22>. Kritovoulos. Flistory of Mehmed tbe Conqueroz (trans-ed. C. Riggs), Prin-
Gregory IX, see Tautu (ed.). ceton, l9)4.
Gregory XI, see Tautu (ed.). Kuripeli6, B. Putoltis kroz Bosnu, Srbiju, Bugarsku i Rumeliju 1)30 (trans'ed.,
Grigorovid, V. O Serbii o' eja otnoienijab k sosednim derlauom Dl. Pejanovi6), Sarajevo, l9)0.
preimuffestaenno u XIV'XV stoletijah, Kaz,an, l8)9. Lasicr,D., "Fra Bartholonraei de Alverna Vicarii Bosnae 1367-Itt07 quemdam
Gui, B. Manuel de L'lnquisiteur, 2 vols., Paris, 1926-27. scripta hucusque inedita," Arcbiuum Franciscanrm Llistoricun, LV (1-
Gundulid, J. (J. Gondola). Croniche u.lteriori di Ragusa (Nodilo ed.), JAZU 2), 1962, pp. t9 81.
398 Medieval Bosnian Church Bibliography 3L)9

l.a\vanin. fra Nikola. l.e topis(ed. J. Jeleni6). Sarajevo, 191(r. orbini,M.ltRegnodegliStauiboggicorrotlamenledettiSclliat,onillistoriadi

Laszowski, E. "Urbar Vinodolskih irnanja knezova Zrinskih," VZA, XVIrI, I),tn Mauro Orbin.i Rauseo A"hbate tllelitenser' Pesaro' l6() .A
I Scrbian
1911, p.107. trunrlrtion by Z,. Sundrica with notes by S Cirkovii'cntited KtdlJeusluo
Liuf,il, S.' 1.).istine o odnoYa jilt
izrn ediu Ju/noga Slduenstua i Mletathe Republihe, Slot,ena was published in fleograd in l968'
I X,JnZU, , 1r,9,12,21,22.Zagreb,1868-9 l.
MSIISN1 pon,lif l-, B. D n D'ior r", i' li'i bun en i i e t fi'I er c anen s i' I{onre' I 9 19'
i'i;iif;;,'N. Die ungari.sche l)ontinikancrpro')inz uon ib,er Griindug
1221 bis
Luccari, J'acob. Cofioso tistretto degli annali di Ragtsa di Giacomo di Pictro
Luccari (lst ed., 1601), I used and cite from the 1790 edition published in zttr Tdtdtenuerttntst:.ing 1241-42, Zurich' 19i 3' (Dissertation frorn
Racusa. Freiburg, No.8(r) (I)ocumentary appendix) .:c,:- lTaxrntt
f,t-*.
J "Prilog pitanlu nestanka bosanskih
t-,.,fi.t, bogumila (patarena), " Llisrorijski P,,p;'Pi,,; ii (Enea Silvio de Piccolomlni)' Europa-Pii,Pon-t.ilicis
zbornik, a1y, lp(rl , pp.239-1t2. nost,.ofuntten,Po,:umuariascontinensbistolias,Basel,l)0t. suis con-
Lucius, l. De Ilegno Dalmatiae et Croatiae, in Scriptores Rerum llungaricarum, Pope Pius 11. Comm'entarii ret'um memotabilium' qilde lemporibus
I.)almaticarum, Croaticttrttnt et Sclatonicarum Veteres, III (ed. I. Sch- ligerttnl, Rome, .l 584'
P"p;i-";k;r,'lvt. "Sino,lik caria Borila," B'tgarski stalini' Vlll' Sofiia'
1928
wandtner). Vintlokrna (Vienna), 1748.
Dr. F. IVI . (Tagreb). "L)vr savrenrena izvjeYtaja o Bosni iz prve polovine XVII p"irt";"ttf<". "Koz-nra Presviter bolgarskii pisatelj X ve ka"' B'lgatski starini'
st,rlie6a." G7.rllS. XVI. l9()/t. [)l). 251 66. Xtl, Sofiia, 1936.
MandiC, l). Ilercegot,alki sltonenici .[ranjeua[kog t'eda iz 'I'unkog doba, I Itucii, M. Spomenici srpski,l, Beo!',racl, 18)8; II, Beograd,, l862 t, n.c
de Losnas lc t'r?lre'
(l463 99), Mostar, 1934. Prrech', ll. & A. Vuill^n,. I e trait/ conte les Bogontiles
Manut:l di S. Giovanni, G. "Urr Epixrclio dclla Storia del Pientonte ncl secolo Paris, l9lt5.
XIll," MisceIltnet di.\toria It(1Iidna, XV, Torino, 187 1t,pp.7-Blt' Ralki , F.
,'Priloz.i z-a
Jnviesr bosanskih patarena,"
Sta|ine,I, 18(r9, |p 109-
lVlartene-l)uran<I. tlnf lissima collectio ?elerilm scliptorum, 1., Paris, 1724. l{r '
lVlarterre-lJurand.'l'lte saurtts noutts ail e cdotorilm, I, Paris, I 7 I 7. HolLi. p. "Notae Joanris l-.trcii," Starine, Xlll, lSBl '
pp 2-l I 6B^'
Starine' XIY '
MatasoviC, J. "Foini&a Regesta (Acta l'urcica Bosnensia et Latina ex archivio Raiki . F. "Dva nova priloga za poviest bosanskih Patarena"'
conventus Fratrunr IVlinortrnr clc ()hservantia Spiritus S. liojnicac Bosnae lBB2, pp. l'29.
Algcrrtinae), " Spt,tnenik (SKA), LXVll, Beogracl, 193U, pp. 61-432. juga god' 11t48"' Slarine' xxVil'
, p.":Prilog za grvjest slavenskoga
nac:t<i
MatkoviC. P., "sponrenici z-a Dubroval*u povjest u vriente Ugarsko-ltrvatske 1u95, pp. 226'38.
zaltite, " S)tarine, l, 1869, pp. 141 -T,0.
'fepfcije Batala iz' 1393
Rutl"iitii; iji. "Odlo,r,rk bogomilskog jevandjelia
i\,latthaeus Parisiensis, Cbtonica Majora(ed.I{. Luard), Rerum Brit. Medii aevi gua;n.,
,' B'lgarska Akalemija na N;ukite, lztestija na Instit,t za lstorija,
scriptores, III, 187(r. XIV-XV, 1964, pP. r+91'J09.
Matthias Corvinus, Epistolae Matthine Coruini Regis Hungariae ad Pontdices, nra""li,'i.' b;i;;;:l;[" A'kia i pouetie (Acta et Diplomata Ragusina)' SKA'
lmperatores, Reges, Principes, aliosque.. . .(ed. S. Vida), Cassovia, 1744. 2to.nit IJKSN, Ser. I, Vot. i, sv' 1-2, Beograd, 1934 (ed' S' ,
Mercati, G. "Note Varie sopra Niccolo Moclrussiense," in Mcrcati. Opere Itesti, J. Clti'onica Rogr.rino ab origine urhis" usque,arJ
-- -Ncldirrl, annu.m
^145I
lllinori,lV, published as volunte 79 of ,\tudi e T'esti, Vatican, 1937, pp. jxz'v,
'Defanski wtsttsm,
25,. scriptores, 2, Zagreb' lB9)'
20> >8. Risti{ S. sl)omenici, Beograd, 1B(r/i'
Nlihailovi/, Kt'nstarrtin iz Ostrovice. Jani/ar"et,e ilspomerre ili I'ttr.rka bronika, Ilcrgm'cle Wen,lover, Cbronica siie flores historiarum
(ed' H Coxe)' IV'
etl.-tr. Dj. hvanori(, Sltonenik iSnNl, 107, Ilcograd, 1959. l.ontlon, l8lt2.
Miklosich. Ii.
fulonttmenla Serbica Speclantia Ilistoriam Serhiae, Ilssnae, Sabcllicus, tlltaltsodiae historidrum ab orbe condito Enneades' 2 vols''
M.
Ragusii, Vienna, lB)8 (photostat of 1818 edition done inGraz,, l9(t4). Vcniie, 1494 lt(t4.
Monumentd Ragusina.l.ibri Reformationurn, IV, JAZU, MSIISM, 10, 13, zagr eb. 19\ I'
skok, P.'l-ri,rt arofran ctts ke hron i ke o zadru u godini 1 202,
27 -29, Zagreb, 1879'97. Snri[iklas, 'l'. Cr/rtex dil>lomalictt.s Regni Ctoatiae, Dalnratiae et Slauoniae, 1l-
illonumenta'lhrcica IIi.rtoriam Slar.,orum Meridionalium Illustrantia, I it , ),ugr.b, 1t11'sra-34 (corlpletej'up to 1378; cited throughout this study
(KanLrni i kanun-narne z-a Bosanski . . etc. Sandiak), Orientalni lrrstitut, as (;D).
Sarajevo, l9)7. Stanoievi6,G."JedanF)rnenokrstjanirnauDalmacijil(r92godiner.''ClD'
Monumenla Vaticana Ilistoriam Regni llungariae llluslranlfu, Ser. l. Vol. I a1, f!(r0, 1tp. 273'71+.
(llationes collettorum Pontificorurl in Hungaria 1281' l37 t), Brrdapest, 'l,t;*.ttorljeuo
ieuandjel7e-(acsimile edition)'
Beogra<l' .1897'
S,"i.,r,-;d, l,'i.
Li. Srari srpski zapisi inatp;ii1Sl<A),1 VI' Beograd' 1902
1887; Ser. I, Vol. 3 (Bullae Bonifacii lX 1389 96), Br-rdapest, 1888. 26'
ii"i.'""if ,
Molin, V. "Serb-skaja redakci ja Sinodika v Nedeliu Pravoslavija, " VV,XVll, ii"i^".";f, i
l-i. Stari.rr:pski ro'dosloui tetopisilsKA)' Ileograd'
.1927 ..:
l9(,0, pp.278-313. ;;;i,,;;"i:i ri. 'i,r,, sipskn pouetie i ltismat, pts' l-2' sKA (Zbornik z'a IJKSN
Nodilo, 5., ed. Annales Rogusini Anon.1,7ni item Nicolai de Ragnina, JAZU, l(), 24), llcograd, 1929, I93t+.
Iti,t;r';ri,t i.'yrrnri', 5,nronoii et Willetmi de lVoTcestre (ed' J'
MSIISM, 11t, Scriptores, l, Zagreb, 1881. Nasmith)'
NcrvakoviC, R., e<J. Brankot'iteu letof is(SAN, pos. izd.), Beograd , 1960' Carnbridge, 1778.
 1t07
Bibliography
tt}0 Meclieval Ilosniart Church

Truhelka, C. lsignec.l Dr. 'l'.). "Jedan zanintiv zapis pisan bosant'icom"'

5i5ii, t . "t.etopis Pavla Paulovi& patricija zadarskoga, " VZA, VI, 1902r, pp'
GZtvIS, xvtil, 1906, pp. )49'14.
r-r9. r'"ri.itl,'t.iij..-r , l;<lp.'i',.iun zapis pisan bosanticonr"' GZMS' xvlll'
Si$ii, tt. "Nekoliko isprara iz- pc,Eetka XV st.," Starine, XXXIX' 1938' pp'
I t)0(r . on. t40-tl .

l)tt. Truhelka, i. t.A.l. ''Fojni.lkakronika," GZtulS' XXI' 1909'

- 1 29 pp'44) 57
Sundrica, Z. Acta Consiliorurn Reipublioae l?agttsinae, Reformationes, "Turski Dokurnenti ,, B,r.n; iz- clruge polovine XV stolje&"' Istorisko
prauni
XXVIII; and Acta ('onsilii Minoris, Reformationes, XXIX (unpublished zbornik, l, No. 2, tq49, pp' 179'2'08' Published by Pravni fakultet'
.. tvpcscrinl - to be prrlrlished). Sarajevo.
5u"j;it, M. "Jetlan rr,rvi poclatak o gostu Radinu i niegovoi sekti," G(D, Xl' Urban V, see 'fautu (ecl.).
196U. no. 26J 68. Venanz-io da Fabriano, t'i V;to tli S' Giacomo della Marca (ed M Sgatonni)'
5ur,rrin, l)'i.' f lrt',ttski spttmenici , I,
JAZLJ, Monunlenta I{istorico-juridica Zaclar 1940. ,
Slavorum rneridionaliunt VI, Zagreb' 1898. Volaterrancr, R. Comntentariorum urbanorum' Basel'
I)70'
-I'adiC,
J. Pismu iupiltstud DubrouuYhe )lepublike (Litterae et Corrrnissiones \%ilir; t Antt.ales 'i'llt
MinLrum sen. rrium ordinrtm a s. Francisco institutorum,
Ragusinaer), SKA, Zbornik za IJKSN, Ser' 2, Vol. I, Beogracl. 193)' l;:{ 25 volumes, tig('' I utilized' however' the third revised
Rr-rme
Ilonorii III (121(t-1227) et Gregorii IX (1)27-1241)' in
,l;li,ig
Iuut,,, A., ed. Acta edit:ion, Quaracchi, 193)' Volumes 7-13 cover thc relevant period for our
,l'i$
Fontes, Ser. lll, Vol. III, Ronre, I910. .i,{,* li,r.i, ri;)t rzrTl). citations are ro original pagination rvhich is also given
'I'autu, A., ccl. Acta loannis XXII (1317-1334), in Fontes' Ser' III' Vol Vll' .,1$
'forn ll, Iiorle, 1912. in thc thircl edition.
lif Zr^,.r"ii, S.;-;B;it l.sti nekrolog xlv XV vieka"' Starine '
XXI' 1u89' Pp' 83-
'l'autu, A., ecl. tlcta IJencdicti XII (1334-1342),in Fontcs, Ser' Ill, Vol' Vlll' ':,,ril]i
rit.
.1
Rome, 1918. ztot'o"i('S,..lzvidtaioBosnigo<l.l61t0odPavlaiz-Rovinja',,Startne,
fautu, A., ed. Actd Clementis PP VI (1342'13t2), in Fontes, Ser' III, Vol'
:;,iti

# XXIII, 1890, PP. 1-38.

lX, Ronre' 1960
'l'autu, A., ed. ,1\cta Innocentii PP Vl (1352-1362), in Fontes' Ser' IIl, Vol' 1,.;l$

X, Ilorne, 196 l. :
.,*.$
,:.'.'rr
B. Archaeological atrd Epigraphical
'lautu, 4., ,:i. Acru Llrhuni 1>p 1t (1362 1j70), in liontes, Ser. IlI, Vol' XI, :iils
srednieviekovrta-n.al.aza iz Sulticla kod I(orrjica"'
p,r,,,,,, lt)(r4. ,t.:, GZMS
lll, Vol XII, Andielil, P. "l)va
'l'auttr, A., ecl. 1\cta Gregorii PP XI (1370-1j78),in Fontes, Scr' j.ltl-
(arh). rt.s. XlV. lc)5('. pp' 2{13'14
Ilonre, 196(r. j,ii1 '/'-
:.l.krpuu'ric rra'srednievrkovrronr gradu Ilob.rvr u," Arltculu'ski
'l lralllrtzy, n"ii.ni.u,'p".
l. (.,,,lc.r I)if l,,nttlicus C!)iltilu,n dc Iltagdi, []trtlapcsl ..1897 ,i,i{ t,rtalcJ, t, 1959' P1' l596l'
thallr(ez.y.L."lstralivarriao1't'51 3111iulus:ttlskebaltovint'sattaroiitinloltzirom A".li;ii:,-;.':'nrrt""r"{t. ispitivanja,"-chapter in I'epenica' Pos' izd' III'
:. I
rril,

na povelie Ktitmendskt,g arhiva' " GZMS, XVIiI' 190(r, pp' 401't+44' Nl)ts1.I, S:rraievo. 1963' pp' L)l 9l '
'l'halldiz_y, L. Studien ztr Ge.rcbichle IJosniens und Serbiens im Mittelalter, "
n"ii"iii^p. .fR;;i,ii; Iiiuniu't<utin"ue pl.r[e. GZMS (arh)' ' s xv xvl'
Nlunich , 197lt. l9(rl , pp. 2BB-308. . .'. ,- ,,
'Ihalk5cz.y, (with tlorvatlr). I\ilonumenta l{ungariae Ilistorica, Diplomataria,
- A"d;;i1,'
'CZMS
d.":,a;;;;i bosa'skih kralieva u Arnautovi6ima kod visokog,"
XI-, Co de t D if l nm a l ic tt"r P drt i il m R egno I l ungariae adn e x a run (Bafl atus, (arh), n.s. XVII, 1962, pp' 16) 7-1'
Castrurn et C)ppidunr -laicza), Iludapest. 191).
'fheiner, A. l'etera monu?nenta historica Hu.ngariam sacram illustr7ntia,l-11, n"li.i*i, r.'s,')12i,,,1ehnrni lelati iz'Bornc i Ilercegou,ine'23.Auiu"l'1i^
-"'U,,,j"rnurri.
Irrtrka i
S,rrajt'r',r. 197(t'
Rll.lJiela. [ni.3B. r'tli. lJ'r-rltv. narrk.
llonrc, I Bt9 ()2 (cited throughout as 'fheiner, MH). GZMS' l' No' l '
,Cn.rny,ruur. "bpig.uf.i" ..ti." it Bosne i Hercegovine"'
'I'heirrer, A. Vete/'o ntonumenta Slauorum foIeridionaliutn bistoiam 1t389, pp.6)-77.
illustrantia, I, Iiorrre, 1B(r3, II, Zagreb, 187) (cited throughout as BrbiJ: S."i6,i^.irrt grobovinta u okolini Grahova"' GZMS' lV' 11i92' pp'
'lheincr, M,9M). 273 7r.
B*i^i;^r*if, tvl .,,O grobljima ig,r.bovirna u gornjent P.lir'lju." GIIMR,
'J'horrras Archidia<rnr: s. Ilistoria Saktnitana (p. Raf*i ed.), .JAZU. NISI ISM
lo,7a1yeb,lu9zr. A ncw cclition has now appcared edited by N. Kkil' X Xll-XXlll, lP(r{). pp. 217 21.
Ilaslcr, D j. " Ivarrisko pof i", " () Z hl'\, n's' Y-lI' ) 9 12' pP'
/t1 1'20'
SAN, Ilt'ogracl, 1967.
cle 'f'lrrrrcrcz-, iro,tnet (.fanos'l'hrrroczi). Cbronica I'Iungarorum (1/lU8)' il^ri"., oi."Kupres,;' GzMS,n s Vlll, 1911, pp' 111 41'
--. pp' 29c)-306'
Monuntenta Flr:ngarica, 1, I3uclapest, 19)7.
'l'kaliic., L llonumenta []istorica Episcopatus zagrebien.sis saec. xll et xlll,l' ;;;i;;: ;i. "r<'1t""" r<i.eliak-Folnica, " GZM'i' n's' Ix'GZA4S 19'1+'
(arh)' n s' X'
il^ri".. fj; "Dolina N"."iu. od'Koniica do Rarne"'
II. 7.rgreh, 1877 74. )N1'.
Truhclkr, r'; "t ile[ni{tvo po naroclnoi predaji bosanskoi i po jeclnon staront B,
JIK
ilr?i',r,. er esant n h st eiak a sa podruri a stocyn e Bo sn c,' .' .t
i i Ia n c i
rtrkofisLt," GZilS. I, No. /t, 1889, pp. L)5 716' ",fi gradia za kulturnuisrorilu istoVne liosne''ll' 'fuzla' 1918' pp 51-63'
-l'rLrhclka. C. " Iz st arilr rukopisa, " G Z 11'S' VI, I B9zr, ppt. \11t1 7' 3'
/tO2 Nlcdieval llosnian Churclr Bibliography 403

IJerrhc, A. Iladimlja, SNSIltl, l, Sarajcvo, l9)0. lliielir{, M. "Natpis iz MilianoviCa." G7.A4'\' lll'.lB9l' 1';r' lzt-55'
lJen;rc. r\. Qlot,o, SNSIlll. 2, Ileograd. l9)1. il;;;r;;t:i. r'.-;lsi"ti n,rigrob,,i spontc'ici tr seltr Vrrrfici"' GZlll5' xLll'
llcnar'. A. .\irohi lirryeg, SNSBH, .j. Saraievo... l9)2. 1930, pp' 177 82'
[]enac. A. "sredn jevekovni stclri od Slivna do depikuia," t\lItD,II. 19t3, tloianovski, i. "Stari grad Bobovac i njegova konservaciia"' NS' \rIIl' 1962'
pp. )9'82. ot. 7 l L)(t

Berroit, F. "LeSarcophage de Lursen Provence," Cahiers Arch6ologiques,X, tfuiu'rinu.tti,'f . "Arheololki spornenici u 4olini 1'rebilniice," N5, Vlll. t9(r2,
Paris,"l9)9, pp. 27 -70, w714.
tlcXlagi{, S- "l'rorrfavanic i z.altita stetaka," NS, l, 19t3, pp. l(r7-75. goiu',i.ru.r,i, L "ZaYtita.spomenika kulture i prirode u po-druliu bttcluce
akumulaciie na I'eruiiu na l)rini, " unpublished typed paper in his
'
Ile\lagiC. !. Krt1,res. SNSBI{, 5, Saralevo, 19)/t,
llcXlagic/, S. "Ste6ci u dolini Neretve, " l/S, Il, 195/1, pp. 180-212. nossession.
Ilexla;ic1 3. "Ste'cci Kod Ratke.Go..," l*rS, Ill, 1916,'pp, 2r3 60. [r"rirrf"i[, I. "lskopavanje crkvine u Zgoldi," GZfulS, n's' IV-V' 1910' pp'
BeXta;ii 5. "Nl".t^n BLrbanji/," GlD,vll, 1955, pp."67 -80. 4t | 16.
Ilellagii, 5. "Stari kr stovi u l)reY,nici, " NS, lll, 19)(r, pp. 179-88. l. "ZnaYaiarheologije u istralivaniu
Ur.utnVttif., srednjeg vijeka"' Pregled'Y '
Bellagii, 5. "steici Duvan jskog polja, " Starinar, Vil-VIII, If6 t7 , pp.311' .. 19t1, np. 85-86.
96. Ir.,""i"iL ji. ,;tru"Ytrl
. iskopinama u Rog#Cima kod BlaYuia," GZillS,n.s.
llellagii, $. "Stei-ci rra Nekuke kod Stoca, " GIiMIl, XXI, l9)8, pp. l5i-7). Vlll, l9t 3, pp. 303-l ).
llcYlagic{, T,agrelt (JAZU), 1959.
$. .\lc,i'; na lllitliniu, frcnr,,Ynik, I. "Dva sre<lnieviekovna grada u okolici (lra6ova," GZill.9, n.s.
IlcKlagicz, S. "Uredjenje nekropole stdcaka u Boliuninra," NS, VI, 19)9, pp. ., VIII. 1953. pp. 349 )1.
t\5 42. irri.J.It^i o isk.pavanjinra na crkvini u 1-isiXilima kocl Ko'iica,"
6r.,nXnit-,-t.
Ilellagii.3. "S.to l(osale i njegovi spomenici," NS, VI, 1919,1t1t.243 46, GZIVS, n.s. IX, 1%4, PP' 211-2).
IJeilagii. S. "Neknliko novopronadjenih natpisa na ste.Irima," GZIIIS (arh), .,Novi srednievjekovni nalazi kod Priiedora." GZillS(arh), n.s.
drenro3nik, I.
n.s. X lV , l9 t9. r,p. 279"47 .
, X..191). p1' 117-47'
Ile\lagi6,3. "Ste6ci u Gornjem l{rasnrr," N.S, VII, 1960, pp. 9l'112. tremo(nik, l. ''''Crkvina u Golubiclu," GZtolS(arh), n's' Xi, 1916' pp' 127"
Ileltagi6. S" "stedci u Oplili6ima, " NS, Vll, l9(r0, pp. l4t 54. 34.
Bc\lagii, S. "Boliuni srednjoviekovni naclglobni sponrenici," Starinar, n.s. Ir.n,o!nit. l. "Narodnzr simixrlika na rimskim sprmenicima t"'oYi-
XII. 196 l. no. 175'2o1 .
, kraievitrra, " GZA,IS (arh), n.s. X!l' t ?17,. 1tp 217 Jtt' ..
llt(lrrgiC, 5, "S,r,l.i u llrotn jicanr a," A II t D,V IlI'lX, l()62, p1t. 6) -83. 6oroviC, V. "Jedan srpski natpis iz Xll viieka"' GZtulS' XXItl, l9tl' pp'
llc(la;ic. \u Katin,,t,ih., SNSIltl 7, Saraievo, t9(i2. 149"5 t .

lleilagiC,5. "sledrriovekovni nadgrobni spomenici -.ste.ti - u Dolini 6ornui{, V. "lz-vfe(taj o iskopavaniinra u Brez.i l9l3 godine," GZl\15' XXV,
'l rebiKJrfice," N.5, VIII, 19(t2. pp. L7'3{>.
. 1913, pp.4t\9'2t).
i'Obnou. nranastira Banje," Starinar, n's' IV, 1926 27 pp' 223'
BeYlagi6. S. "Nouoplonadjeni natpisi na steCcima," NS, IX, 196/+, pp. 131' cclrouiC, V. '
44. 71. v
Ilcllagii, $, "Ste€ci u Bitun jo j, " lX, l9(t4, pp.79-100. C"r""il, V. "lskopavnnia u Petrovom nranastiru kod'I'rebinja''' ]lC,l (3 4)'
B('Ila;iC.5. "C;ritrti natpis iz cloba^/S,Kulina banal;' Ns, X. 1965. rp.2()l-07 . 1935, pn. 7i0-51.
(written with 7. KajmakoviC and F. lbrahimpatiC;. Crr""ii i;rrl;rlJf . rur "Nekropole igrobni belezi," Gradju,lX, Arlreolo(ki
tleKtagid, S. "Llutrinl. sreclnjovjekovni nadgiobni spomenici," NS, X, lnstitrit, Il, Arheoloiki spomenici inaiaziYta u Srbiii l, Zapadna Srbija,
1!6),ypp, 117 63. - Beograd, 19)3, pp. 169'98.
Bef lagiC. S.. "Stedci u Ziemlju, " Starinar, n.s. XV-XVI , 196r, pp. 279 92. Delid, S] "Dva rtara .tatpisa iz I{ercegovin e," GZIVS, xXIII, 191l , pp' zt81
Bt:XlagiC, .5. I'opot,o, SNSIIH, 8, Sarajevo, l9(r(r. ,02.
Ilcllagil, 5., Stelci Centralne l}o.rze, SNSBH ,9,Sarajevo, 1967. Dragif.eviC, f'. "starobosanski natpis iz- Vlascttice," GZMS, IV' lB92' pp
BcYlagiC, S. "'l'rnnuo Srednjovjekovni naclgrobni slromenici," N5, XI, )48 49 (with V. Vulctit{-Vukasoviy').
1)67,.pp.. l0l 3t.
- DvornikorjiC, V. "'l'ri starinska groblia u StudeniEkom kralu''' GEivIR, XVil,
Betlagid, S.'
i'N.koliko novopronadjenih natpisa na steicima, " NS, XI, 1967; r9J4, pp. 1 39.
Filipovid, M. "Nutpis na ste6ku u Tffidima," GZMS, XXXVIII' 1926' pp'
u"t,l!;Z1t{l9Novopronadjeni natpisi na stlccima," Ns, xll, 1969, pp. t33- 79 80.
1t8. Filipovii, M. "Starine u Bakilima kod Olova," GZMS, XL, No' 2,lc)28, pp'
l}rtlagit. 5.''Stei.i okoline Klaclnf a, N.S, X " il,
t969, pp. 15 5'7 (t. (t9 78.
BeTlagiC, S. Ste6ci; Katakt-sh.o - Topografskipregled, Saraievo, I971' Filipovi6, M. "Nadgrobni spomenik iz Puste reke iz 14' lt, 1 0'2)' 1948,
Ilihalji-Merin, and A. Benac. Ilogomil Sculpture, Beograd, 1962. p. 214. "'prilog prou[auaniu
BijeliC, M. "Dva starobosanska natpisa u Vlahoviiima," GZMS,II, 1890, pp. Filipovi( M. "starinska groblia u predclu Takovo -
225-28.
 404 Medieval Bosnian Church tlibliography 1+O5

stedaka," N.l, VIll, 1962, pp. 113-62. soorrrcnika i predloz-i z-a z-irTtitu," N.5, IV, 1957, pp.97-1i8'
I lJrrrrann, l(. "starobosanski natpis iz XV vijeka, " GZ14S,llI, i 89l, pp. 48- wtiteii6. N. "C,lkva sv. Klimenta u Nlostalirna," GZA'15, rr's. IX' l9)zr, pp'
51. 281,96.
Hijrmann. K. "Olanil kod Stoca," GZtuIS, lV, 1892, pp. 40-49 (with V. NIiletiC, N. "Nekropole u selu Mihaljevi6ima kod l{ail.vca," GZTIS (arh),
Radimsky). n.s. XV XVl, l9(, l. pp.249-17.
Horvat, A. "O stedrirna na podrulju Hrvatske," Historijski zltornik, IY, Miletic{, N. "Izve3taj u .iYtitnnnr iskopavaniu u Potocima kod l\Iostara,"
19)1, pp. 117 62. GZM.t (arh), n.s. XVII, 1962, pp. 111 )7. w
IvanoviC, V. "srednjovjekovni nadgrobni spomenici u Podrinju," GEMB, Palavestra, V. "sredniovjekovni nadgrobni spomenici.u Zepi ," Iladoui,
XVll. 1954, pp. 22t-71. NDBH, XXIV, tirrtt', pp.139-1t]0 (with N'1. Petri6).
.;uriYic/, K. "Stari hrvatski natpisi Makarskog primorja (XV XVilI st.)," Palavestra, V. "Nekropola 'Deminov krst' u llurmazi kod Stoca," NS' X,
Starine, LIII, 1966, pp. 89-133. 1961. no. IL)r'201.
Kajmakovii, Z. "Znalajniji likovni i arhitektonski spornenici u dolini R,rdinrsky'. i. tt,itrlotuYpi lek:ihon. un'rrhlished ms. kept at Zrvod t., ,tJiit.t
TrebiKnjice," lVS, Vtll, 1962, pp. 39'11. sponienika kulture in Saraievo, existing in a Gernran hanclvritten edition
KajmakoviC, Z. "Zivo1:tis u l)obrunu," Starinar, XIII-XIV, 1962-63, pp. and a typed Serbian translation. It lvas written in the last decade of the
217,60. nineteenth century.
I(ajnrakovil, Z. ''Natpisi i krstal'e sa Gutal*og polja, " l/S, IX, \()(t/t, pp. 71t5- Ila<Jinrsky, V. "O maierijaltr bogunrilskih ste6aka," GZI'15,1' No' 1' 1889,
() J. pp.59-l,O.
KajrnakoviC, 7,. "l<:tl:xt starijc kultno mjesto," l/S, Xl, l9(>7, yt1t. l7t U0. l{,.rclirirsky,V."lli\it poljckodNlostara," GZ14[' lll, 1U9l,pp' l)9 92'
KatiC, L. "stedci u Irnotskoj Krajini," Starohroatska prosajeta, Ser. lil, sv. J, Iladinrsky, V. "ostaci rinrskih nastnhina u Sipragi il']odbrgjtr. 7-a tirrr
1354.
_Pp. .t3r
69. -tiu.,ri-.onrtl ste6ci u Sip.agl i uz- Vrbaniu u llosni''' GZX'IS,lV, 1892,
Kcrroiec, J. Uuod u materijalno ku.lturo Slouanoa zgodnjeg srednjega ueka, I,P. 75 80.
Ljubljana, 1912. Itrdirnskv, V. "ArheoloYke crtice." CZMS,IV, 1892, pp 117'25' 221 22'
KoroYec, P. "Srednjevjekovne nekropole okoline Travnika," GZMS, n.s. VII, Iiaclinrsky, V. "Crkvena razvalina kod Dabravine u kotaru \/isolkorn u lJosni,"
lL))2, pp. 375 407. GZMS, IV, 1892, pp. 372-87.
Krajinovil, J. "Iii revidirana nadpisa iz- okolice'l'ravnika," GZMS, LV, Raclimsky, V. "Ilazvaline crkve na Carevoj luci kod Rrnania tt lJosni," GZA'IS,
19tt3, pp. 227-36. V, 1893, p. 1t87.
Manclic/, I!1 . "Patarensko groblje pod Osma.Yom pianinom," GZMS, XlV, Scrgeievski, D. "srednieviekovna groblia u Stuparinta iRastiku,'^ GZfuIS,
1902, pp. 56t)'62. LIII, 1941, pp. 95-99..
Mandic{, N'l . "'l"urbe kod 'I"ravnika, " CZIWS, XXXVI, I92t+, pp.83 90. Sereeievski, D. "'Putne bilieYke iz' Glarnota," GZMS,l-IV ' 1942, pp l l3-7 1'
MandiC, Nl. "starine kod Fojnitkog Kiseljaka," GZMS, XXXVII, 1921 , pp. Serlejevski ,D. "Arheol,-,Xki nalaz-i r'rSaraievuiokolici," GZhIS,n s lI' 1947,
(tl 66. pp. l3 )0.
Mandid, M. "Arheololke crtice iz. Bosne," Stainar, n.s. Ill-lV, 1928, pp.9 Scrgtlevski, D. "PutnebitjelkesaNevcsinlskogpolja," GZifiS, n s' III, l91tB.
t3. ff 219 tt)
NIaz-aliC. Di. "starine po okolini Sarajeva, " GZMS, LI, No. 1 , 1939, pp. 15- Sergeievski, D. "Japodskc urIre. CZ,.I1.s, I\'-\'. iq10. ff l i 9I
15. Sergrievski. D. I-rdner, SNSBII. q. S;trrievo, l9)2.
NIazaliC, Dj. ''Flercegova crkva kod (lora-zda," GZMS, LII, No. I, 19tt0, pp. Sergeierski , IJ. "Staro hri!(anska bazilikr u Klobuku," GZ'\1'\, n.s. IX,
27 -r+1. 19)1|, pp. 189 207.
Nlaz-aliC, D j. ''Boral , Bosanski dvor sredn jeg vieka, " GZMS, LIII, 1941, pp. SkariC. \'. "Clrobni natpis brade Radilolica u daclorini," GZIIS' XXXIX.
3t 94. i92r. rf 191 96.
/!laz.aliC, Dj. "starirre u l)obmrrrr, " GZM,t, Llll, 19zrl, pp. ].01 123. Skarit{. \,.
,lL;r.,i. i qrobni sponrenik Gr.s1. Xlttut,nr nr !lunrskt nr u Irt,Irnskom
NIazatiC. Di. "Gradac kod f lad),icl, " GZMS,LIV , 191+2,pp. 1()3 2.06. srezu. ('2,\1.\, iist.etn) XLVI. l9r i. ff :t) Sl'
M azalicl, D j.''Stara crkva rr Sarajev u, " G ZII S, lrlY, 19 1+2, p1t. 21t1'7 0. Slileplevi{. P. "Staro groblje gn Gacku." GZ,}[S, XL. No. ]. lc)18. ll. 17-
Nlazalic{, Dj. "Travnik iToriian ," GZM.t,n.s. IlI, 191r8, pp. l1+5 66. 6-l
NIazaliC, l)j. "Scnriz.ovac i okolina," GZMS, n.s. IV-V, l9)0, pp" 403 10. 'I'ruhclka, i.t "Du^ heratdiEka sporncnika iz- Ilosne, " GZlls,l, No. 2. 1889.
Mazalic', Dj. "Stari grad.fajce." GZ1\15, n.s. VII, 195). pp. t9-I00. or'. J 1 76.
Mazali(. t)j. " I'eisan j," GZMS, n.s. Vlll, 19J3, pp.2.89 3O3. lrrrirelka, (]. "B..rnnti., ," GZM'5,1, No.4, 18t3i), pp. (r5-83'
NIaz-alii, Dj. "Visoki,bosanski gracl srednjeg vjeka," GZMS, n.s. IX, 19)4, 'l'ruhclka, (. "storub.rtunski rnramori, " GZIVS,III, 1891. pp. 3(rB-87.
pp. 227 ,-7. I rtrlrr-'lkir, C-.''Stari bosanski natpisi, " III,
i 89 1, pp. 8(r-95
GZMS,
Maz-aliC, D j. "Zvonik (Zvornik) stari gracl na f)rini," GZMS(ist. etn), n.s. X, lrrrlrrlka. C. "Katakonrl,e tr Jaitu." G7.'lI\,1V. l892' 1'p 57 r'8.
l9)), pp. 73 116; Xl, 19)(,, pp. 2t+3-277. lrrrlrelka, t. "Nt'k,,lik,, hercegoualkih nalpisa"' GZAlS,lV. llt92. yp' 21t
NIaz.aliC. Dj. " t Iri(c'arrski ni(ani u okolini 'I'ravnika - eviclcncija vaYnijih 72.
 406 Meclieval []osniarr Chr.rrch 407
Ilibtiography
"I'rulrelka, C. "Stori hercegovalki nirtpisi, " GZMS, LV, 1892, pp. 107-l(r, ,,-l'races <le Manich6isrnc dans le N4oyen Age I-atin (\Il XII
217 2(t; V. IB9l. nl'.9.1 97. Alphardcry, [r.
'l-rtrhelka, C. "lsk,-lpine u ckrlini l.a"sve lf:i93," CZMS, V, 1893, pp. (r85-89. ' sitclesj," Rcare d'I:listoire et de Philosol>bie lleligieuses, lX, 1929, pp.
'I'ruhelka, d. "start,bosanskipisnreni sponrenici," GZMS,V1,1tl94,ytp.77 l- /tJl 67.
,,Sredn joviekovna kultna nriesta u okolini Koniica," GZll15(.arh),
82' t Arrdielic., p.
'l'rulrelka, C. "Natpisi iz- Sjeverne i lstolne Bosne," GZlVtS, Vll, l89), pp. n.s. XII, 1917, pp. I B5-99.
177 16. Andielir/, p.. "srednioviekovni graclovi tr Neretvi''' GZMS (arh), n's XIll'
T'ruhclka, C. "storob,rranski natpisi, " GZMS, VIl, 1S9t, pp. 259'82, 167" 1958, pp. pp. 179'229.
7r. Anclielii, P. "'IrgoviXte, varol, i grad rr Sredniovickovnoi Bosni," GZfuIS
-truhelka, d. "Stari natpisi iz Flercegovine," GZM,S, VIII, lB9(r. p1t.321'28. (arh), Ir.s. XVIll, l9('J. lp. 179 l9l'
'[ruhclka, C. "Natpis Kr,rlina Rana," GZXtS, X, 1898, pp.617-22. An<lielic'. P. "Neka pitanja litrsa'ske her"aldike," GZAI'S (arh)' n s XIX'
'l'ruhelka. C. "Grohnica lxrsanskog Ttplije Batala, obretena kod Gornieg l9('/t . pp . lt7 -7 2 .

-I'urbeta (Kotor T'ravnik)." GZMS, XXVII,

1915. pp. 36>-71.
Vego, M. "Srednjevfekovni bihaiki Iatinski sponrenici XVI vjeka," GZMS,
lX, l9)zt, pp. 2t, 69.
rr.s.
Vego, M. L.iuhr{ki, SNSBII, (r, Sarafevo, 1914.
Vcgo. M. "Nadgrobrri sporttcnici poroclicc Sankovii'a u selu lliskrrprr korl
Konjica," GZtolS(arh), n.s. X, .19)), pp. Ir7-6t; Xll,1917. pp. 127-
39.
Vego, M. "[,lrrrna[ka ploXa," GZMS(arh), n.s. XI, 1916,p1t.1+1-61.
Vego, M. "(lirilski natpisi iz- Ilercegovine," GZMS(arh) n.s. XIII, l9)8, pp.
169 77.
Vego, M. "Crkva u Razilinra kod Konjica," GZMS(arh), n.s. XIII, 19)8, pp.
159 67.
Vego, l\4. "AlhmtoYko iskopavanje uZavali," GZMS(arh), n.s. XIV, 19)9,
pp. 179 BB.
Vegc,, M. "Novi irevidirani lirilski natpisi iz Y-upe Broino u f{ercegovini,"
CZAIS (arh). n.s. XIV. 1959. w.221-3r.
Vegrr. M. "Arlreolo{ko iskr,pavan je u Vini{rima kod Kon jica, " Arheoldski
frcgled,I, 19t9, pp. 179-82.
Vego, lVl. "Novi irevidirarrinatpisi iz llercegovinc," GZllIS(arlt), n.s. XV-
XVl, 1961 , pp.219'86; XVII, l9(r2, pp. 19I-2rt3; XIX, 1964, pp. 173-
AndieliC, d."'Dobo sred'joviekov'e bosanske clrYave," in A. I3enac (ct al.),
ed., Kuhurna Istoriia , , PP. 40, t36.
Andielicl p. ..Originahi clijelovi dviju bosanskih povetia rr falsifikatilna Ivana
'i ,,,,rk"IMar'aii1a." (;ZMS,rr's.XXVI(rrrh), 19.7 l.1'1, 347 ('o'
" GZI\15' n s XXVI
Arrclielid, P. "Stara lxrsanskaY.upa Vidog<fi6a iliVogoii:r,
(arh), l97l , pp. 372 '16.
And,,,rouski , tI. 'ib [)ragovitskim l]ogornilima Koste Ilacina," Ptegled' Yl'
No. 2, l9)1t, pp. 108 9'
r\rrgelov, D. llogontilsruoto tt B'tgarija(2ndecL ). Sofiia' 1961
Ane"lnu, p. Iteview of Obolens[y's 'I'be l]ogontils, in Blzantinoslat,ica, X,
IL)49, pp.3o3 12.
"Le Nlouvenrent Bogomile dans les pays llalkarriqucs et. sor]. In-
'fl,,",r."li.en
A'g"lou.
Europe Occiclcntale, " Ades du Colloque Inteltationul dc
Ciuilisations Llalk'aniquesorganiz-ecl [y the Conmission nationale Rountaitre
lnur UNESCO, 1962, pp. 17)'82.
Angelov, D.,,LeMouvenrent Bogomile dans. les_pays slave.s Balkaniqtrt's et
',lons Byzance,,, Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Problemi t\tttttli di
Scienza e di Ctltura, Ilonre, 19(r4, pp' (r07-1(r'
Ani.Ykov. E. "Les Survivances Manich{'ertnes en I'ays Slave et cn Occident"'
Reuue cles f:tutles Slaucs, VIII, 1928, pp' 2ll1-25' v .

211. AniXkov, E. "Maniheii i Bogu'rili," Glasnik Skopshog nauinog Jtuitua' Y '

Vego, M. Zbornih -srednjot,jekotnih natpisa lJosne i Hercegoaine, l'lY, 1929. pp. 137 76.
,'O Isusa Ilrista sa diavolor'." 2 texts rn Sta,ne,
Saraievo, 196270 lfurther volumes will be forthcoming) ' XVI, l88zr, pp.8(rprepiraniu
Apocryphafi'ale,
89; and XXll, 1ti90, pp. 200-03.
Vidovi/, D. "Sredn jevekovni naclgrobni spomenici u okolini Zvornika," lVS, 'J
lll. l9t(), rry. 221 38. As1fth, An'bliriot ;I'our 7'hrougb llosiia and ITerzegouina' I-ondon'
VukrrviC, J. "Jedan stari bosanski nadgrobni sponrenik i natpis," GZMS, n.s. I 890.
ll, )l-(r8 (with A. Kuian).
1L)47, pp. Atom (Pseudonym). "Kakva ie bila srednievekovna 'crkva bosanska' 'vjera
Vuletic'-VukasoviC, V. "Drevni bosarrski boYak," GZMS,II, 1890, p1t.3(t3' bosanska,' '-' iJosanska uila, Yil, 1892, and IX, lB94'
6(t. tsabi/, A. "Ne"sto o karakteru bosanske feudalne drYave," Pregled, V, No' 2,
Vuletid-VukasoviC, V. "Stari manastirski petat iz Duvna," GZMS,lll, 1891, 191), pp. 83-86'
pp.2)3-14. Ilabi/, A.' ,lNouiii pregled u nauci o pitaniu sredn jev jekovne crkve bosanskc, "
Vulri{-Vukasovii, V. "starobosanski natpis u Kalesiji ," GZMS,lll, 1891, Pregled, VI, No. 2, 1914' PP' 101-07'
pp. It))'()). Ilabil, A. "O o6nosima vazalitetau srednjev jekovnoj Ilosni," GID,VI' 19t4'
pp. 29-44. .v
gabiC, n..,O pitanju formiranja sretlnjevekovne bosanske drfave," Ilddout,
ll: SECONDARY WORKS NDIIH, IIl, 19tt, 1>p.57-79.
BabiC, A. ':Dipiomatsku-ilul.b" u sre4njevjekovnoi Bosni," Iladoui, NDBH'
Alphardery, P. "La Gnosticisme dans les Sectes Medie'vales Latines," I?euue XIII, l9(r0, pp. l1-70.
d'Ilistoire et de Pbilosopbie Religieuses,Yll, 1927, pp. 395-411. Ilabii, A. ,,strukiura sre6njovjekovne bosanske 4rYave, " Pregled, Xlli, No. 1,
 _1.:.{
liJ
408 Nleclieval lJosnian Church jfl IlibliographY tt}9
ii
19(rl, pp. l-8. .itudi e documenti di Storia e tlirit.to, XVIII, 1u97, pp. l8l-431'
Il:rtric?, A. IJo.ron.rhi /.taretici, Sarajevo, 19(r3. ".rri l3orst, A. Die Katlnrer, Stuttgart, 19),3. (Schriften dcu Monrtmcnta Ger-
A. "Fragnrcnt iz kulturnog " : l;,li
Ilalric'. Yivota sredn jovjekovnc I3osnc, Ilotloui, nraniae lJistorica l)eutsches Institut fiir Irforschtrng des .Mittelaltcrs, 12')
Iil'S, 11, I 96lr, ptr. 125 36. ,"i
i: Borst, A. "Neue liuntle und I''orscltungen z,ur Geschichte dcr Katharer,"
Ilagby, P. (ultrre anrl Ilistor7, Ilerkcley, 1958. t'i Ilistoriscbe Zeitscbrift 174, f952, pp. 17-30'
ljarrrlrcrgcr, l). I:ullen Angel.r, Plriladc$hia, 1952. l,*-{ Bo{koviC, I)j. "Pribg proulavanju 'I'raYkog konianika," Starintr, n.s. Vll-
Bakula, P. ^\cbemttistnils toPogrcfl:ico-ltistctricus Custodiae Proaincialis et ,"ii
l- iLi
VIll, l9t6-t7, pp. t19 62.
l/icariatus Apo-rtolici in Ilerce,gouina, Split, 1867. BoiiC, l. "O jurisdikciii kotorske dijeceze u srednievekovroi Srbiii, " Spomenik
Barrovic(, S. "O yrrijeklu slave krsnog irnena, " GZA,IS,XXIV, [)12,pp.2(f " :;'ff (SAN), 103, 1913, pp. l1-16.
71. {ffi Rofic', l. "Mlec:ani prema nasledniciura Flercega Stevana," ZRFItB, VI, No. 2,
Ilarrovi( S. "N{aYta prerrra istini u natim narodnirl piesama, " ZN\O\S, :,Uif l9(,2, pp. I 13 128. .. v
XXVI, 1928, 1,p. l9i 216. IJ.,Yiicuiti, i. "l',.,,1u,r.k icdrtc pricYe () \'tag,tr," 7'N'2()JS, XXlll. l(.)lli. l,p. l'
'o$
[3lrrovirlu S. "l'raznovjerica nzr{eg naroda o prekopavanju starih grobova," 4.
7.Nl() l.\.vXXlX, I93 I, pp. 88 tl9. ',.,rii[
IlcrIitkoviC, J. Kritilki ispir Ttopisa hosanskih uikara i prcuincijah 1339-1735,
[],rracla, Nl . "Sidakoi'problent 'bosanske crkve,' " Naslauni ujesnik, XLIX, i$ Ilcrrgrad, 1935.
1t1/10 4l , 1'p. .398 4l I 8ra jkovitl, C. "Var ikanska 1r'litika u prt,llc,sti prenra lJosrli i Ilercegovini,"
;d'
.

[]:rrirtlrr, N{. "()svrt na odgovor 1.5i.1.k'r, " N,tstauni tjesnik,l.. No. 2, l9lt I,
:'i:i
.",! l'n1gled, V. 1953, pp. 2B{)'fi5.
pp. I 7. 2(). Ia
| []rarrdt. M. "strsrct Viklifiz"nra s l]ogonrilstvortt tr SrijctnLt," '\'tttrobruulsh.a
!,rl
[]arirrg (iotrltl ,5. (.rrio,rt.r A1]ttlt.r o/'!ltc fuIiddle rlges(2nd Scr.), l.orr<lon, lu6B. ,:ii,E
Prosu;je!a,lll Scr.. sv. 5, 191(r, pp.37-(t1t.
llariYit', N. "lirarr jcva(:ki sanrostan i crkva u Sut jeskoj, " GZXl.t,ll, 1tt90, pp. . i.? llr"arrclt. NI . "Wyclifitisnr in l)alrnatia in l3tl3," Slottortic and Iiast fitrapean
2U 18.
.rit Ilt,t,ieru, XXXVI, No. 86, l9)7, Ip. 5B-68"
B:rriK1, N. "l,osu(je," GZAL|, Iv, 18g2., gt. 276 77. '.,t;
[]randt, NI. "Utjecaii patristikcu ranonr l]ogomilstvtr ilslarrru," lla,l(JAZU),
IlariKc{. \ " l ihrrljina inicz.inc znanrenitosri,;; GZA4S,V, 1893, pp. 558-(r0. ii lll). 1962, pp, 57 83.
Ilarkan, O.1,. "Essai sur les l)orrni'es Statistiques des Rr:gistres de Rccensement ;l Ilrtek, N'l . Iluhopisi hniiYnice hlale Bta/e r Duhrot,niku, l, Zal1relt (JAZU),
,iri$
rlans l'l.irlpire ()ttonran auz. XVe ct XVIe silcles, " Jorrnal o.[ Economic 1952. liurther volurnes never published.
and,\otial I Ii.rtory o/ thc Orient, l, l, 1917, pp.9 36. ,,,;.h1
rj; Bru. C. "Notes en vur,'<l'rrne ilterpretation sociokrgiqrre de Catharislne Oc-
Ilaroja, J. (,.'l /re Worll oI lVitcbes,Olricago, 19(r1t. citarr." Anntles Institul d'liutdes Occitanes, Xll, 19t2, pp. t7-8().
llaYagic', S. Kratfu ilfiltd il l,ro"slosti Bosne iflercegot,ine od 1463-1850, l$
::{ IJrtickner (llrikner), A. "O paganstvu kod starih Slovena," Knjiga o IJalkanu,
. ,tii
Sarajcvo,1900.
iili
II, llcoqrad-, I 937, pp. 5 l-6 I .

BaYagic', S. "fJoin jaci i Ilercegovci u islamskoj kniiirvnosti, " GZiVS, XXIV, :; Brrconjic{ N. Lint i,,hitoji Ilrrato futolilLe t'jere u I}osni i}!rrcegouini,
1912, 1.p. t ttS. ''1r

'!..i Sarajevo . I 9()8.

tlirsler. I)i. "l(asrroantiiko rlol,a." in A. Bena< (et al.). ed., Kulrrrna lstttrija . Brrtlimir. I\1. Jlevierv <,f..Arrte Kuiarr. "Jedan rtari l';rlkanski n.rdgrotrni
,,r,i
, pp. 303 375. sponrenik i natpis." 14. I (l-2). tt)48. pf. l('t-(rJ.
Batirric(, M. Dietot'anjelranjeuacau Bo.rni iITercegouini,I,Zagreb,lUBl;ll, Iluclinir. N1. "'l'rikletil.abuni ibabice patarenske," GID, X. 1958, pp.73-86.
Z.ngrch, I BBl. Iluieti{.'i'. "\'erovania o djavoh'l uokrugu l\loravskont,.' Si.,2, 31. I}eograd,
llirtinir/, lVl . "Nekolikr) priloga k bosanskoi crkvenoj poviesti," Starine, XYU, l!)2). pp. 40() 0t.
lBB5, pp.77-150.
Batini<1, Nl . It"anjeutihi santostan u l;ojnici od stolje{a XIV XX, Tagreb, 'l hc 1r:tterr (l shall bc followed by
, d arrcl then by C.
t9tt.
Ilenac, A. "Jcclan z.nalaian problern nrYse Istoriogra!i1e," Preglel, V, No. 11, Carrrpbr.:ll,J., ("d.). 'l'he llIl's7s7is.r, I]ollingen Series XXX, Papers from the
1953, pp. 281 87. hlranos Yearbooks, 191t2.
Bcrrac, A., et al., edit()rs, Kulturna istoriia IJosne i Ilercegouine, Sarajcvo, Carnplrcll, J. "l'}rinritive Nlan as Metaphysician." in S. l)iarnond, Primilit,e
1966. Vieu,'s . . ., 1>p. 20-32.
B jelovLrlic', N. Pot,ijest ltoluotoh.a llata (Petjeical, Split. 1921. Carnplri:ll, J., (r:tl.). Pagan and Christian Mysteries, New York, 195).
tljelovuY:if , N. llogomil.rka t,jera od Xll'XVI t,, Dubrovnik, 192(r. Cannon, W . Ili.rtorj' of Chris!ianitlt in l/te Middle zlges, New York, l9(r0.
Bodenstein, G. "'l ri turske Iistine Mcinastira Duia," GZMS, XX, l9{i8, pp. Carcopirrtr, J. "Lcs symhoiisrnes de I'Ascia," Actes du Ve (ongres In-
ll3 I l(r. tct'n,ttional d'ArcltIologique Chr&ienne, Ronre-Paris, 1957, pp. 551 66.
Ilogil'evid, V. "Vlas'teoska lnroclica Nliloradovi& Ilrabrenih u llercegovini," Cerrn,rnc,vi6'KrrznmrroviC. A. "Kult i spornenici tr^l'k,rg ltcrosa u l,rlkanskim
GZnl.t (arh), n.s. Vll, 1912, tp. t9-100. zerrrljarna," ZRFItll, VI, No. 2, 1962, pp. 7i-91.
lJ<rnfitto, l). "Eretici in l)iemonte al tempo clel gran scisrna (1378 1412),"
Ser bia n ch 's ([ o. d) ,h o ll follo w all r he c' s.
.;l
,t
il
4to l\'lcdieval Rosnian Clturch Bibliography 4tt

Challet, J. "Bogumili i simbolika ste/aka." NS, X, 1961, pp. 1')'37. Ci.t nXrc, S. "Vesti llrolia cla Lavelo kao izt,or za istoriju l]osne i I)ubrovrrika,"
Charles, R. A Critical and Etegetical Commelttaryt on tlte l?euelation of St. . /C, XII XIll, l9(,1, pp. 167-88.
Joltn, New York, 1920. ilrr.ouif, i. lrtor;io rrodrin,'0k,,,'re bo.ran.skc ,lrlor'r, Bcograd. l9(''t'
.,1)ie l],rsnisclrt. Kirchc. " Accadentia N'azionrlc ,lei I intti,
C-lratrrrrette des'l'ossds, I\1. A. l/o ya/!e eil lJosnie drtn.s les annies 1807 et 1U08, CirhtruiC. S.
I'aris. I U I6. Ptttltlt'ni Atru,tli discicnza e ili Ctlltra,Ilorne, 1!(rzi . pp'51t7'71
Clark, .f. 'l'lto l)tnce oI Deatlt, (.]lasgow, 1950. Cirkovil, S. I Ierteg .\tc1an ltttk[i/'Ko.raia i njegouo doba,l\e<ty,rad (SAN pos'
Coulton, C). lVlediet,al Village, Manor and Monaslerllt(1921), ed,. Nerv York, , iztl. 370\, 1964.
1960. iirk.rvi.{. S. Review of A. Iiabi3's Bosanski bereticiin GlD, XIV' l9(r'i, pp'
Coulton, G. hledieual Faith and S.1,mbolisnt, Oxiord, 1928, 288-92.
Coulton, G. Life in tlte Middle,4ges, Cambridge (Eng.), 2ndetl., 1928. djrkouiC, S. "Suslrbi venac," ZRFFIl,Vlll, 1964, pp. 1/+3 69.
Coulton , G. Inquisition and Libertlt, London, 1938. Corouic', V. "FlercegovaEki manastiri," GZMS, XXIII, 1911, pp' 101-33:'
XXIV, I912. pp. ,4r 14. n
Cvilicl J. "studies irr Jugoslav Psychology," Slat,onic Reuietr, lX, 1930 31, dorouiC. V. "Ban Ktrlin," CNC, XXXIV. i921, pp. J-3 41'
.. pp. .175-90. 662 8l .
{orouiC, V. "srebrnik za vla4e Despota Stevana (1413 27)." Prilozi' ll' 19)2'
Cajkanovic<, S. "srpska pravoslavna crkva Svetih Arhangela u Sarajevu,"
. pp. 61-77.
_ GZM.S, I. No. /+, 1889, pp. 1-11. y corouiC, V. "Hercegova[ki manastiri," Starinar,n.s.l, 1922, pp' 209 30; lI'
Cajkarrovii, V. "Nekolike op\te po jave u staroi srpskoi religili," 6NC', XLI,
1932. I'p. 167 228. . 1923, pp. 6L)-77.
;'sandali Flranidu I)ubrovniku 1426," [Jratstoo, XVII' 1923' pp'
w
jkatrovicl, V. "starinska religija l-, nourinr dnevnim listovirna, " GNC, Cor.uii, V.
Ca
102-07
- XLVIll, 1939. p1'. 164 tt3.
.

i"r""if, V. "1.d0. novi izvor za srpsku historiiu iz po[etka XIV vcka,"

Cajkanovii, Y. O srpskom urboanom bogu, Brcgrad (SKA, Pos. ltd. 132),
194t. , Priktzi, lN, 1924, YP. (t7-71t.
Coroui./.Y. Krlali Turiko'I Kotromani/, Beograd (pos, izd SKA, I-Vl). l92i'
i,arii. A. "Ruclica kder Poganica ," GZtuIS,lX, 1897, ytp.729-31.
CuLouii, Y. ,l4,,.tll,tr initprturt.ttlt.sht fraatslaunil ol)Ilind,llctrgrad. 1931'
Crernolnik. (i. "l)rodaja bosanskog primorja Dubrovniku god' 1399 i kralj
CoroviC, V...'l-eritoriaini razvoi bosanske.lriave u srcd$ieru vekrr." G/as
. Osroia." G7.AL\, XI-, No. 2, 1928, pp. 109-26. . (SKA), l(,7, 1935, pp. 5-1t7. v
Clenr,'drik. (j. "()ko []ogourilstva u srctlnfcvek<lvnoj l]osni," Prosueta, XXI, Corovic', V. "lz. pro-slosti Bosne i llcrccgovine," GNC, XLVIII' 1939' pp'
u lL)J7. pp. l{)-16.
erern.,inik, G. "l'ravni poldai nateg roblja u srednjern veku," GZMS,n.s. Il, t r1)-4r.
Qorovii, Y . Historija llosne,Beograd (Pos. izd. SKA), 192+0.
.. 1947. pp. 69-73. CororiC, V.
..prilog proutavaniu naiina sahranjivania i podizan ja nadgrobnih
eremoYn ik, G. " Bosanske i hum ske povelje sredn jega vi jeka, " G Z lV S, n.s. Ill,
spontenika u nu!i* krajevima u sredniem vijeku," NS, III' 1956, pp' l'21 '
1948, pp.1O3 43 anrJ GZMS,n.s. X, 191), pp. 737'46.
-
Crenrolnik, G. "Zaclnja raz-iskovanja
47. l'his unf inished article was founcl among his papers after his death'
o bosanskih Bogornilih" (1952 oril 6rr&i, V. "starinsko oru'zie u Bosni i l-lercegovini,'; GZMS, LY , 191+7, pp'
paper) printed in T4odouinski {asopis,l9(r5, pp. 229'36; with an addenda )1-) )1
, bringing it up to date by B. Grafenauer , pp.236-18.
(rnia. 7. Cultuntl llitor.v n.f Croatia. Zag,reb, 1962. v Serbian Dj's (or D) shall Iollow all the D's.
CubriloviC. V. "Poreklo nruslirnanskog plerrrst va u Dosni i IJercegovini." //C,
, I (l 4). IL)31 , pt). l()8-403. Davidovic., S. Srpska ltrauoslauna crkua u lJosni i Hercegouini od 960 do 1930,
CubriloviC, V. "Srpska pravoslavna crkva pod Turcima od XV do XIX veka," Sarajevo,1930.
. ZRFl:ll. V. No. l. l9r'tt. p1'. l(r3 88. Dawkins, R. M. "'l'he Crypto-Christians of Turkey, " Bltzantion, Vlll' 1933 '
CatiC, A. "uol-i.'kod Muslimanuil'.nr.o, u Bosni)," ZN\OlS,XXVl, sv.2, pp. 247 -7 ) .

, 1928. pp. 179-B{}. OecJiler, J. Ilercegouinr:, Beograd, 1908.SEZ, Xll (SKA,.Naselja-Srp' zenr' 6)'
Cirkolid, S. "Dve godine bosanske istorije 1414 It+l>," IG(3 tt), 1()53, pp. llcdiier, l. "Poril"kto bosoniko-hercegouulkog stanovniltva, " Pregled, I (7 -
29 4r. I,
B), i9l PP.
1t2()'30.
CirkouiC, S. "VIastcla ikraljevi u Ilosni posle 11t63, " lG(1), I9\/t, pp.127- Drine," GZMS,IV, 1892, pp.2)) 69'
l)ctitr, S. "Samoborkod
71. "KodDjavolababica," GZMS, V, 1893, pp.3)2 )3'
DeliC, S.
Cirkov;C, S. "Ostaci stariie druXtvene strukture u bosanskom feudalnom
DeliC, S. "Gataiko polie," lkottki tjesnik, XI, 1904, pp. )49 5)4, 6)1 66);
, ,Jru(t uu ," IG 3 4), 1958. pp. 155 (t4.v XIII, 1906, pp. 162 ft.
Cirkovir', S. "Jedan prilog o banu Kulinu," 1C, IX'X, I9)9, pp.1 1-77.
DeliC, 5. "Petrovlnanastir kod Trebinia, " GZMS, XXIV, 1912' pp' 275'82;
Cirk,rvid, S. " 'Venra sluf-ba'i 'vjeragospoclska,' " ZRFFB, VI, No. 2, 1962,
XXV, 1913, pp. 129 3'2.
, pp.9) lll. Dcluras'Boussaeot.'B. "I-es tnonuments funeraires Bogomiles) I'Exposition,"
Cirkovii, S. ''O DjakovaEkonr rrgovoru," /6(1-4), 1962,1tp.3-10.
1+1 2 lVlc.clieval Rosnian Church Ilibliography 413

CF.(:, ll,
No. ), spring. 19t0, pp. 11'77 [)onrlaine, A. "1.'Origi.c clc l'lcresic N'lccli6vale, " Iliuista di Storia della
( l,rt.so in tt,tlia, Vl' l()\2. 1'y, /11 lg
"

I)ercrko, A. "Crkva sv. Alxrstola Petra r.t Ilijelom polju," Glasnik 'Skolt.tkog pp (r(r 162-
ntrtinog,lttr.iira, VII'Vlll, l9)-9 30, pp. l/+J-1t6. L)onclirinc, A. "St. [tierrt' rrr:rrtyr-6tt"|"s," All,XXlll' 1953'
"l),rancl et la anti'Cathare," Al;P,
l)iamond, S. (ed.) Primilit.,tt Vieus o.l'the World,New York. 196/t ilo,-r.1oin., A. cl,, Ilu,,sca p.lc(rrtique
DiniC, NI . "Jovan Arrgel 'dominus Syrmiae , "' Glasnik lstori.rko,g dru{tua u XXIX, 1919, pP. 22tt 16.
K. See al.s<, uncler sources si.ce 6e prrblishcs s.veral
visitatiolr texts
Not,otn .tadu, lY , I931 , p. 3{)l . Drug^r,,,ui.i,
'ntt<l
l)irric(, M. O Niholi t\l/ontttrtolitttt, Ilr:ogracl (1xls. izd., SKA,90), 1932. itttotttttllltics tltt'tt'xts with interestilrg ancl valtr:rlllc cssaYS'
rrr.g,"l,,"i.l, r<. 'ko,otitt,, crkva u Ilosni i I Iercegovini nekad i dan.as
:
Dinici, Nl . "0 krurrisan ju l'vrtka Prvog z.a kralja," G/as (SKA), CXLVII'
1932, pp. 13t-45. (.ro,ttirt 'Sacra, IY, 1()14, pp' 111-21(t' At the satrte tinrc he published "'
I)inir1, M. "srcbrnik kral Srebrnice," 6la.r (SKA),-I(r1 , l93t+, pp 1B) 9(r, in,livirlulllv lr rrst,lrrl rrrirt,,n'titlerl "preglcrlnrr kirrta klrtol. crk. tl ll"stli'"
.Jrrr,,tiItu,rkva . srcrl.,uit'Yrr,,i lJosni." in P,tt'iest llll lei2.
Dinic', NL "VestiEherharclaVindekeaoBosni," JIC,I(3 4), 1935' pp' 352" IJr,,g';;;;;;iC. K1
67. Pp.
(185-7(16. i,: ,,
Dinii, NI. "Dubrovalki tributi," 6ias(SKA), l68, 1935, pp.2r't5)7 Urnfln.,ui( K. "Katatog katolitkih Yupa XV,ll.r'ieka u Ilosni i I'lercego'ini'
I)ini1, M. "l)ul,rovafka srecln jevekovna karavanska trgovina, " JI(,lII, i%7 , (iroatia.\acra, Xlll klV (no' 22'21)' 194/+, pp' BL) 126'
I). ''N;rtotlrrc I'rrznovieric<'." (;/'N:;' XIX' l9{)7' p1' lll -t-l
l
pp. ll7 46. tlr,rgil,'vi,r, -':C.rtn,11,,,,i".
Dini/, 1!l . "11'rg Drijeva iokolirra u sreclniem veku," Gl/C, XLVll, 1938, pp. ii,rii,fN. i p,,gr.l,,'i ol'iiali rr 'k'lini 'l avrtt'." ZRIiI
'-,,,ri
109-47 .
(SAN), II, lleogracl, l9)1, pp. 119 128' -
DiniC, l\{. "Zcmlje Ilercega Svetoga Save," 6/as(SKA), 182, 19'10, pp. 111- Drogun,a,i,". M Nole.r on lbe Slat'ic I?eligirt Ethical Legends:'I-be D:nlistic
'(.re,ttion of' r be W'orlcl (written r:a' l B90) trans E' Cotrtrt Iutliana
2r7 . '
lJrrivr-'rsity Pr"rblications-liussian atrd East Iliuropean Scries' V'
21
I)inic/, L. ".fedan prilog z-a istoriiu Patarena u Bosni," ZRFFII,l, 1948, pp. '
33 44. lllrxrtrr itr gton , 196 I .

Ilonaventure. Joanni.r.\tojkouiy' dc l?agusio O.P. (+ 1433) Doctrina de

Dinicl, M. "FJosanska feudalua drYava ocl XII do XV vcka," i't Islcttija nrtrodt Duda, 1,.
( oyttrt.t,.i /,ililttc l..rrle.sinc, Rrtrtrr.. l()58.
.lrgttslaliie, l, Bcograd, I 913, pp" 715-64.
I)irriC, Nl . l)rituni raltor.tredn.iettehol'il( l)osne,I)ectgrtrcl (pos. iz-d. SAN 231), D,,iI..'"1 l.'illl,r11,r,t'iti lrci pacsi Sla'i t'la l.ro Storia"' Accalemio Ntazirtnale
(rl9
l9tt. tlei Lint-ci, Prloblemi Athtuli tli Scienza e ii Cultula,lionre, l9(r1t, Pp-
L)inic{, M. Zt istoriju ttdarstr.,a r, .rrednjet,,ekounoj,Srbiii i IJosni,I deo, Beograd /t1. r
I. " Dragvista-l)ragovita." lleatte des lltudes 131'zantine'r, XKII'
(pos. izd., SAN 2/t0). 191) I ll cleo, Beograd (pos. iz-d.. SAN, 35t), 1962, t-l,,iier,
DiniC, M. "Odrros iz-rnedju kralja Nlilutirta i l)ragutina," ZRVl, lll' l9tt' 1964, pp. 2It 221.
pp. 49'80. , v Durharn, M. E. ,9ome T'ribal Origins, I-auts and Custorns of tLte L3olktns'
Dinil, NI . "Drrlrrovlani kao fcudalci u Srbiji i Ilosni," /C, IX'X, 1959, pp. Lottth,tt, 1928.
r)9
48. Uuu".nnf , j.
,,tln traitdCathare d' d'ebut dLr Xlll silcle," CEC, Xlll' 2nd Ser.
DiniC, NL "ConesCorrstantinus," Z1?VI, Vll ,19(r1, pp. lLt). ll, Slrring 1962, pp 22.-5tt.
Dinil, M, ".Jedna rhrlrrovalka arhivska knjiga XV veka," /4, Xll-XIll, l96l- Djivarxrvii, N. "ltl,ig"f^.,ti u r.rfienr pritnorltt," Glasnik Shopskog natinog
(r2, pp. l5 30. drultt,d, vll vltl, 1929 1(t, pp. 193'96.
l)inic{, . "ReljaOIrnruIevid--istorilaipredanie," ZRVl,lX,l9(r(r, pp.9)- Djordicvir/, 'l. NaY nar,,lniYiu,tt' l-Yl.lleograd' l9l().'321 t'I I'arlitttlar.irr'
1\1
'
ltil. ,.r,'., ar(' thc following st trdies : " Koni i 1'rrrlit' k:rt znat'i pololal.a i
Dinil, Nl . Ilunsho''l'rebinjska t'la.rvela,lleograd (pos. iz-d. SAN, 397), 19(;7. storr,Xiurtuo," I, pp. izg ltr; "svatovska groblja," I.l, -1-n' 1()6 16;
Jugoslovtrrskim Nluslimanima, " vl, pp. 2(r-56
,,lrreislanrski ostaci mediu
NB: Serbian D (or Dj) shall follow all the D's. Djukic, 'l'.
,,Tri legen<Je iz_ ot,lasti Komova, " Rad Kongresa Iolklorisla, Y.
7.ajetar,1958, pp. 18) 89.
t)'ollingcr , l.
[bhles I?e.rptr'ling tbe ]]opes ln tbe Xliddle Age.r and Prophetic Diurdiev, I3.
,,Llloga'si'ske crkve u 6orbi pfotiv os.ranske vlasti, " Pregled, Y ,

,\pirit anrl t/ta Propltccie.r oJ'the Cltri.rtian lira(trans. by A. Plunrrncr and I I' N,'. l. 1951. 1'P 1i'51
Smittr), New York, 1872. ,,S.prtu
crkva p.t1 turskonr ulaY.{u do 1r17 ," Itistoijski ltregled,
I)jurcljcv, il.
Dollinger, L lleitrige zur Sektengesc/:icl:te des Mittelalters (1, sources, ll, his lV, No. l. l9tB, PP. 20'28
discussion). Munich, 1890. {',:i Dlur<ljev, ll. I)logarrir'r'ustatijoj istoriji s-rltskt'gnarodrt,saraievo' 19(r/t'
Dondaine, A. See alxr nn<lcr sottrces since each text hc publishes is accolrtpatricd iriirt j. Divo{a'i'ilroradi{a," Z'RV|(SAN)' Vll' 1961' pp'
l>y a long critical ancl interpretative essay.
1.litl
' 113-61"-fevandielfe
DjuriC,
n.
,# iwith ivaniXevi[).
I)onclainc. A. "Nouvcllcs sources de I'histoire cloctrinale du n6o-l\lanit:hiisrntl 3j*.)q Dfurii, V. "Minijat.,te Ilvalovog rukopisa," IG(1-2), 1957 ' pp',39'-12' , ^
au Moyerr?ge," Ret,re ies Sciences et 'I-h{ologie, XXVIII, lL)39, p;t. 1t61' Irl;zo;iC, G. " Turski \zvori za isioriju lugoslovena, " Brat str o, 1XXVI' 932'
I ili;
88. ii$ pp. )1-125.

''S
fJ
',ii
.$';i
 /+14 Medieval Bosnian Church llibliography 415

Iilez.oviC, G. "Je li krat' k'zi 'kultno' lice sa vile grobova, " IC,l (I-2), 1948, Filipovi( N. "Osvrt na poloYnl bosanskog scljaYtva r.r prvoj deceniji
pp. 297 30t). usplst avliatt ia osttt alt skc ulasti u Ilosni," )ldoui, FFS,lll, l9(r5, pp' (rl-
lilez.ovic?, (). "lz-rptrtopisa Evlile dclebiie niegov put iz- Ilcogracla u Her- 11.
ccgovinu," lC, I (l-2), l9ztB, pp. lt)5-31. l;iliorlvira. N. "Nirtrt,r1crrr. 1Islurrriz:ttiji tr llosni t IIcrtt'govilli u XV Viicku,"
C,,,lilniuk, tu1. vtl, Ccntar za B,rlkanoloika Ispitiv:rnia' krrj. ), Saraievo,
'
illiade, M. Pdtterns in Oontfaratiue lleligion, Clevcland, l9(r3.
Ilcrovit{, K. "U kojirr su rnjestinra lranievci Zaosrroga vn{ili dulol'riinilku 1970, pp.71tI-67.
sluYl'rr u .l (r i l8 vijeku,"
Noott Reuija(Makarska),'V, lc)26, pp. tt9293. Fine, J., jt. i'ntisuaios and Iiastudi]c - A Ile-exanrination of thc Question'
livans, Arthur. 'I'/trougb IJosnia and Ilercegouina on Foot, London, 1876. Citl, xVt, t9(r) (Sar.aievo, l9(,7). pp 223-22().
Ilvans, Athrrr. Ill.yrian I.ettels, I-ondon, 1878. Fine, J., Jr. Ilevicrv of S. CirkoviC's lsrorija .. ',in Speculum,Xl-L, i9(16' pp'
Evans, A. "Social Aspects of IVledieval Hcresy," in Persecution antl Liberty; )26-29.
[lssays in Flonorof G. l-. lJurr, New York, 1931 ,pp.93-116. J., Jr., "'l'he l)ead Man's F{and and the Hand of
Fine,'riritiftr, Glory," Nurorlno st
Evans-Pritchard, E. Nzer Religion, Oxford, 19)6, (lleograd), VI (sv. 21), Januarv, 1967, pp' 23-21 (Serbian
Evans-Pritclrard, 11. 'l-heories of Primitiue Religion, Oxford, 196). .il translation , pp. 20-22).
Faber, iVI. "Zur Entstehung von Farlati's 'lllyricum Sacrum,' " Wissen- Finc, J., Jr. "Waithe llosnian Banate Subiected to llungary in thc Sccond_l-Ialf
.rcha.ft,licbe hlitteilungen aus Bosnien und der Herzegouina,III, 189), pp. ::t:l oi,t. L'nit,."nth Century," Etst lluropean Qudrlell!, III, no' 3' June'
,:i
388-9t. ; l9(r9, pp. 161 77 .

Firrc, J., J.. Reuie* of N. Garv.rian, 'l'he Paulician LIeresT, in Sltcculum'

rl r.

Fallati, D. lljricum .9acrum,l-lX, Venice, 1711 1819 (especially Vol. IV). .l

, f
i
Ferdon, E. (ir.). "Agricultural Potential and the Developmenr of Cultures," . r'1 XLIV. rro. 2. April l(){r9' pp. 2tlll 8U. .,
Soutltute.rtern .lournalof Anthropology, XV, Spring, 19)9, pp.1 19. ' ,, i:l Fine, J., Jr, "Uloga Bosanske crku" r, irvnorn Iivotu sredniovek.vne Bosne'''
Ferri, R. "Prilog poznavan ju ilirske nritologije," AHID,ll, 19>3, pp. 419 28. GID, XlX, l97O 71 Sarajevo, 1973 ' pp. 19'29'
Iiiala, F._"Crtice sa Glasinca ," GZMS,IV, 1892, pp.336-/tO. lr'i Finc, J., Jr. ;'Mysteries about the Newiy Discovered Srebrnica-Visoko
Iiilipovil, NI.'' Dr.rbrovnik u Bosni, " GZ IVS,.XXXVI, 19 2/t, pp. I 0 l -02r. , 'i tiirttop.i. in Bosria (1434 I4t+l)," East European QuatterlT, VIII' no l '
FilipoviC, M. "Manastir Udrinr ili GostoviC," GZMS, XXXVI, 1924, pp.
';'i March, 1974, pp. 29't+1.
l09-112. .,ij Firth, R. f]utonf'7lr4.1, New York, 19)8.
Iiilipovid, M. l/isocYh.a nahija, Beograd, 1928. SEZ, XLIII (SKA naselja i porek. ri Fliche, de I'llglise,20 vols., Paris,794l- (with V' lllartin)'
A. Ilisroire
st anovn iltva , 25 ). ..l r'i Florinskij, T. D. "K voprosu o bogornilah., "
sbornik stdtej po slat'janou.edeniju
sostai,lennyj i iztlan'n1j u/"nii)nti tt/est' V. l. Lamanskogo po slu"caju 25-
'i.(
FilipoviC, Nl. "Slava ili sluYba: (Visoiki gornji kraj u Bosni)," ZN'ZOJS,
XXVI. sv. 2, 1928, pp. 329 41. . rl*
".i lerija ego itenoj i pifessorskoi dejatel'nosti St' Petersburg, lBU3' pp' 31'
Iiilipovil, M. "Varoiica ()lovo s okolinonr," FranjeuaYki uijesnik, l93rt, pp. .: ii
-i1
1t0.
231-47, 270 Bt, 301-12. ,,rji Folz, R..,Le Catharisme d'aprls un livre recent" (Review of Borst, I)ie
Filipovil, M. "Tragovi Perunova kulta kod Juinih Sloven a," GZtr4S, n.s. III, ..i-il Katltarer . ), Reuue d'bisloire et de philosoplsie religieuses' XXXIII'
1948, pp. (r3-80. ,ir'.,i.*
19)3, pp. 382 88.
FilipoviC, M. "Stare srpske knjige i rukopisi gr Sever.o-istoEnoj Bosni," ;:r'i Franknoi , V. "Kardinal Carvaial u Bosni, " GZA'IS,ll, 1890, pp'.9 I2 ^- -
GZMS'
GZtuIS, n.s. III, 19/tB, pp. 2tl-60. !:1 Gabridevii, B. "saraievski medalion s prikazom tradkog konjanika"'
IrilipoviC, NI . "KrYtenimuslimani," ZREI(SAN), II, l9tl, pp. 120-28. n.s. IX, l9\/+, pp. 1tI-46.
IiilipoviC, Nl . "Folk Retigion among the Orthodox lropLriation in Easrern r'.iit
. ,tii
Gakovil, p. Prilozi zd istorij, i etnografiju Bosne - neslailak Bogumila'
Jugoslavia, " Ilart,ard Slaoic Studies, lI, 1914, pp. 359 74. islantizaciia Rosne, poriieklo Srha na siet'ero'zapalz' Saraicvo-,,19J,1
Gakovii' P' ';'I'estamerti go'tt Radina"' iazt'irak (Banja Luka)' \rII' No' )'
'3
IiilipoviC, lVI . "[)rultvcnciol.ri[aino-pravncustar]oveuRarni," GZMS,n.s.lX
(ist un), 19t4, pp. I69-B0. :i
l9/t0, ptt. 129 333-
I;itipovi6, lvl . "Jo[ o tragovinra Perunova kulta kod Ju]-nih Slovena, ,, GZMS, P.
i'P,,topis IJeneclikta KuripJ-sic{a, " Razuitak, VII' No' 1' 19/t()' pp
.if Gak.viC,
n.s. IX (ist-etn). 1951+, pp. 1Bl-82. .'1|l 147 t0.
liilipoviC, M. llamu.t Brlsni, tJeogracl, l()tt. SEZ (SAN), LXIX (naselia i it Cars<riart. N. '17:e Paulician IIeres-v,1'hc Ilague, 19(r7'
porck. starrovni{va, 3)). :,:f,l
:! Gaster, Nl. Ilcbester Lectures on ilrecko-Slauonic Literature, Oxford, 1887.
Filipcrvict, lVl. "Bele'ske o rrarodnorn Yivotu i obi"calirna na Glasincu, " GZMS, ;.
Cirster, M. Ilrtmanian Ilirdand Beast Stoties'Lonclon' l9lt'
rr.s. X (ist-etn), l9tt, 1'tp. 117-3(t.
:.ii,l Ccci(,'Nl. "Prilog bosanskoj istr:rriji 1397 99," lG, (1 2), 1913' pp' 55'61'
Filipovii, lVl., ed. Simfozijum o .rrednjot,jekounom Katunu, Saralevo, 1963
'r1il
Gil'fcrcling, A. Iiltsniiu ptrteufia zamethi pis'mo k A'S' Ilontjakot'u' Nloscow'
(pos. iz,tl. NI)Bfl, II). I 8tg.
FilipoviC, I\4. "sklapanie irazvod hriil.anskih brakova pred kadijanra u rursko ' ,llrt Glik. L. ,,'ler.viranie ko7e kod Kat.lika u Bosni i Flercegovini ." GZLI'\, l,
cloba," Rarioll (NDIlfJ), XX., l9(r3, pp. lBt-9>. .
ii,n
No. 3, 1889, pp. 81-88.
Filipovitf . NI. "Sr ur.lijc o slavi. slull'i i krsnorrr inrenrr," T.bornih za dttX!t'ene
:1;
Glik. 1.. "O urocinta, " GZMS,l, No. 1t, 1889, pp' t8 6)'
l:
naukelNlarica Srpska Novi Sa<l), XXXVlll, 1964, pp.5l-76. .'Li

l-1

f4
 416 Nlecliev:rl Ilosnian Church
Ilibliogralrliy ttlT
GltrKar.,V. "sredniov.kovna_.bosarrska crkva,, ,, prilozi,ly 192t+, pp. _55 llardic, IVI. "C--hristiarr Survivals alnong Ccrtaitt A'loslcrrt Subjc<rts of (llt'<'tc, "
GIrrYac. \,. "Prrrlrlcrrr,llop,rrnilslva.:, di;, r). ry:r, pJr. lt)5 ,.tB. I
(.ontentf orar.y Ilctit'tt,(l-orrrlon). (.XXV, .f an.'.[unc. 192'1 , p1,. ))5-32.
Gouillard, f . "L'Ilcirdsie rrans l'Erripire tlyzartin des origines IIaskins,C. II.''l'heSpleadoflcleasintheNIiddlcAges,",\i7,ecrltn,l,l926,
'l'rat,arx et fulemoire.r,l, 196i, au xilc silcle,,,
pp. 29912r+. pp. l9-3t).
Grabar, A. Recberches sur res inflaen'ces orienrares dans IArr Barkaniqtte, ilasluck, li. W. Christianitlt ax/ lslant tnder tbe Stltans,2 voluntcs, ().rford,
Paris, 1928. 19 29.
Grafev, V "1'ernriny'/rrpa'i '/upa'' v serbskih isto[nika li. 'l'be lli,ldle
xrI-XIV vv i IIeerr, ,4,ges, Lonrion , 1962.
traktovka ih v isoriografii,', Iito/niki iistoriografia.slot,janskopo sred_ llcfele, C. J. (Le Clerque), Ilistoire,/es Concile.r, VII. pt. 2 (OIr Brrscl). I)aris.
net,ehot, TA (AN lnstitut slavjanoveden;ja), I\,Ioscowl
l9(,i,;,"t,. i ,2 1c) 16.
Grant, R. Gno.rticism and.Iitrl.y (,'hristionitlt(re:v. ecl.), ru"* y.,,t, llilrni,NI . "Prilogistoriji Sarajeva," G7.r\LS,I, No. l, lfl89, pp. l7 2t).
Grdjiclljclok.cic{, L. " 'K.z-i grad', 'iu),n; g.ua', .gradina,'u'. iif,f,.
. koraru llolcr, J. .lo/unnes t'on (.'tltestrano,lnnsbrut'k, Vienna. i\lrrnich. 193(r.
lojnilkorrr," GZA4S, IV. 1892. pp.9194. IIofk'r, A. "Stara crkva rra [Jukovici kod'l-ravnika," GZl,IS, Xlll, l9()1, p.
Grdgoire, IJ.,"cathares t|Asie r\Iinetrie, d'rtarie, de France, ,,
t\I/ntodar Louis 468.
Peti, N|{langes d'histo.ire_e, a',q..,rt*L;i.. ar.liu", de l,oricnt Iloller, A. "Dva odlonrk:r iz. pouel'eg rada o kr{6anskoj crkvi u Bosni. " Sponten
chrt(tien.
l. I)aris. l94tt, I,1.. 142 tI. hnligu iz I3osne, Zagreb, 1901 , p1>. )9-I/t2.
Gruber, D. "Bertoldrlterarrski Ban IIr'arski iNacrbiskup
Karoi*i,', r/zA,v, Ilofstaclter, R. "'l'he Paranoid Style in American Politics," in a ccrllection ol
t903. pp. 18,41. essays under the sanre title, Vintage pb. ed., Nerv York, lL)(tl, pp.3-1t0.
Gruber, II. "Lcs'l'.mbes llogonriles et leur Sig'ificance,,, llijrrnanrr, K. "Olovo," GZMS,l, No.3, IBB9, pp.(r3-72r.
C,L:C, XIV, Spring
1963, pp. 1l /t(t. IIrabak, I). "Prilog datovarrju hc'rcegova[kitr steclaka, " GZt\lS, rr.s. VIII,
Grrrjic, i\' "crkveni
drr.Ytu,t. VII Vlll. 1929."1:T.arr,i krsne srave, " Gtasnik skofskog nnuinog t9J3, pp. 325-28.
)0. t\D. 3/t 7/r, I lrabak, B. " Ut ica j prinrorskih privrcdnih centara na drttXtvcno ckottornsku
ortrf ie{' Al "K.srroroxki 1'rohrt'nii'po rr)sirr starirrr_ruk.'isirra. "
Gotliinj,th istoriiu Bosne illercegovine u srednjenr veku," Pregled, V, Nrt r, 1953,
., ..\lolrhnq
(iru
/itozn[.rk.g fahulreta, i, g.lo, ,,,i. tl7 Ztr4.
jil, M. f.rlrr. ievarrrrj<'rj. l,trsansk.gat ri1,n y1i7 pp. 382-85.
XV vt,ka rr jr#rr.j srhiji,.. in llralrak, Il. "llcrak VrarreY," Gll,), Vll, 195i, pp.53 (rzr.
/./,,,mih, lllo;1ratl, lgl7, r,ni )(ti 7-/.
lJ,,.li,(,'t.
lj: '.{:,:ll"li potl r;rznirrr g,,rj,,i,io,in," 6cl XII
(irtrii/-', IIra|ak, 13. "l)rollost Pljevlja po clubrovafkitn rlokutucntinta ckr polt'r'irtt' XVII
(SKn ), LxVl. IL)26, pp. 3-121.
do XV v,,. .gpornenift v." Lstorijshi :nl,i:i, Ylll. I955. Pp.9l2.
(lrurnel, IIral,:rk, Il. "O lrciceg,ruolki,,, ulnYki,rr katuninra 1'1g;n1 l,osltrvrroj krrjiz.i
.Y., Les Regestes des Actes dtt patriarcat de Constantinol)te,I (I 3), Dubrovtanina DY-ivana Pripiilovic{a," GZiVIS, (ist. etn), n.s. Xl, 195(r, pp.
lstan bul , 1t)72.
29 38.
Grundnrann. []. "Neue Bcitr'dge zur oeschiclrte der lrerigioserr
Bervt,gun,.cn Iluizinga, l. T'he l1/aninltof the Middle Ages(1921t), NcwYork.11)>4.
irn I\littelalter ,', ArcLtit, fiit. Kulturgeschicltre, XXXyir,
82.
iSii, lrl,. lzS lli{, .1. Die Ilogomilen in ibrer grtschiclttliclten lintu,icktung, Srcrnski Karlovci,
1923.
Grretii-Gaspiiev, N. o ujeri starib srot,ena, I,tt Mostar, r90() (2rr<r part lnalcik, ll. "Ottonran Methods of Conquest," Studia Islantica,II, l9tl1, pp.
never published).
1 03,10.
Grrldcscrr. S. lli.etorv o/ ,Ilctliet.,tl ( totttia, 'l he I Iacut,- l9(,1
Gun11i_a, S. "Prinos lrozrrava, jrr'<uilekla i
lvarr<u:eviC, P. "Kula, "
(;ZMS, III, lBgi . ?p. 1t7 1tr.
naiina l,riievoza sret1aka... li, V, Ivanka, Il. "Gerardus IVIoresanus, der Erzbischof Uriel und die Bogorrrilen,"
195lr, 1'p. 1/t(t-47. Orientalia Cbristiana Periodica, XXI, 1951, 143 46.
lla(liiiahi(1. i\l "() isranrizatiji b.sarrski' kr.stiana.' .
obzor, 7.agreb, rl Ivan<rv, .1. []ogotnikki h.nigi i legendi(Bn N), Sofija, 192).
I)ecerlbcr 1937. IvanoviC, R. "srednjovekovni baXtinski posedi hunrskog eparhiskog
IladY)iahi(, ill. "Kainrija o Bogonrilirrra ,', iirrt, t9j2,
No. ). p1t. 125.16. vlastclirrstva," 1C, IX X, 'l959. p0.79-9t.
Iiallowell, A. "oiibwa ont'logy, Bchavior
a'd worlcl View,,, i's. Diamond, lviC, A., "Kadje iod koga ie Stepan Vuk.vic(dobio titulu 'herceg od Sv. Save, "'
_ Primitiue Vieus . . ., pp. 49_82. Letolti5 Matice srpske, 230, 1c)0r, pp' 80-94.
Ilamrnel , E. Altet.natit,c.S,o)ot .liruirres and I?iraal lvii, A., "Kad je iod koga ie Stc'pan Vuklic< dobio titulu'herceg od Sv.
[,.-nglewocxl CIi{fs, New "" Relation-r in t/te llalhurs, Savt',' " Letoltis fulrtice stfshc, 270, 190t, pp. 8()-9'4.
Jersey, 1968.-'"
I Ianrp' E' P. "Notes on lvte.rrcval tnr.ription. JablarroviC, J. llogontilstt'o ili Patarenslao, Mostar, 1916,
of llosnia a'd I rert.egovinl,,,
Zbornih m fitotociiu itinpt,istiku!N,,;iirl;'.
irr. r9i,t.;n.;1.;,:"',,,. Jackson, A. "l'he [)octrine of Metempsychosis in Manichaei-snr, " Journal o/
Iland, W. "srarrrs uf Eu.op"ou un,l'A,rr".i.un tbe Anterican Orientol Societlt, XLV , 192t, pp. 246-68.
i"g.na
tlvnl,ologv. VI, No. 4'. Oct. trle:-,1,p-." 'l-V ttC Stu{y,,, C.urren! An- Jagic', V. "tlistoriia knii/evno.sti naroda hrvatskoga isrpskoga" (rvritten
llarrdiii' I I' rrramizdtija Ilorne i 'tiJ*iiirire lB(r7), in jek Jagi{a,lY,Zagreb, i953, pp. 207'36,/t.
.
/terce,go uaikih fii uslimanu, Sarajevo.
i foijehro h.s,tt^hu- V. "Opisi i
I) Vatroslaua
izvocli iz- nekoliko julnoslovenskih rukopisa: sredovjccvni
I;i?)'' JagiC,
liekovi, gatanja ivralanja," Starine, X, 1878, pp. B1-12(r.
 .J
;t
ft
ix
4r8 N{cclicval Bosnian Church ,j$ Ilitrliography 4r9
.:*
Srrralevo, l93t
XIl,jG.-ur',i."
Jagici y. "Nckoliko lijcti o br.tsanskirrr natpisirna na stcCcinra, " GZMS, \,
.."1
,tl nuzeio,
Kararr.vil. M. ' srednievckov.e bosanske )upe Zer'lja,''ik," GZIliS,
ltl9t), pp. I 9. .{

Jagi<i V. "Flin neu enrdeckrer urkundlicher Beitrag zur Erkl?irung clcs

xlvuI. t936, pp. 27'36.
,:f
Kara.oviC,
,'irio.ilsko-etnografske
M. crtice o Iupoutu Rarni i Skoplju,"
Ilcrsnischcn Patarencntunr s," Atc/tiu Jir slauiscbe Pbilologie, XXXIll, 'x
1912, pp. t8t ti7. GZMS, L, 1938, 73-L)).
t f<u.*uuii,'M. "O
1>1.t.
n*u,no.u vuluu<'l. MornEila," GZMS' LII' l'\o' l' 1940'
Jagid V. Izahrani kr,r/i spisi, Zagreb, n.d. (clearly conipilcd after Worlcl War .' t! oo.69-71t.
II). XIV'
Kotonu, Stephano, Llistoria critica Regum llungariae, Vol'
'.1
Kalocza'
[i. C/tristiat t\4.yth and Ritual(1933), Cleveland, 19(r1.
Jarrres, .ii
t79 2.
JcleniC, J. "Kriiarska vojna proti bosanskim Patarenirna, " ,,i$

glasnik, 1901, pp. 200-04.

Franjeuauchi
iI Kemp, P. 'l-be Ilealing llitual; sndies in tbe I'ecbnique and'l'radition of tbe
Soutbern S/ars, I-ondon , I93).
Jclenic/, J. Kraljeusko Visoko i samosttn so. Nihole, Sarajevo, 1906. ::
Kemura, S. "Stara hriYianska crkva u Saraievu," GZMS, XXIII, 1911' pp'
JelcniC, J. Kultura i IJosanshi Franjeuci, I, Sarafevo, 1912. J
I 297 302.
Jelenic/, J. "Problem dolaska Franjevaca u Rosni i osnutka llosanske vikarije," lii
Norc l?euije(Makarska), VII (No. 3-4), 1926, pp.1-27. Kemura, S. Bitje\ke iz ltr,Ytosti bosanskih katoliktt injibouih hogontolja po
" turskim tloktnentinta, Saraievo, 1916.
Jirc{ek, K. "Vlastela hr-rnrska na natpisu r.r VeliEaninra, GZA4S,IV, 1892,
'iif
:1
V. Pottiest Ilosne do propusti hrali,eusttta,Zagreb, l8B2'
p1>.279-81. Klaic',
,t
t<taii, V. Bribirski knezoui od ple.menaStbila do god' 1347,Zagteb, 1897 '
Jirefek, K. "Glasinac u srednjern vijeku," GZil'tS,lV, 1892, fl).99-101. :r
I{. "Das Gesetzbuch den Serbischen Caren Stephan Du}an," Archiu ,,i KlaiC; V.,,Crtice o Vukovskol Iupaniii i Djakovu u sredniem viieku," VZA,
JileEek,
XXII, 1900, pp. 144-214.
.fiir slauische Pbilologie,
:':$ ll, 1900, pp. 98-108.
::i t<laid,'V."tieicegLI.uojeiFIval krstjanin," Nastauniujesnih, XXXV' 1927'
Jiretek. K.'l'rgot,aYki dntmoui i rudnici Srbije i ISosne u srednjent uijeku I
, iill
pp. 83 U8.
(i879), Sarajevo, l91l; also inclucled in Zbornik Konstantina Jireleka, l!:X
l'! ,, ,Bosanska crkva' i patareni" included in a collection of essays by
Flc'ograd. 1959 (SAN pos. izd. 32(t), pp. 2Or-704. rcru;i, v.
p p' 69 82'
;:ii
ft it" enti tle<l, C rr i ce i z b n'a t s h e lt rors ! 9 s t i, 7a gr eb' 19 28,
Jirefek, l{. Istorija Srlu,2 vols., [-]eograd, 1952, translated ancl revised by J.
'-.t
snrrt, " 7'NzOlS, XXVll, 1930, pp 166-71'
llatkur
r{jii
Klaric( I. "Porod,Yeni<lba,
rc,,"i"uif, S...Lik zmije u narodnoi urnetnosti itradicifi Jugoslovena,"
iC. . tli
Joirrirr<ru, P. "l,.es.Croyances I)6rnor-rologiques au XIe sidcte ir Byzance, " Actes r;rli
dr Vte Congris hiternationat d'ituiei Byzanrines,l, Paris, 19)0 , pp.245-
'lr'i GIlMIl, XXII XXIII, 1960, p1t. )7-97.
. :Li
Kniewald, D.
,.oligine franEaise du plus rncien sacrartrentaire ,Je Zag;eb,"
60.
V. "Prilog izulavanju , llr
'l]l Annale.r de t'inititutftansais de Zagreb,l93B, pp I94 200
Kniewald, D. "Vierodosiojnost latinskih iruott o bosanskim krstianinra," Ilal
Jokarr<rvic{, bosanskog feuclalizma,' RatIouiNDBH, il,
Sarajevo, 1914, pp. 221-67. ;,i
. itj ttl
Jorras, I l. -'l'/te Gnostic Ilelilqion(rev.ed.), Boston, 19(r3. 'D.270, t949,
IAZU), pP. 276.
;'i{
Kniewald, "Flierarchie- und Kultus Bosnischen christcn" Accadentia
Jovanovil, Lj. "Ratovanje I{ercega Stjepana s Dubrovnikonr l45l t4,,' GNt, Nazionale rlei Lincei, Problemi Attuali di scienza e di Ltltura, Rotne,
X . I 888. 1'p. 87- 198. : :.;i

j. "stjepan Vuk"ciJKosa[a,', (SKA), XXVIII, lg9l.

'',ir{
;j l961r,pp.)7c)'601. ^ . /.
Jt,v.rrrovi6, L Glas pp. l- ji f<oio, D.',,L'Orna,n.r.,tation cl'un Vase) Mesure du l\4us6e Clunl' et les Stecct
BB.
l;
'1; llcrsniaques," '4r'tibls Asiae, XY , Ascona. l9)2, pp' 195 201
Jrrgie, n4- "Phounclagiagites et llogom iles," Echos d,Orient, XII, l9{)9,
2t7.262.
pp. .i:i
K.r;/., v. .';C.i.u".r pri*tonjenirn lukovima u staroi Flercegovini i chrbrov_aEkc.r
graditeljstvo XV-XVI veka," ZRFFII, Vlll' 1964, Pp' )(r1 99 (with V'
-.{

.fung, L, I'allen Angels in Jeuish, Cbristian and Mobantntedan Littrature,

",4.\

Philatlelplria, 1926.
':r'iit
,t tvi l) ju rit).
K;tjrnak,rvid, 7,. 7.i,1n,,.\'likarstuo rt lJosni i Ilercegotini, Snla jevo, l()7 i
'{.
:t KoraC, V. 'l'rebinje - istoriishi fregled,'l'rebinie, 1966 u
Kovalevic', I). " 'ilog,.tnrili,' ,:r[va bosanska," Srfski hnjiieuni ylasnih' LIY '
,

Ka.anran, l,j. "o bosanskim sredrrjovekovnirn stec{cinra." .\ratnbrt,arsha i:j

Ilcograd, 1938, np. 32 ltI,217 2t.
frost'jeta, Ser. lll, sv.7, 1914, pp. l7l-182. ir:l
;:+ ,,O't'uiloruaninr lJog.milima," Naia pro"slost\l(ralievo), IV'V,
Karan<rviC, Nl . "Jeilan zanirnl;jiv rnramor kod Skender-vakufa," GZMS, Xl,, i-d f<uuuf.uiC, fi.
Ncr. 2, 1928. p1t. 1?, 19.
t: 1970, pP. r-27.
KaranoviC, l\,1. "Grobna crkva grafidki izraY.ena p<t bosanskom sredn-
:i,1
i:,1
Kovalevic','l). 'li'pot,ina u srednjoujehoanoj Bosni, Sarajevo, 1961' (NDIlll'
jevek.vnorrr sp.r'e'iku, " N ouo.r ti i z bosan sk o-bercegouttkog muzeja, XI, lifti l)jela XVllll. . r..
D. i'Irad
.

.t
:"1 Kouui"uiC, bosanske sre<lnjovjekovne dizave po d',,brov,Ickinr rz-
Sarajcvo.1934.
Kararrovi/, M. "Problem K'li.a bana," Nouosti iz bosattsko-ltercegsr,,lrtog Iti.t vorima," GID, XIV, 19(r/1, pp. 20t 220.
.'id KouateuiC, J. " tlelcvske z.a pr.orr[avan je N'l iroslavljev.g ievanclit'lja i nraterijalne
;.f krrlture XI-XII veka," 1C' I (1 2), 1948' pp. 218 33'
;iii .,Nad9ro6'i narpis ireljef Kaz.naca NesJrirte," GZMS(arh) n.s.
KovaEeviC,.[.
#$
:'i XV XVl, lc)(rl, pP. 317''22
rtt
$
r.j;
i4n
 :#
#
420 Nlcclic.val lJosnian Church $ Bibliography 421
{
Kovarv-rvicr', 1. "Prvi klcsari /iril^skih potpisa na 13arkanu," Gz,MS (arh) ..s. fr Levy-Strauss, C. T'he Sauage Mind, Chicago, 19(16.
XV XV l. l9(r I . 1'1'. luc) .3 I 6.
#
4
Liepopili, A.
Ston u srednjim uijekouima, Dubrovnik, 1915.
Kovafevij, K. "Selo PraXcijak i njegova pe6ina,', GZMS,I, No. l, lBB9, pp. .$ Lil;k; E.'"Riznica poroclica Hra"i6i (nadimak KosaEe)," GZMS, I, No' 2,
2t_23. 1889, pp.1-2).
Kovatevic', K. "Selo Gorijevac i njegove srarine, " GZMS,II, 1890, p1t. 21, '!! Lilek, E. "Vierske starine iz- Bosne i Hercegovine''' GZMS, VI, 1891i' pp'
27. $ t4t 66, 2>9'81, 3(r)-88, 631 7tt.
Kovac%vici [.j- "Z'arne'ite srpske vlasteuske poroclice sredrjega veka, " GNd, ,s
'$
Lilek, E..,Biljeike o z_adrrfi.nim i gospodarstvenim prilikama u Bosni iLIer-
X, 1888, pp. 199 21tt.
# cegovini," GZMS, XII, 1900, pp' 213'2).
KovijaniC, P. "Bosanski proro\,'estiiar Zore,,, lstoriski zapisi,Vill (1,2), 1()15, ,s
Linton, R. "Nativistic Movernents, " American Anthropologist,XLV , 1943,
It.. Jt 1 5/r (wirh I. Sriepievif). $ py:.230-1+0. Reprinted in W. Lessa and E. Vogt, Reader in Compatatiu
Krekic', lJ. Duhrot,nih il.eront (1280 1(60), Berograd, 1956, (SAN Relipion,2nd ed., New York, 19(r), pp. 499'5(h.
l)os. izd. .r{
26t). s Lfubid, S. "poviestniEka i,tra1ivanja o l{rvoiu velikom bosanskom vojvodi i
t(rekiC, B "V_uk llobaljcvid," ZRV1,IV,l9)(r, pp. 11)-210. fl4
splietskorn lrercegu," Rad (JAZU), XXVI, 1874, pp. 7tt 92.
KreYevljakovic', Il, "odakle su i Yto su bosansko,irercegova?.ki Muslinrani?, " Liubinkovi( R. "Hurnskcr eparhisko vlastelinstvo i crkva Svetog Petra u
.l)anitn lZagreb), l9l{r. 1'p. )17 28. ,.ff Bilelorn polju," Starinar, IX X, 19t9, pp' 97'I23.
Kre(evljakoviC. II. "Stari bosanskigraclovi,', NS, I, 1%2,pp.7-47. L.ckwood, W.'lThe MarketPlace as a Social lVlechanism in Peasant Society,"
Krelevljakovic', Il. "Stari hercegovaikigradovi, " l/S, II, til'54, pp.9-22 (with ,$ Kroeher Antltropological Societ1,, Papers, 1965, pp. t17-67.
IL Krrpidlii). #
t-nor. trrt. :'i" nrd,.n,Ju' temoinagl (l'un traitd tle Jcan Exarqtre intitule/
Kristic, A. lJosonske crkue i n.iihouo ohshrbrjiuanje za otoma,she ukde, 5"rto.ln"u et relatif aux Bogomiles," Byzantinosht'ica, Xill, 191'2-53, pp'
Saraievo. 193(r. $
t9 67.
Kudarr, A. "Kanreni stolac iz Bukovica, " GZMS, (arh) n.s. X, I9rt, pp. 4l ,il Loos, M. "Le Mouvement Paulicienla Byzance," Byzantinoslauica, XXIY,
ztB (with llf . IVIaz-ali[). No. 2, 1963, pp.2)8-86; XXV, No. t, 1964' pp.12-68'
Kukuliica. L. "Ivan stoikovic. " nuhrot,nihz.a 1B(>7, split, 1B(r(r, pp.2B0-99.
'iil'ri,i,"I ilt{
H
Lopa'siC, R. Biha( i llihaiha Krajina, Zagreb, 1890.
Krrlilir'. (. "7.rrrij:r k,,,, Yiu,,ii,,1.ki t",;ri,,;;;ik",t,,1,,,9i;;.." tit",p
.1t
..,9*
l"i,rl('A. "(ilagoljski natpis,tu kont",.tl., iz. okolice banjaluiYkc," GZ14S,
luk;r6 VII, No. 5. l()4(). 1';'. 14a 47. dg
t,i1[ Xl.lx, 1937, pp. 3l-16.
Kuliiid, s. "ltaz-nrarranja o poriieklu Muslinrana'Ilosni iI-lercegovini," ',,i$ Machal, Fl. "slavic Mythology," in h4lthologl of all llaces, lII, Boston,
97.ry.\.rr.s. VIll. 1951. 1,p. 145-j8. 1918, pp. 227-J14. /
t<uliiir{, 5. "'l-ragoui bogor'ila u Iloki Kotorskoj, ,, Spomenik, SAN, l0). i't
'rn
Macl.rek, V.-"Essai comparatif sur la Mythologie Slave," Reuue des Eludes
J956. or.'.47-1+1. .:..{

.\kues, XXlll , 1947. pp. 48-65.

Kuli.(ii, S.
""starije ct'iZte formacije i etnifki procesi u obraz.ovanju narocJa # Maksimovil, J. "llustraciie mletaikog zbornika i protrlern mi'ijatura u sredtr-
tlosrrg i I lercegovine," Pregted, XIII, No. j,19(tI, pp.9-16. iq jevekovnoj Bosni," IG(I-2),19)8, pp. II7-30.
Kuli\1i.S '.'Etnitka proKlost stanovniltva [.ivanjskog pui;",', pregled(between :od Malinowski, I). Mugic, Science and Religion and Other Esrays (collection of
1962 64), pp.2l1-i(r ( I readas an undatedoff,print). ',j
f' essays written between 1916-26), published by Free Press, Glencoe, In-
,ts
Kuljbakin, s. PaleograJsk.a ijezitka ispitiuanja o Mirosraarjeuont jeuandjetju, diana, 1948. Citations in my study to the Anchor edition'
,'.1$ .,Social Trends and PersonalPressure," (India) in c. Leslie,
Srenrski Karlovci. 1925. .ij.i Mandelbaum, D.
Kurtz, L. 'llbe l)ance oJ Deatlt and tbe Macabre Sltiit in European Literatttre,
, !;)
Anthropology of Folk Religion ., ., pp. 221'r>'
New York, 1934. MandiC, O.'Uogimitna crkaa bosanskih krstjana, Chicago, 19(r2 (which is Vol.
Lanternari, Y., T'be Religions of the Qppressed (Mentor pb edition), ,r.i{ 1l of his Bosntt i Hercegouina),
New
York, l9(r3. Mandii, D. Rasbraue i piloziiz stare bruatske fouiiesti, Rome' 1963'
Lea, H. C. A IIi.rtory of tbe Inquistion of tbe llliddle Age.r (1887), $ MancliC. D. t:inifhn 1'ouijest lJosne i I larcegouinc, Ronrc' l9('7 iwlrich is
3 Vols., ,1
vcrlume 3 of his IJosna i Hercegoaina).
New York, 1922. rl*
Lelf , G. IIere.r1 in the Later Middte Ages,2 Vols., Manchester, Manntreim , K. Ideotogl and IJtopia, New York, 1936.
19(r7. fiC
Leger, L. "L'hc'resie des Bogomiles en Bosnie et en Bulgarie au ,:f Marid R. Antithi h.ultoui u ntsoj zemlii,Bsngrad, L9)3.
moyen?ge,,,
ii MariC, R. "Bind ilirski bog izvora," GNC, XLVIII, 1939 ' pp.146-49'
- Reaue des Que.rtions Historiques, VIII, 1g70, pp."479-517
Leovac,.O. "Bogornili u_Bosni
,
..i MariC, R. Studije iz srpske numizmatike, Beograd, 19)6 (SAN pos' izd. 2)9)'
i Hercegovini,',' bUrni* Jugoslouenskog
NIarjanoviC, M. ''Aristodiie zadranin hereziarha bosanski, " Zadarsha reuiia,l,
- .f rolesorskog druitua, XVIII, 1937 , pi. g1-83.. i9:2, t'lo. I, pp.3-10; No. 2, pp. 9-15; No. 3, pp.13'21; No 4, pp' i2-
t,i"* york, l9(;0.
Leslie, C. Ant/tropolog.y of Fotk Retigior,
Lessa., w' Reader in conparatiue Retigion(2nd ed.), 16,
New york, r96I (rvith E.
Vogt). lr Markovi6, M. "I)ve narodne pripovetke," GZMS,IV, 1892' Pp 20?-'94, -,
,ii MarkoviC, Z. "Drvene grobnice u okolini Rudog," GZMS, N'S. VIII' 1953,
:1
iii
''irr
{ii
;
li" i
 422 lVlerlieval Bosnian Church Bibliography 1+
15

l)t). 3 l7 19.
N{arriott, l\I. "l-ittle c-ornnrunities in arr Incligcnorrs civiliz.ation" MirkoviC, I). "Manitstir Pitragjnt, " GZTVI'\,1, No. I ' lUtl9' |P. l2-15.
llndia), in c, lllirkovic(, I). ''Vojvorla'fonta," G2fu1'5,1, No.2, IfiB9, pp.29 32.
Lcsli,a, Ant/t,1)pil(,,q.tt of Folk Ileligion, pp. l(r9-218.
Matanii, A. "De d'plici activitate s. Iacobi de Marchia in rc,gno ct vicaria Mirkovid. P. "JankoviCa razboiiYte ili svatovsko groblje na I.]rezovctt, " GZIlS'
Franciscali Bosnae," Arcbiuunt Franciscanunt /tistoricrn, i3, l9tO, pp. l, No. /t, 1889, pp.21-23.
111-127. MirkoviC, P. "Bilai." Gz|ilS, II, t890, pp. 1)2'17.
Illatasovic', J. "T'ri humanisra o Pararenirna, " Godi$tjak skopskog lilozofskog Mitrovi4 A. .'Krsno irrre ni patarenskog ni srpskog ni pra'oslavtrog
prrstanka," CZMS, XXIV,'iie 1912, pp. 39196.
.[akrlteta, I, i930, pp.235-211.
i
/ "
NIatarcviC, J. "Rerum Bogomilicarurn scriptores novi aevi anriquiores, " :,t M larlenovii, N1 . "Osmanli Conqucst ancl the Islantiz-ation of Iiosnrl, ljtrzdas
C,',liY.niah .\lttf sl,try fitoi:ofshog fdkulteta, lIl, 1914 38, yt1-:. Irti-99, .,.1 .\ht,cs et Iist t:urop[ennes, lll, 19t9, pp' 211) 226.
Mot'ul'skij, V. ' 'O ntnintom dualiznrc i nrifulogiji Slavian,' ' Russhii
,,"i
Matkovii, P. ''Prilozi k trgovaEko-politi[koj historiji republike dubrovatke, " 'i
liltt!,tL'ileshii t'a:ltih, XXl, 18t49, l'f 15J'2U4.
I
I?t,l tJAT.lt), Vll. 1869. pp. I li{)-266. A

i'Stari ruk.pisi i{ran'pnnc k.iige u CainiIu." Ns, Ill. l9t('.

lvlatkovic/, P. "sp.r'enici z-a dulrrovaEku povjest u vrieme ugarsko-hrvatskc * M.,",iro.lic/, P.
z.altite, " .Sturine, I, 18(;9, pp. l4l-210. pp. 17) 77.
4
t
Matkovicl, l). "t)va taljanska putopisa po balkanskom poluotoku iz XVI vieka, " .:{
Morrre, 8., .Ir. Social Origins nf Dictatorsbil> ond Democrac-7, Boston, l9(r(r'
t
.Starine, X, lB7B. ytp. 201-5(t. ,{ NloKin, V. Review of (1. tremoirik's "llosanskc i hurnskc poveljc. . .," in
llistorijshi zbornik, ll, lL)41), pp. 3l )-21 .
'!
I\latk<rvid, l). "llur.vanja p. Ilalkanskor'lrolu.roku XVI vieka,,' lltttUAZU), ii
,\l.ll, 1878, pp. )(r-l8z+; XI-IX, 1879, t)p. lO) 6t+; LV, l88l, pp. t1(r- .,1
,,I
NIoYin, V. "Rukopis pljevaljskog Sinodika Pravoslavlja, " Slot'tt, VI-VIll,
Bzrr l.VI, lfl81, pp. 141 232; LXII, pp. /15 133; I.XXI, 1884, pp. I (r0; 1917, pp.11476.
LXXXIV, lBB7, pp.4t-99; tJ, 1890, pp. (rl 168; CV. tB()1, pp. 142. ;,$
Nlolin, V. "serbskaia redakcija Sinodika v Nedelju Pravoslaviia. " l/f, XVI'
2{)l;CXll, lt}92,pp. 154 241; C'XVI, 1893, pp. l-112: CXXIV, 1895, ,:J
f
1959, p1,. 717 94.
pl). l'l{)2; L-XXIX. 189(r, pp. l-tt9; CXXX, 1897, p1t. 8(r lti8; ,1 Mtrjez-inovi( NL "Groblja nad Kovafinra r"r Sarajevu," N.t, lX, l9(tti, p1't.
(lX.\ X VI. I 89B. I't'. I 9('. ,;{
t21-32.
rT
l\lazali( t)j. "Kratki iz-vjeKtaj . ispitivanju starina crkava nranasrira ozrena, ]\lrrrray-Aynsley, tl . .\..ynb6lisnt o/-tbe [:ast und West,Lonc]on, l9(X).
l :rrrrrrt,. I'rrpratve. I.orrurice, " G7.iL\, 1., 1918, pp. r)5. l(rg. ,,itr
Nt'lli. R. Le Pl,en,, .llnc Cat/.ttre, ['rcsscs trniversitaires clt'f rancc. 19611'
l\lrrzalir{. I)i. "Krar{i ,la',,{i i raspr.:rvc." ()7.I1l.5,,r.s. IV-\,. l()1(,. pp. )15.rt2. ,r.t
,{ NikolaieviC Stoikovid, l. "skulpttrra srccln jevekovnih crkava [Josne i I'ler
I\'laYLrrarri{, V. "lzvori rlul,r,rv,ifk,,g lristorikir Jakovt Luktr,,ui1.,i.il Nttrot!na ]J <t'grrvirrt'," 7.lll1l, V, l9tfl , pp. I ll'122.
starina, VllI, lc)211, pp. l2l 71. t
NikolaicviC Sto jkovi<1, l. "l.a Sculpture ()rnanrct)talc au XIIc Sii'cle cil IJosnic ct
lvlcggcrs, I]. ".Environr'ertal I-inritatiorr on the l)evelopnrcnt rf culture," m Ilcrcegovine," ZI|Vl, Vlll, No. 2, pp. 2{)5-309.
-.t\ uttican A ntbtol,ologi.rt, l.VI, Octoher 19r1t, pp. gOl-21t. NjegoY, P. I). "lhe Ilay of the Microcostn," IIart.,ard Slot'ic 'Stu,/ie-r,Ill' 1917
NleY(%1qk;1 , N. "K istorii teksta slavjanskoj knigi Enotia',', VV, XXIV,1964, (trans. rvith interesting introduction on dualistic ideas in his rvork by A.
pp.91-108. Savi d-Rcbac ).
Mignc, A. I)ictionnaire des Apocr-1,pbe,r,l, paris, lB)(r. Novak, V. "Slavonic [.atin Syrnbiosis in I)alnratia I)uring tht: i\'li<ldle Ages,"
NlihajloviC, Il. "Popovo u Ilercegovini ," GZMS,l, No. l, lgB9, pp. 15"17. Slat,rtnic and lla.tt liunfean I?euieut, XXXll, No 72, I)ec. 1953' pp' l-2fi.
LihajloviC, II. "Vjetrenica pc6ina u Zavirli, " GZMS,l, No. /r, lBi9. Novakqvid, S. "llurkard iJlertrarrdon de-la Ilrt'kiier o balkatrskonr |oluostrvtt
1,p. lg-
21 . xlv xv vcka, " GNc, xl\/, tB9/r, nn. l-116.
NIihajlcrvi6, Il. "Manastir Tavalai Vierrenica p"6ina," GZilIS,lI, 1g90, pp. Obolcnsky, D. 'l'/te Ilogomils, Cambridgc, Iingtand, 191t8'
1lo-43. Otxrlcnsky, D. "Bogomilisnr in the Byz-arrtinc Entpire," Actes dt l/le Congres
Itlihajloviel ll. "(.'rkva sv. Perra uZavali,,, GZMS,II, 1890. po.27 1.7). Int0rildtiondl d'Eludes l)1,zar,,rrnt, i, Paris, l9)11 ,pp.293 lf.
NIijuYkrviC, J. "llunrska vlastcoska por.dica Sarrkovili, " 1CJ,'XI, J 9r,tt,
1,p.
Olxrlcnskv, I). "l"e Christianisrnt' Oriental et les I)octrincs l)tralistes, " 'tlc-
t7 t4. tarlemia Ntzionale dei L.incei, Problemi Attuali di scienza e di cullura,
l\1ilas, NI . "ll.gurrrilska riie.Y 'reIit' u Storru i I)alnraciji,', GZi\lS, Vlil, Ilorrrt', I ()64, p1t. 643 51.
I B9(r, p. )39. i OlilackrviC, l-). 'l'be i.i1e and Adrentilt'es oJ Dositej Ohradori/(ad. and trarts. by
I\1 iletiC, N. "Ranosl()vensko cloba," in A. Ilenac (et al.), Kulrurnn istorija i Ci. Noyes), Ilerkeley, 19)3.
yp. 371)-/t0'2. Oeconornos, L,. l.o l/ie Religiet.re tlon.r l'l|mpire l),1'7orr,, at'l'emls des
lvlilkt, G. "l a Religion ()rthotkrxe er Ies Fleresies chez les yugcrslar.cs, " I?euae
j (.onnbnc.r et de.r Anges, ['aris, 1918.
I'llistoircdes I?eligion.r,l.XXV, Jan.,Jurre, 1917, pp. )l't 94.
de I ukig. Nl . '1 . "l-t's Kristians lBngtrnrilcs Parf airs) cle Bosnit: d'apris des
l\lilobar, Ii. "Ban Kulin injegovo cloba," GZM.S, XV, 1903, pp. 311-7 2; i i)rr( unr(.nts 'l rrrcs in6dits, " .\iidnst-Forscbtngen, XIX, l9(r0. pp. 108-31.
482 t2B. I Okig, Nl.1'. "l-es Kristians (Bogomilcs) de llosnie." CIC, XI\/, ivinter l96J'
1\litoXevii, A. "Petao u htnnskorn krrltu kocl antiikih Grka i u srpskom (r11, pp. I 6.
i 'I'trscany in
naro<1u." GEAtll, XVII, 1914, pp. t0(r-113. I Origo. l. " I he Dotnestic Iint'rrt1': 'I'he Eastern Slaves in the
1

l
 tns
1+2,lt
.,ld
Nleclieval Bosnian Church d
.U
tr Bibliography 42>
,I
ii
Iionrteenth anrl l;ifteenth Oentury.,, .91teculttnt,
l)irlavt'st,lr. V. "l(rrnrp:trativn,, istruyiva,l XXX, 1955, ,p. 321_6(t. Pouiesl bruatshilt zenral.ia IJo.rne i Ilercegouine, collectiv. work issued by
l.l un'..,t ,.t, l,lil,r,t.t,tlakrr k:r1r p11111oc{no "Nalrrc<lak, " Saraievo , 1942 (abl'r'eviarcd as Pot'icst BI l).
sretlsrvo za prorrCavarie r.rniIkih nd'n.u.;;
h;;'K;;,^))'rl*,'])rii,orr,o Prevedcn ,li. A llistor,y of tbe Croatian Peoltle,2 volurncs, Nerv York, l9)),
.f rgo.rtat,ije, VI, at B.ted, 1919, rjufrfiar,", iqOO,
-Palavestra, 'kr-".rirn pp. I il-ii'."'" '"'"
V. "Narodna-predanja o krstovirna,,,
Narodno st-
196 2.
t.,antlaltt,o, XV XVl, Beograci. i9(r), pp. Primgv. B. "Nledieval Bulgaria and thc I)ualist Ileresies in Western Europe,"
Palavestra, V. "Nekoliko nepoznatih
ll)l 1y16,. Etudes Ili.rloriqres h l'occasion dr XIe Congrbs international ,Jes Sciincet
stihova o hercegu Stjcpanu, ,, GZMS
._ (ctn), rr.s. XXIII, l9(rB, pp. 133 17.
Prrrrofsk.y, ll.. 'l'onb Sculftrre', 'New york. 1961r.
/tisloriqttes held at Stockholm, August, 19(r0, publication, Sofija, l9(r0,
pp.79-10(r.
I)riskvalirr. V. "Krrrt.si u arrtir*' J"t."; p.rr^ul;u B.srrc Prirnnv, 13. "llayner Sakorri kato iz.v<tr z.a vt 'z-kitt nreY.du Katari. Pavlikjani i
i r Ierc.egovine,., Bogornili," lzsledaunija utest lllarin S. Drinou, Sofija, 19(r0, pp. )3)-
^ G7,/\1.\ (arh). n.s. XVlil. 1963, pp. t)j->t na
Pecarski, B' "Bvzantine Influences on son.,.j sllver Iiook 70.
covcrs in Dalnatia,,,
Actes du X'IIe Congr)s ti,ir*i;"""i') Erlra", I)lzantines(ohri<1, l96l),
Prolraska, D. ''Bogonrilstvo i Boljiev izant," Jugoslat'ensh.a njiaa, Lil, 1,919,
IJrcgrarl. 1g64. lU, t)1,. .3 l5 20. pp. 28 1 -83.
-. ,
t"Uonnt:,'' Ohila ji i uerovanla iz Puech, I-1. C. See also under Sources, since his Frenctr editi.' .f Kosmas' Tract
Bosn e, " .tlz (SI(A), XX XII, 19 T, pp. T9 - against the Ilogornils, also contains a long and valuable stucly about dualism.
I)cisker, J. ''l(oje su vjcre bili stari Slaveni prije krs.tenja Puech, Fl. (,'. "Catharisrle Mcdidval et l)ogrxnilisrnc," Conuegno di Scienze
pntsujeto,ll (l-2), 1928, pp. Jl_gg. ?,, Sitarobruatska rnorali, .9toricbe e Filologicbe,lionre, 19)7, pp. 5(r.t31r.
Pejarrovi{' Di' '\tanouniitrn Buio, iHercegtuine, .,lj l)'lver, M. "Jesus'Ito.nd l)ance and Crucifixion accordi'g to the Acts of St.
Beograd, 195) (sAN 4
izd. 229). pos.
John," Bollingen Series XXX, Papers fronr the llranos Yearbooks (J.
It'rojevi<{. l\l . 'lhehistorical chaptcrs jn-pouiest 'fbe M,vsteries, 791r2, pp. 169-193"
..Canrpbell. Ed.),
.J

Pt'rvan,,M'.''Prirog rreicniuproblema Borun.J...kue

llll, lg42,np. l)c_5t12. :i Itaiki ,F'."Priloz.i zaz-birkusrbskihibosanskihlistina," Rcd(lA,ZU).l, 1867,
ili llogurnila u Bosni,,, p1t. 124-163.
.. I)ohri Pastir, Iy-V, 19i5, pp. gr_102.
t
i\
l)ervan,_M. "!ry,rskc prilike za^vrijemc, Kulina
ba'a,,, Dobri pasrir, yl,.,
i
l
Ra[ki, lr. I]ogomili i Pdtareni (originally published scrially in l?acl, JAZU,
1957, pp. 128-1t2, rl 1869 7O; re-issr.retJ in book forrn (SKA pos. iz.d. 87), llcograd, l9jI. All
l)etkovic, P "Motiv arkacra i storova na stedcima, ,{
. citations in rny study are drawn frorn the 1931 edition.
195(t.17, 1,p. l9l 2O5.
" stdrirar, VII-VIII, .i
RaIki, F. " DubrovaUki spomenici o odnoYa ju dr.rbrovatke obline naprama Bosni
'.s. rl
l't'trir1. IVI "().lnigracijanra stiurovniitva u ljcrslri i 'I-rrrskoj godine raz-spa bosanske kraljevine ," Starine , VI. lB7zl, pp. l-18.
i Ilcrccgovirri irloseljavanja
't^,*'"' i
., urlrrrriisnia kretarr ja, "
J
Radcliffc-llrown, A. sttuctttre and l"rnction in Prirnitiue S.ciet1, Nc,rv york,
GZM.S(etn), n.s. XVIII. t li;l
I9(,.3:';,t,.
1965, particularly the essay "Religion arrd Sociery, " pp. 153-77.
PletroviC). L.fra. Kr-{/ani b.osansh) rrirl,rr"iliri*f i" b;t;;;r,ii,
ulT, as a .separate book, Sarajev o , yjSl. tg>Z, Radic(, I''. "Udlonrak $arog slovcnskog rukopisnog cvangclijara s predgovorima
-PetroviC,,P..''Motiv ljudskih otiju ko,t Unfl"n.tit
slovena,, , GEMB, XXil
^na
i s blagoslovima, goiskim pismom napisana, u -.knii/-nici' fraloua.Ykog
XXIll, 1960. pp. j3,55. samostana na Otoku (Badia) kod grad Koriule," GZA,IS, II, 1890, pp.
Pfci{fer, N 1)le nngirisclte 254 62.
urn ihrer Grindunp 122r bis
* la r t t/ n s lrylni_halcrprouinz
s 2 4 1' 2, zur ich, l 9 t 3 ( cli ss
Iladin, P. Primitiue I?eligion (1937), New York, 1917.
;i: .';1,i.'
" ",
1
a, rr
er. t r. d-u
r
",,' ",r' ".g, Itadin., P. Primitiue Man as a Pbilosopl:er(rev. ed.) New York, 1917.
Pilar, I. Ilogornilst uo kao religijozno poojestni Radojf i', N. "O z.emlji i imenima Bogo-itr," piitozi,Vil, 1()27, pp. 147 )9.
problem, Zagrett
te kao socijalni i politiXhi Radofdic(. N. Obred hrunisanja bosanskoga kralja'lurrka I, I3cogratJ-(SAN, pos
, 1927 .
Pilar' I' izd. lt+3), 1948.
-'o duarianu u vj^eri starih slo-vjena i o njegovu podrijetru i znaienju,,, ItadoicYiC. N. "t) iednorn naslovu velikoga Voivor.ic t{rvoia Vukli {^,,' tt, l,
ZNZOJS, XXVIII, No. I, t93t, pp. f S6.
.,
Polenakovic' IJ' "Ilagada u Makedonskoj pir.""ji 19.tt\, pp. )7 13.
usrnenoj kn jilevnosti,,, Rarl
ItadojiiC. N.SrpsAa istorija Maura Orbinija, Beograd, l9i0 (SAN po.s. izcl.
Jugostauije, vr,'at Blei, ts19, r.j";ij';^.,'"rXo,
!1,;:;;.".fotktoilsta on. rt2).
Popovic( C. "Da li su Bosanci u XVII veku znali za l3ogornilc, ,, Ziuor, ILadojU'ic1, N. "Dva ocllomka Ilariona Ruvarca o K.,su.Yarnu," GZlrIS, n.s. IV-
No. 3, pp. tB7-89. 7952, v. lr5(). w. 200-12.
',*r'Bogornil'u Bosni,,, \iwt,1952, Redojcvicl, tl.
l'o111y1L, 9
l]:l,ll{, No. 7, pp.273-75. j "'bi" Wichtigsten l)arstellungen dcr Gcschichte Ilosniens,,,
Sii;t,,.u litrt('/tungt,rr, XlX. l9(r(), I'l'. l4().()3.
C. "llosan.sko hercegovalke preslice i vretena.,,, GZIVIS, n.s. VIII, ,{ Radoilit', S. "Crkva u Korriuhu." ZRVj.l. 19J2. oo.I /rB (r).
1953, pp. I)9 86. tl
.i
tt f':yif, C ji prilozi,za pitanje Bogumila u Bosni, ,, Radojill, S. "O nekim za jerlrrilkim nrorivima noYe nuro.l,,. I)csrne j nJ."g .trrog
_"Man
XII. 19t7. GZMS(arh), n.s. slikarstva," ZRVI, n, 19)3, pp. lr9 77.
t\>. 23t_39. ;ll
. |.: RadojEiC, S. "Reliefi bosanskih i heiiegovatkih stdcaka," Letapis tuIarice srp-
,i ,iii
, r.'j

. i:l
,;3
,1
).:l
 /t26 Medieval Bosnian Church
13ibliography It )'7
r,6r, (.,\X.\\'ll, krrj. J87. Novi Sad. Jarr. l9(rl. pp. l-t).
I(:rrl,'iiYiJ, 111. "tirtl<,la ((ird) rrebin jski Yrrl,an Xll vtlkrr." l)ilnzi, XI. 1931, XVl, 1Bfl9, pp. l-30.
pp. I )1-16. Iluvarac, I. "Draga, I)anica, Ilesa," GZhlS,lll , iU9 l, pp. 225 3tl (rcprinted
Ilatlo'i( .1. "Der ()rossvoivode vrn l]osnien sanclali FIrani6 I(.su.Ya," Arcbiu in Zbornik I. RilttdrL:a,l, Bcograd, 1934 (SKA lros. iz.d. l()3). pp. 131 347.
liir-:lat,ischc IltihtloRie. XIX, 1897, rrp. 3tl7-45t,. lltrvarac, I. "Katarina kt-i 'l'vrtka 1," GZhIS,lV, 1U92. pp. 20) 1l (rcprintcd
Radorrit{. J. "o knezu Pavlu Ilatlenovil'u - l,rllolak istoriji I}osre krajerrr XiV i in Zl.tornik L Ruuarca, I, pp. 35i')8).
poi'ctkorrr XV veka, " l-etolris Malice srpshe, 211, 1902, Ilrrv:rrac, [. "Banovanie l'vrtka bana 1353-77," GZA,l.t, \/1, 1894. ytp. 22)-
1r1r. 3i-{r2i 212,
lc)(12, ptt. 31t-(tl .
/t0.611-20.
Itadonic{, J. "llerceg Stipan vuk[ii Kosala i porurlica nru u istoriji i'arodnoj Ruvarac, I. O bunshim episkofina i bercegottaVhim nilrufolilimr dtt todine
tradiciji," in Zlttrnib r slarr Vatroslat'a -,ili.storia
Jagi/a,Bcrlin. lc)()8. 1766, Mostar, 1901.
.I'rrrcbcsca,,'1tp.4O6.I/1,
,f . "l)onalcl, tla r,ez.z,e i njegova
IradcrniC, " cNcl Ilycaut, P. Itre.sent.\tate o.f tlte Ottoman Enfire, Cologne, 167(r.
XXXII, 1913, pp. 302-38.
Iiaynaldi , A. t\nnales ljccle,riastici, Continuatio lJaronii, l5 vols.. Lucca. NIl. 'l'he Serbian lerrervs(sh) shall follorv all the S's.
t747 t6.
Ileclfielcl. Il. I''olh (.ultur.e o.[ the Yucatan, C-hicago, 1941 .
Sadrrik, I-. " Religiijse und soziale Reformbervegungen bei rlcrr Slavischen
Redfielrl, R. 'l'he Liftle (cttnntunit.yan,J Peasani societ.y and (,rlture(two lnoks Viilkern," part II, "Die'Bosnische Kirche,' " Iltick nttc:b Ostcn,lI. n<t.
pulrlished togtther under one cover), Chicago, 1960. 4, March 1912, pp. 261-66.
lleclfield, R. "'I'hinkcr and Intellectual in Prilnitive society," in s. Diarnontl, Sapir,Ii. (,ultrre, Itntrqtage and Personolit.l,, Ilerkelel,, l!)/r9 (r'specially tlre two
I)timitit.'e Vieut.r . . ., pp. 33,tt\. e.ssays, "l,an11uage" ancl "'flrc Nleaning of Religiorr").
Ilenrlic(-lllioc%vic, I). "l)a li l; speraeur' u Moliiima slulio sarn. rrritrijaTkorn SaviJl{ebac, A.'i() naroclnoj pcsrni 'car Dukljan ikLstitelj .fovan,' " SAN,
krrltu," GZXI.), n.s. VIII, t9)3, pp. 27 l-76. Z bo rn i k rado ua, X, In:t i ttt t zt frouY au m je knji {e un o s ti, i . []cograd, 1 95 1,
Ilerrdic{A'l iocevic, D. "llirske pretsrave Silunuu kult.im slikarna sa poclru[ja pp. 211 7 t.
l)almata," GZl\1.1 (arh). n.s. X, l9tt, pp. 'a l-zr(). Srlrrnaus, A. "Der Neumanich?isrnus auf dem llalkan," Saeculum,ll, 19t l ,
-.
Ilengit<r, l. "Novci lxrsanskih ban.va ikraljev.,'1 GZM.g,l,V,1943, pp.
237- I'p. 27 I c.)l.
91. Sclrnerveiss, 8. "(lJavnielerne nti sanirtnih obilaja ko<l Srba i I Irvata, " Gla.snik
ReYetar, M. "l'..y'etak kova'a cl.brova.ykoga novca,, , Ilart(.lAZ,U), 266, IL)31),
Shttfsho.q ro,,lou,g tlrultt.,a, V,
1929, pp. 263-82.
pp. t/t9.7(). Schrvoebel, R. 'l'lte S/tadou, oJ tbe Crescettt; 'l-be llenaissance lnrage of the
Rice, I).'1 . "l'he Cross," B.l,zantinoslat,ica, XI, l.)5(l . pp.72'81.
L.eaved 'l'urhs 14)3'(J.1 7, Nieurvkr>op, 1967.
Itistic{ M. Bosna od smtti hana M,,trije Nlnosl,tua do ulatle srem-rh.oga Kralja Sergejevski, D. "Slike pokojnika na naXim Srednjeviekovnirn nadgrobnim
,\tet,ana I)ragrtina, t2j0- 1284, tleograd. 1910. spcrmenicima," GZhI,9, n.s. VllI, 1913, pp. l3L'19.
llother, A' "Johannes "r'heutonicus (von wircreshausen)." Riim.ische
orar-
talsrltrifi fiir rltri.stlicl,e Alrer!/tumshun,te trntt NIl.'l'hc Serbian l.tt,,. $, sh, shall follow atl the S's.
1891, m. 13c)-70. /iir ki)rtrrrrrrri)i;;,;';,;,
Ilovirrskii, I). "A{arcrial dlja istorii Bogornikrv Shanrron. A.'l'lte l)olte-r and Ilereslt in 7/1s'l'birreenth Centur.y, Villanova, Pa.,
zenrljalr,,, 2rrrol
Mini.rter.rtt'a Narodnogo 'Serbskih
22O, NIar. lg|2, pp.'32 1i.
1L) /11) .

Rrrrrcimarr, S. 'l'he llediettal.tlo.raeilinija,

Manicbee,-Carnbriclge 6ng.1, ilil . Slrannon, A. Ileview of C. 'I'houzellier, Une Sornnte anti-Lathtre . ., in
Ilrrnelrerg, A. lVitcbes, l)n.!rr.,:r., and Fertilirlt'A4a'gic,"Anarys1,f ,llteir Speculrm, XLI, 19(16, p. 182.
Shinrkirr, [). "Culture and World Vicw: A IVIethod of Analysis Applied to
'tipni/icance and A'[rtrtr ]rekttions in rVe.irern liur,tpean i,otn inhgion,
S.c'ietas Scie'tiarurn Fennica ccrr'nrentatiorres Ilurrranarunr Rtrral Russia," Anerican Anthropologisl, LV, No. ), 1953,1tp.329-/tB
Litterium (with P. Sanjuan).
ql;irrska Vt'telrskaps Soc(.etaten) ). .l947_
Itul'[ic. I]. "Povotl.nr Franka Sinric/, M. "Groblja i naclgrobni sponreniqi u okolini Novog llrda, " GEtlIll,
{ii N M-.a gde jc hir. sijr:ro Biskul,iie sar-
sitencnsis," l)ohri pastir, VIII, 1957, pp.6g-g2. XVII, l95zt. pp. 16047.
Russ,ell,.J. "lnterpretations Sjcrbcrg, G. " 'Folk' and 'feuclal' Societies," American Journal of Sociolog-v,
.{ the c)rigins oi M"crieual IIeresy,,, fuIedieuar LVItl, no. 3, Noverlber 19)2, pp.231-39.
.Stutlic.r, XXV, 1963, p1t. 26 13.
,.
Ilussell, I. I)is.rent and Rrf?;!, in rbe Etrl.y Mitttlle,zlges, Skaric/, V. "Porijeklo pravoslavnoga naroda u sjeveroz.aparlnoj Ilosni, " GZMS,
Ilcrkcle y, l()65. X XX. U lll. pp. 219-(t5.
Ru'arac. l. "NeYto o Bosrri, Dil,1l..t9i i i)abro bosaiiskoj ,,pi.t
,,iii-i'., r.prt in-, SkrriC. V. "/,upai grad Bora.Y u Bosni, " Prilozi,Il. 1922, pp. lt3zr'88.
nranastirirna u Ilr-rsni," C^/(:', ll. lB7S, pp.2,1+0-61.
Ruvarac, L "Miroslav brat St.fa.a Nernanje u"iiiuguyupuua SkariC, V. "Kudugeri," Prilozi,VI, No. l, 1926,pp. 1t)7-l 10.
srpskog,,, CNf, Skarid. V. "J'rz"an," GZlllS, XL, No.2.l92B,pp. 127-31
X . l8ilB. l'[,. (,5 (rB. .

Ruvarac, I' "o natpi.su na crkvi V. "Jcdan slovcnski uzor bosanskih ,.,rran.,ruu^ (stelakrr), GZMS, Xl-,
SkaLic',
he'rccga Stefana u Gorr#dLr, " (3ras (sKA), No. 2, 192U, pp. I4L-44.
 Ilibliography 429
428 Mcdieval Bosnian Church

Skari6, V. "1.'attituderdes peuples Balkaniques I I'elard des Turc, " Raoue Solovjev, A."llroi grobnih spomenika u Bosni i Hercegovini"' GZMS(atlt)'
lnternotionale des Ehtdes Balkaniques, Year 1, Volume 2, 13eograd, 193), n.s. X, 195), PP.2I7-I8'
pp. 217 46. Soloviev, A.,,sinrfotita sre4'ievekovnih sporne'ika u Ilosni i lJercegovini,''
Skarid, V. "Sirerrje Islanra u Bosni iHercegovini," Gajret halendar za 1940, (;1/), Vlll. l9)6. PP. ) 67'
Sarajevo, 1979, pp.28 33. Sotouieu, n "Le Testament du gost Radin," Mandileu zbornik' Rorne' 196J'
Skcndi, S. "Crypto-Christianity in the Balkan Area uncler the Ottomans," pp.141-)6.
Slauic Reuieut, XXVI. June 19(17, pp. 2)J-46. So-ir.,o.iu", L. "Srudi recenti sulle eresie Medievali, " Riuista Storica Italiana,
Skok, P. "Bogomili u svjetlosti Iingvistike. " JlC,l, 193), pp.462 72. LXIV, 1952, PP. 237'68'
Sciderberg, ll. La Religion des Catltares, Uppsala, 191+9. Sneranskii. M. "Ein bosnisches Evangelium in cler Ilandschriftensammlung
Solovjev, A. "Svetosavski nomokanon ," I)ratstuo, XXVI, 1972, pp. 19-43. S."ttouiC," Archiu fir slauiscbe Pbilologie, XXIV ' I9O2' pp' 172'
Solovjev, A. "'I'rgovanje bosanskim robljem do god 1(161," GZMS, n.s. I, 83.
1946, pp. 139-62. S.";oulC, D. "Jelen u narodnim obidajima, " GEMB' XVIII' l9tt' pp' 23I'37 '
Sokrvjev, A. "Pravni poloY.aj seljaka u srednjevekovnoj Bosni, " Pregted, Il, S..i."i.,, D. .".Lep,
Anciens Eldments Balkaniques dans la Figure de Marko
- 'Kraiievi6, " Liro Antika, VIII, 1958' Skopje' Pp 72 97
l<)1t7 , pp. 2tt4 50.
Solcrvjev, A."Gost Radin i njegov testarnent," Pregled,II, lg1I7, pp. 310-18. S"..rl*il, S. "tsogon'iti i Liusiti u Sremu i u Ba1koj," Glusnik lstorijskog
S<-rloviev, A. "Postanak i pad bosanske crkve, " Prosujetni Radnik, Sarajevo, iruYtr,t (Novi Sad), l, 1928, PP. 114-11'
Nos. 6-7, 1947. S,unoi."i6, S. "Oog.ai^;i l'213 i I2>4 godina''' G/ar
(SKA)' CLXIV 1935'
Solovjev, A. "O natpisu na grobu velikog Kaz.naca Nespine, " GZMS, n.s. ll, pp. 191 98.
Matice srpske'
1948, pp.23)-37. Stefariovid, V. "Ratovanie Kralja Matije u Bosni," Letopis
Solovfev, A'.'"La l)octrine de I'Jglise de Bosnie, " Acad/nt,ie de Belgique - 332, 1932, PP. 191-21)'
Bulletin 'lettres - )e Ser. XXXIV, 1948,pp.481-134. v StjepEevid, L. "Hrani6i-Kosate u kotorskim spomenicima, " ti,v, 1914-,1,
Solovjev,A.Review of V. GluKac's, Istinao Bogornilim.a,in IC,l(1-2), 1948,
' 'pp.
3lI 2I (with
pp. 26)-73. s.ii'i""iC,- i;.
);i.Jt.R. prilog
Kovijanid)'
poinavaniu bosanskih Ilogumila"' Starine'
Solovjev, A."Les Bogomiles veneraient'ils la Croix, " Acaddmie de Belgique ' XVIll, 1886, PP. 230'32'
llulletin- lettres - 5eSer. XXV, l9t+9,pp.47 62. S,oif.o"ii, i.1;iontti inrpost kapiteli iz^Makedoniie i Srbije"' ZRVI' l' 19'2'
Soloviev,A."Saint Grdgoire, Patron de Bosnie," Byzantiott, XIX, ),949, pp. pp. 169'78 (see also Nikolaievi6-Stojkovi6)'-
263-79. so"iirniro"iC, G) "srednlevjekovno grobile koi Zgo5{e," GZMS'
III' 1891'
Solovjev, A.''Vlasteoske povelje bosanskih viadara, " l.rtoisko-prauni zbornik, pP. 122-r+0.
I, Saraievo, 1949 , pp.79-105 (published by Pravni fakultet, Sarajevo). St.uii'-i.ouiC, G.''Rimsko kamenje kod Gostilie, " GZMS'lll' 1 891' pp' 286'
Soloviev,A."Nestanak Bogornilstva i islamizacija Bosne," GID,I, 1949, pp. 9r' 189 1' pp' 323-)4'
tt2-79. StruiirnirouiC, G.''Opis polja Glasinca," GZMS,III'
GZMS,rv, t892' pp'68 70'
Solovjev, A. Review of Runciman's, The Medieual Manicltee, in Bltzan- ;;;;;ili;;"tC; G.''o'crkvi i)zrenskoj,''
tinoslauica, X, 1949, pp. 96'102. StratimiroviC, G.
.,Opet o crkvi Ozienskoi," GZMS, V, 1893, pp. 309-10'
Soloviev,A."Le Messe Cathare," CEC,lil, No. 12, 1952,1>p. 199 206. ,'starinarske bilie{ke," jZUS, XXXV1I, 192)' pp. 85-86'
SrratinriroviC. G.
Solovlev,A."Fundajajiti, Patarini i Kudugeri u vizantiskim iz-vorima, " ZRVI, "7.;"i ^"'kistetak," GZMS, xxxvrll' )e26' pp' 41'46'
;;;;;i;;;;;;I, c;;rtluiio.i
l, l9)2, pp. l2I-tt7. ;;;,fJi, Di: miniiatura Miroslavlievog Jevandielja"' ZRVI' r'
Solovjev, A."Autour des Bogomiles," Byzantioa, XXII, l9)2, pp. 81-104. lc))2, PP 181-203.
Solovjev, A. "l-e t6moinage de Paul Rycaut sur les restes dcs Ilogonriles en S,rot.,"i,R.
llPutn..,',iihrvatskaS$golskakniiqa,.'VZA'XVU'19L)'p'348'
Ilosnie," l)lzantiott, XXIII, 1913, pp. 73'86. R. "Vrag u crkvi," zNLols, xxvll, 1930' pp' 180-82'
si."r."r, -i.
Solovjev, A."Svedo8anstva pravoslavnih izvora o Bogornilstvu na Balkanu," ;;;;li, Poulfstn;tke crtice Kreieua i franjeaafkoga sdmostana' Sarajevo'
GID, v, l9)3, pp. 1 103. 1 899.
Solovjev,A' "Novi podaci z-a istoriiu neomaniheiskog pokreta u ltaliji i Bosni, " S,.rtid,i.,, Katolfka crkva u Bosni, " Spomen knjiga iz B os ne, Zagteb' 1901'
GZMS, n.s. Vlll, L9)3, pp. 329'334. pp. 111 ff.
Soloviev, A."Prinos za bosansku i ilirsku heraldiku," GZMS, n.s. IX, 19)4, SubotiC G...Kraliica Jelena A#ujska - ktitor crkvenih spomenika u
pp. 87 l3). primorje," IG, (I'2) 1958, pp' 131-48.
Soloviev,A."Le 1'atouage symbolique en Bosnie, " CEC, V, No. 19, 1954, pp. Swanson, G. 'L'be Birth of tbe Gods, Anrt Arbor, 19(r0'
1r7 62. SabancrviC, tt. ,'pitanie turske vlasti u Bosni do pohoda MeSmeda Il 11)63 8,"
Solovjev, A."Le Symbolisme des Monuments funeraires Elogomiles, " CEC, V, GtD, vil, 1915, pp. i7 )r.
No. 18, 1914, pp.92'1lt+. Sabanovit-. H. "Bosans-ktkraiiYte 1448-1463," GID,lX, 19t8' pp' 177'220'
&rloviev. A."Bogurnili ," Enciklopedija Jugoslauije,I,Zagreb, 191J , pp. 641- SabanoviC. H. Bosanski paYaluk,saraievo' 1919 (NDBH, D1ela, 14)'
49.
 BibliographY 4)L
430 Medieval Bosnian Church

XIII, l9(r0, pitaniu heretilkog'pape' u l]osni 1221

"O i 124t"' lltspruue tt
Sal,arrovit, I l. "l)osrauak irazvoi Sarajr:va," /?arlo,l(NDIlll). pp. Sia.t, .1. Tnxlrusti irt tttttctttosti.
0-l I/t. I lartftmnnnou ZAr-;il"Si.rlultu
nf."A"n'1in
7 IQ(r('.'-1'p'
Sabanoui<,, Fl. " I-e penica il nrvonl stoljeCu turske vladavine, " chapter in Razrerl za z.so,l,,rin,kf i" i;; t;fi;;t vede' Lltrl'l1ar1n'
Nnstutnit'jesnik' rx' re0r' ^1,4'1 '9
p1'
Leltt ttic,t,pos. -iz.d. Ill, Nl)BtI. Sarajevo, )-961, pp. 193'207' 5';',iTl::*;;["j;.;r;;;;"';":,;;sravcn"'
5ah,rn.vic, I i . ''2.p. i n jena .koli.a . prvim dccerriiama turske vlasti. " 7t70_rtt).
i.njego.uo doba'zagteb' 1902'
. (;,/M.\, rr.s, XIX.1964,1\. \9 44 (with V.Pirlrrvestr.l). Sisir','1. i),iro,to ItruojgvukYii llruatini/ i bosanskoga"' GZII/ls'xlv '
5airrn'il. I. "Sveta Pt'tka iNi'tiielja: Kola u Llosni." ZNZ-UlS, XXVI. sv 2. siric. r. "t'ad Nlladena s;;t;;: B'";;rvatskoga
. 1928, tll). l)[\. ]7t{ 79. 19o2, pP. 3J1 6('. pp' l i 9- rt9'
$-if, fir'. Lr, ,i,,i,rrgrur., franqais en IJosnie) lo 7n du XVIIIe sibcle et au debut Kilii. i-n: :si,laii.
. t'nr^n,te historije," G?M;\'xv' 903'
'p,ir";'";;
ir"
1
' v zA \1 r
du XIXe et le !a.ys telqu'ils I'ont t,u, Paris, 19(r0. i'iti. i il^x,,' ;;;;;;'i t'o'u'rskih
ugui'ko ratova ' '

tt. "l(atolifke crkve isamostani u D'bici iniez-inoj 'kolici u srednicnr . p. 135. "
SeriC, 191121
i DjakovarYkoj Katedrali ,"
viektr." ( rttalid.\acra,XIII XIV 1nr' 22 2.j). 1944'pp.7 2 RB i,Eit. r..:'.N.r,i o Bosansko-Dlakovatkol tsiskupiii
(i1.t.1. "Prohlern 'bosarrske trkve' rr nrXoi lristoriografiii otl PetrarloviCa do ltt'
. GN', xl-lv' l93t' PP' 54 ocl XYI do XX stoljeCa"' Jtl4oslouenrki
. Gltisca, " RaJ (JAZLT), 219, lc)37 , pp. 37-182. (ilil. n. "llrvatska fti'itfi'ng'niii"
" jrtnrirhi
{ia.fr, l. ,, .Bc,s^nslia crkva' i proble'r boia'skog'bogumilstva' isredovjefna {asol,is, lt, lglr'. plr 16'48'
i?r'".;iil;;;"i; p"' ii"'i; . " in I )o t'i.e t B t t' tq 42' nnvl JB
-
'crkva bosansk a,"' Sauremenih', XXYI' rro' 1 I' 1937, p1>' 385-91' 3ir,c,'i'. s

Siaut, J. "Pravoslavni istok i'crkvabosanska,' " Sauremetik, XXVII, '.' 9, tir' ;"v itr' rl'i; ;;';; :";" i;vclovne bosan sk e dr)'avc 1'r cd l)ropast
' ".,'r,'6. 6/i),"i"XlV.
l9lE. r.n. 761) 93 1463." 196/t' 1'p, 221.28'
{iaut, J. "Sonrostolnu crkva bosanska i njez-ini redovnici, " Naslattni ajesnik,L, (,"rj,,li]'u . :iir^*"irr.i ;;i; "' 'toi,,idko,,' ieva'tlieli' i tr I{rtl,rsa'lievont
195()' Il' 5 l)'
" Zhutnih uiito'i'*"g'iortittttal'lA7 l' )' ll' o,lrtosa
.. N,r. 2. lg/t I . pp. I - lr'. ":.p;i;;.t"r" I 42()-o3. "
rukotrisu,
5iaot, t. "Bosna iz-apadni dualisti u prvoj polovici XIII st.ljeca," Zgodouinski {,,.,ii.
"" 't-iirin,lijrki
,i,,i. iri"riii, hlsan.ko u",i"cijanskih
zbotnik' XtV. j()('l ' pp' 119
zt5
. la.snl,i: Vl Vll. 1952 53. 1'p. 2R) l{}ft. VI' No'
Ila,,t, J. "l'itanie'crktc bosanske'tr novijoj literaturi," GID, Y, 1953' pp' 'fadi{, J. "Nove vesti o padu H;;;;;tilt pod tursku vlast,'' zRIt}'B'
I 19 (;0. 2, 1962-, PP' l3r'12'
5la.f.. I. ,,() vlerotlostojnosti isprave bosanskog bana 'l'vrtka Stjepantr T"!;;";ki,'"6 ."tlogomilskor o duilen ie' Skopie'.
192t9'
't'fikovski, t:- Itugu'ritst;';;; ;';;;;;"''o ;'1)'i''n.n 'nalenie' Sk'plc' l9) '
I
Rai[ovi6r." Zh,ttnik tddoL]d, St,cuYiliite u Zagrebu,ll , lL)54' pp ?7 48' V No 1' l9>7 '
(i,1,,t , 1 " 1,)rnriirr je stanie pitania crkve bosanske," Ilistoijski zhornik' Yil, 'I-a\k<rvski, D. " Koia it';;;;; a"l"?'"i"^ rl"gonrila"' Pt;gled' '
t91,1, 1'p. 12t1'42; VIll, 19)), pp. 219 220 v
3i;r.,u'. B' "Novi pogledi-na problernatiku stec{aka"' stnroltr-
Kiaor, l. "Fianjevalka 'litrbia' iz- 137213 kao izvor za povijest llostte," lC, v, ,.,Jloruj,l,?
"'-"r,,i,no '211 '20'
1,r,,,st'.iela,lllser', sv' 8-9'
l-963'.pp
. 19t1, pp. 209 22tt. his publicati'ns of source
5ia^t, J.'iI'.ccelsia Stlavortiae irnisiia Dorninikanaca u Bosrti" Zbornik "*r"^*i^f S;;;ir; ,,;;;'*,,r..r,
since fieq,.rently
,^ ,,.,,i..rr,'f..
. filrtzol:hog fakulteta u Ztgtebu,lll, 19tt, pp. 11-2t0. contain historical and interpretative essays'
C7'M'\' tv' tAqZ' pp J70 87'
5id.t, -1. ;' Prohlenr BogtrtniLstva u Ilostli, " ZgodouinskiYasopis, IX, 195), pp. Ihallr{cr-y. L. "Vo;u"tlo H'"til.i'tlts"" 1rb".' historiie"' GZIvIS' v '
154 62. 'l'halldcz,y, L. "Priloz'i k;;G;;i'"i'ulra bos^"ske
$aut, ;. " KoJritarevo bosansko ievancljeljc u sklopu pitarr ja 'crkve bosan- 893, Pp. l-B7.
I lVissen'
.\/nr',,, IV V. l!)5, I,p ,17 {r3.
-. 'kc.'""Nlrugirralija l halt6czv. I.. "lleitrige ztrr Kenntnis der llogorrlilenlehre.'' lll' l89)
5iAnf, "J. uz jeclarr iuLupls'crkve lrosanske'u mletalkoj Mar- s, hili I ic tt, M it tei lu ng en att s
il"tri"" unt! der Llirzegou'ina' ' pp'
.. tiirrri." .\/rrrr,. VlVIll. l()5/. I'f. 1.14 53 'L'.
Stu,lien zrtr Geschicltte Borniens unrl
serbienr int Llitrelaher'
5iart,.; "[],rgrrnrilstloihr:retifka'crkvabosanska,"'Ilistotijski pregled,lY, ', n.i'::tl:
N,,.2. lal53. l'1. l(ll 1,4 Munich, 1911r.
i uaro(i) lajce' 1450 1527' Ztrgreb'
"Sidrrk, J. "l'rolrlcrn popr Ilogtrrnila u suvrcmcnoj nauci," Slor.'o,lX X. 1960, 'l'hall6cz,y, L'. Pouijest (batt'ouine' grada'
no. lt)l c)7.
tl Ret',e J'llistoire Ec'
C. "lleresie et Croisade au XIle-sibcle
v
Sidak. J. "l)r'a priIrga o nrinijaturinra u rukopisinra 'crkve bosan.ske,' " Slouo, ,,r"lr?i,ti"r,
"'"','ir)oir,;q,,c No.4.' 9^14' nn' 851-72
"' " ( t:(" XIII' S1'rinA'
.. IX X. lc)6(1. I'l'.2lrl (16. 11.,,u'ainJ' '\LlX' ,l
Silot . .1. "( ) nekirtt IrtiIrzitna I]. I)t-inrova problenru llogornilstva, " Ilistorijskt 'l ltrrt Weitttarrr. Nl "SvilrL'"f"'-t" Crafiti tle P'n'i"tt'
. :lt,,tnih., .\l\'. lt)61. 1rp. I I I 17. 'ru^,f?t'i 'lfr"ll'jlut samostan u Dubici"' viesrnik tttuatshog arheottikrtg
KiOnt . .1. "IleretiUki pokret i ocljek Ilusitiz-rna na Slovenskorn jugu, " Zbornih
,, za drrftuane nauke (Matica srpska, Novi Sad), XXXI, 1952, pp. ) 24. druitro, l, lB9t, PP' 189-202' York'
,ri c"tt"r, in Eastern Europenn Politics' New
SiOat<,1. "O autentilnosti i znadeniu jedne isprave bosanskog 'dieda' (12127)," 'fonrasic, D. Personaliry'
.<ilot,o, XV-XVI, 1961, pp. 282-97. 1948.
 Ilibliography 433
432 Medieval Bosnian Cirurch
Sarajevo' 19)7 (contatns
Veco, M. Naselia bosanske srednjeu.iekot:ne drlaue'
l-omi6, P. Prattoslaulje u lJosni i Ilercegot,ini,lleograd, lB9B.
'1^ralji(, S. "Da li su lJosanci u XVlll vijekr.r znali za lSogornile, " Ilistorijshi tlrc lrt,st llla| o{ Mt'tlievrrl lJosnia). t ofupacije'
t t - ...
zhurnih, V tJ 4t. I912, pp. 4{)9.1().
V.g;;,- M. llisiorij,t ]lrrt/na o't tajsnrijib ut'emeila do tutske
Saraievo, 196l' , , {,-,r- sponrenika'"
..^^^".,-:L" ! '
T'rifkoviC, V . .\arajcuska okolina(1. Sarajevsko polje), Beograd, 190U, SEZ. XI
Vego, M. "Patarenstvo u L{ercegovini u-svietlu arheolo{kih
(SKA Naselja Srp. zem. )) (with Pcrp Stlepa). ' 6ZMS (arh,1 n s' XVIll. 19('J' lP; 195,215
'I'rpkovi6, V. "Kad je Stepan II KotromaniC prvi put prodro u Hunr, " IG (L 2), Grude i Po'tuYje)' Saraievo'
Vegcr, M. Bekiia hroz tiii',')'1ti''ai'i'li' opline
1960, pp. riL-J4. lc)6/t.
TrpkoviC, V. "llranivojeviii, " IG (j 4), 19(10, pp. ))-84. t n's' XX' 196)'
Trpkovicl, V,. ''Hunrska zemlia," ZRFFB, VIll, I9(rzr, pp.225-1c).
v.g", in. Revicw of S.CirkoviC, lstorija ', in GZMS(arh)
'I'ruhelka. C. "Ko je bio slikar folniSkog grbovnika," GZMS,I, No. 2, 1889, pp.291 3()4. t v. Nr^
-,-) LXII' r Jan'
Pregled' No' 1' T

V"gli fvf .-"p"stanak imena Bosna i Llercegovina,''

pp. 86 90.
1972, PP. 109-lB.
l'ruhelka, C. "Tetoviranje katolika u Bosni i Hercegovini," GZMS, Vl, Verner, E. See Werner.
1894, pp. 241 t7.
Vi;;;ii D" i'Pr.,rrouu kola na steCcirna injihovo zna&nje"' GziVS' n's' IX
'fruhelka, C. Kratjeu:hi g.rad
Jajce, pnuijest iznamenitosti, Saralevo, 1g04. 1954. po. 27t 78.
Truhelka. C. "Dubrovalke vesti o godini 1463," GZMS, XXll, l9IU. pp. I-
vi.l;;i, :sl-i.rift. preclstave na stedcima," Ns' II' 7951+' pp' r19'36'
b:'f
veka u Dubrovniku"'
Vinaver, V. " frgovina il;;;;kil robllem tokom XIV
24.
'l'ruhelka,
C. '' Iursko-slovjenski spomenici dubrovadke arhive,' ' GZMS,
XXlll, j9l l, pp. 303 49. 437 7t+. AIttD, ll, 1953. PP.12t'46' pp' 12 18'
Truhelka, C. "l'estarnent gosta Radina - prinos patarenskorn pitanju," vitrr."ii t.;'irlnnnrtiiozren," GZMS'l'-No. 2' 1889' sanlotlanu' -
Zagreb'
Vladic', J. lJspomena , n"*i i Ramsko* franieua/kom
G7,M.9, XXIII. l9l l. pp. 3rr.7).
882.
Truhelka, C. "Jo{o testamentu gosta Radina i o Patarenirna," GZMS,XXV,
1
GID' XVI' 196t '
Voje, I. "Sitni prilozi za istoriju srednjoviekovne Bosne"'
1913, pp. 163 Bl.
'Iruhelkr, C. "Osvrt na sredovjeEne kulturne spomenike Bosne," Sara jevo, 1967. Pp. 277 -82
GZfulS, v.'ff;:t;;;Y*,.p. :it-u-N"cropole de l{an-Flrevsa GZMS' LII' No' 1'
XXVI, ,791/+, pp. 222-12. l()/ttl , fp. llt 47.
f'ruhclka, C. "Vuk Ranid-KotronraniC - povijestima dubrovaEke arhive," , v ,:"'., :_ D..,,;-.t r.,-t lc
Bosni"' in Pouiest IJH' 1942'
Vrana, V. "Knliztvna nastoiania u sredovieUnoj
C7.M.\.,XXVll, l9l), np. 3r9 63.
1tp. 794-822.
Truhelka, C. "Konavoski rat 1430-33," GZMS, XXIX, 1917, pp. 14t-211.
Vry;;ir; S. "Byzantium and Islanr' Seventh-seventeenth Century"'
East
Truhelka, C. "Larizam i krsna slava, " Gtasnik skopshog nautnog druitua, yll-
liurofean Qilntterl)',II. l9(rB' pp' 20) 4,0'
VIII,1929 30, pp. 133.
VuiiC, M. "Pruo nouUri" ;itlo ;-;t;;vini Dubrov8anina Benka Kotrulji6a"'
Truhelka, Cr. O l,orijeklu bosanskih Muslimana, Sarajevo, 1934. 'Glas(SKA), LXXX, 1909, PP'2t.12.?' ^.
l'ruhelka. C. Sturlije o f odrijetlu, Zagreb,'194l .
v"r.tl""ii f. i tl 80'
t*i"iti" ':\yi'--9-?MS' n s' I' 19216' pp'289-310'
iSr"U.ni.'
'frulrelka. C. "sredovjedni stdcci Bosne i Hercegovine, " " xlll, 190i',pp' 31-70',
Pouiest BII, I9tt2, viltx*;C,'M. "i, ','.itts.o;ti','' GzMS,
pp. 629;41. Itegion Carpato-Brlkanique"'
Vulcanescu. R. j'Les sig*t lti'iaiqu-es dans la.
Truhelka, C. "Bosanska narodna (patarenska) crkva, " Pouiest BH, 1942, pp. Reuue des etuan, s1')"rrii)ripan"r, (Bucharesr;, Il (l 2), 1964, pp. l7
767 93. 69.
'l"urdeanu, S. "Apocryphes llogomiles et Apocryphes Pseudo-Bogonriles,"
vut"tif-VuturoviC, V. "BilieYka o Evangelilu Manojla
Grka"' Starinar' XI'
Reute de l'Histoiredes Religions,l38, 1910, pp.2252,776 218.
1894, pP' 90 9rt.
Uglen, S. "C'etvrtak kao narodni opl-i praznik u okolici jajaEkoi , " GZMS, IV, Ritjelko o kttlttti
v"l;li-vrl;rouiC, v. ,;rl,*.rrc'stoms Dubrovnik' 1.897'
JuYnleh Sbuena'
1892 , pp. 27 O'7 I .
v;ili/v;i;;;""ii, v. and Rites Among the southern.slavs
Llglen, S.''Odakle ie dollo ime'Bokac', " GZMS,IV, 1892, pp. 272-73. in Ancient una trlod.* llimes" (paper clelivered at International Folklore
Uglen, S. "Pric"e iz FoEe," GZMS,IV, 1892, pp.1)t2-t3. Congress at Chicagl isgl; puuiith"d in^^Archiues of the International
Vaillryt, A. "Un Apocryphe Pseuclo-Bogornile-La Vision d-lsiie," Reutte des Foli'tore Associttion' Vol' I' Chicago' 1898' pp 70 82' -- . '
I";rrdes ,\lnt'as, XI II. l9(r.1. pp. l09 2l (tr:ans' !i' Ilanfmann' G' Vakar)'
Carn-
.
vyg;,;k;, L. 'I'ltougbr )u'1 ioo|uogn
Vasii, M. "EtniEke promenu u Bosanskoi Krajini u XVI vijeku," G1D, Xlll, briclge, l9(r2.
1962, pp. ?-33 to. Wr.it, 1'. 'l-be Sociolog1t of Religion,.Chicago' 1944 1958'
Vasiliev, A. "Jorg of Nurenberg," l)1,ronr,on,X,1931 , pp.20)-t)9.
fvach, i. 'l'be Comparat:ileSrufu o.f Religion, New York'
Vego. M. Pot,ije.st humske zemlje, part I, Samobor, 1937, (part ll was never Wallace, A. Cultire and I'ersinaliry, New York'
19(r1l'
written). Webr:r, M. 'l'he Sociotoglt oJ Religiitt(Eng trans' of 4th ed')' Iloston' 19(r3'
Vego, M. Reviewof fra L. P.(etrovid)'s Kfs6ani bosanske crkue,in GZMS, n.s. iv"r,"t, C. it,o;rn a"i'stlrrct it"it)n'int des origines b nos jours' Paris'
IX (ist'etn), 1954, pp. 183-81. 19 t0.
 434 Nledieval Bosnian Church

wenzel' i\r' "A Nrt<riev,alN{ystery cult in IJosnia ancr frercegovina, ,,

tbe_lVubxrg and Courtauld Institttte,XXIV,
oJ Jottrnar
f lfrf , g,p Sl-iiZ
lVenz.el, lVl . "Some Notes on,tl2e l.o,.,ug.ophy
of St. I{elen,,, Actes tlu XIIe
(-onpis lntetnatiottat ,l ,htttdes fivr'oniiorrlheld,
IJt,t'.qr.:rtl, l9(t4. lll. U,. 415 2l .
Ohr;,j,-iqiil, p"fr.
werrz-el, M "S.rrrr: Reliefi.utsicre
the vjetrenica cave at ztrt,al^,,, sirarinar,
rr.s. Xll, lL)(tl , pp. 2l.J/1. Itll(lls'l'lrlt OF I)EltSONn I-AND I,t_ACE Nn NItlS
wcrrzr:l' l\'r - "o rrekir'sirrrlr.rinra rra crahnatinsk-irn.stelcilrn,,, pirrzi
utttfetnosti l l)alntat:iji (Split), rtruijesri
XlV, nfrZ, pp. i9 Itr lltc coLrrse of tlris stutly rrlrrrv lrcople :ll)l)car rncc in lists (c.g. .f
Werrzel, l\{. "l.isrrrtikrst ira ste{:cir,ru, p.olruIln N(,retve,,9ri.
, Mszcj prittenjene
ttrnatnosti T.botnih (lleograd.). Vfu, neZ, pt). jg /t(). r! t lrosc lrcing ;rrratht,nratiz.t,rl ol' of those rvitrrt'ssing t.hrrr.tt,r.s) or as
Wcnzcl, l\l . "Oravt,sitlc lieasi.s antl [)a'ces;,, Vugu.riouio,,, rliPkrrrrlrts, aurl alrorrt wlrorrr rrotlrirrg clsc i.s krr.rvrr. Srrclr Pt,oplc lrc
l;.olklrre,73,
Slrrirrg 1912, pp. l-lr2. trstr:rlly lrot listcr.l irr this rcgistct'. A rrrrrrplctc li.st of Ptrtlrrirr tliplorrrats
wcnzel, Nl . "llosnian arrci Irt:rzego'inian'r'onrbstones - <':rrr lrc fourrrl irr notc l9) for (ihaptcr V (PP.29() 92;. Ollrr,r rrrirjor lists
Why," who Ma<re.r,lrr:lrr and
S'iidost.Forscltnngen, XXl, naZ, pp. 102-1t3.
wenzel, NL LIhra'rni not.it'i trf 1r<'.1rlc: <,'arr be f.urrrl on 1r1r. i2ll, 173 74, 213 16, 2)l .In thc .surnc
srlelcin i, s".ri"uo, rgo) (gives exceilent
.f .rta
tlre.geograPhical rlistributiorr rrraps way various pla<:es rrrc:nti<,rncrl olrr:e about rvlrii:h little is kn9wl apd
.f eaJ ri*tlr. witt u):li,u,,"il..iriun ,n,l
llnslish textt. s'hic'h ure'not inrportant to this stLrcly (e.g. iists of villages br,,irrg grantecl
Wenz,ei, ilt "Stitovi i g:lr,lu.i.lu ste{.cima, ,, Vesnik(Vojni rnuzej), Beograd, in t'hartcrs) are also not listecl in this register. scholars arr listecl .nlv
Xt XII, lc)66, pp. 89-I(t9.
tu""#1'jli "'r'lrc I)io.scuri in the '"r'lrcr.c thcir viervs are bcing discrrssecl but arc not listcrl for sirrrple
.
Barkans, " srauic Reuiew,xxvl, 19(>7, pp. lclct cttcc citatiorrs, llcottolnic rcirsons lravc rret't'ssitatcri a slroltr:r irrrlcx:
\tr'<,rrrcr, ll. "llollorrrilstvoto i Iiarrrrosrt,dlrol.r*ovlrite Ijrt,si tlrLrs toPi<:s irre not inclurlecl. Sec'l'ablc of (-'ontcnts lirr lrcadings of
7.aprd," ltt orifi:.s cgIcl, XlII. No. 6. Ig57,pp. I{r 3 I.
tr:i..ll.t
r. l.atirrski.ja
clrtlrlt'r srrlr riivisi.rrs for rrvr jor topic's cliscussctl. []osnia, sirrcc it ir1r1rf i11-s
't.'hought
.8. tan.yta,qe,
)J|l],lrf,(;. an,l I?errlity',1)rrrrrt,ritlgc.
'<ies-selhstverst?n.nisses
195(,. trrr irlnrosl ('vcrv l)ae(', <locs rrot ill)l)car irr this rcgistcr.
_".'ll.grr rrili' ais
Wild,. Arrs<irur:k
telaltcrlicherr sekrerrki.che, <lcr N{it_
" Kitclte i* ost"n(c6ttirig"rr,-vr,,*r",,r,"".t;,
VI, 1963, p1t. t6-33.

fhe Serbian l"tt", Z (z_h).shall follow all the

r\cotttius (|a|al lcgate), I 3 5. I (r I Ilirlritl, r\ ., ). 212. )7:. 193, 3ll
7.ajcev. V, "K vol,rosu rr rzainrootrr,,ferrii
Z.s. ill, l()2 {)1, 386
r\lbitrriir, Ilukli( (:rutlror riI I7th (.cnlur\,
Bogc,nrilstva i lrekotorylr za|ltllryh Albi. Il7 r iril;rt iorr ,trn(rnA l,;rrrlicltilrrri)
eretilr:skih rlviYenil,." l,estnih
!rri;p;;i;"/Io Uniuersiteta. l1r Scr. Ist., r\llrrccht 1l(ing of I Iung;rry, l4a7 l ()l 02
Jaz., -Lir., lll . lg6rr, Jr1;. l{)9. l(r. 1()\ ,55
zantnovi(., A. "&rgled na'apostorsk.-z-na'stveni racr Dorninika'aca li:rkula ( l9th ce ntLrry tlcrical c ()11)

varskinr zernljarrra," IJogo.slot,ska Snt.otro, u hr- ,'\ lcxarrclt'r lll (popt,), I [ /t nilcr) S5
VIII, 1917, pp 262 81,.' r\llonso oi Na|k,'s. .300 ()l , l()2. ll'rl{ifi,'i Zt.rir. 2rtS. rlrjrrr;rj Ii.. .l()s.
Nll. 't'he Serbian letter ll(). 122. l3l I)jurai Srracirrrirovii Il. 23 l.
Z (Zh) shall follow all the Z,s. r\l{otttrttt (Scrlliln rrolrlt'rrran) 2O13 Ilulir III ll l()l )
r\ltonrirrrovil, Nikola (St'rlrian llirrr ja Nlrirrirst tt'v, l(.)l. )71
postalistCcci, " GzM,S,l, No.3, IBB9, nrrlrlcrrrarr). 19l, l()2 208 Ilan ja Lrrka. .17
'"'[r],Jrr,.'NarodrrcJ,riY'e'kakusu pp.
,\rrrbrosirrs, Ilir. (lir:irrt iscirrr). 7(r Ii:rr'1Ar:tilrru'i). l4(r, l'ifl. 155, ll()
7<tvko,l. "svctica Neclclja," GZ,i,lS',11, I890, p.
I l(r. Anittolia. ll5. ll7 lJrrrbrrrl (Qrrt'crr ol Ilrrrrgulr'), Ji'i
7,ovko, l.''Nekoliko narodrr i h pripoue.laka,. i
7.t>vko, L "Vf erovan ja iz_ Ilerceg-1t,r.rn.,;,'
C 2, U S,III, I B9 1, p. 99. r\nrlft'lii, 1,.. tit, 2),
1 115. 20.1 ()t, lJ:rrlrar:r ol I-it'lrlcrrstcirr. jJ2, .lj.l
Z-iLO1S,IV, 1899, p1t. 132_\0;
t. t9ol.,,n. I l t 60aVl, pt. z, rOirrlpp. 292,311. llt, ltl ol "l);rvro". lf2
Il;rr-bitrit
"y ..y,t,1,j.
Ztrljitr. Nt. "crrit'c ,Ii,gorrririnra
l\rrschrr of Alexarrcllia llnquisitorial Iilrbur ci. Niclrolus (llrpul crrvov trr
y"i'{. ; "^n.;; L B;;"i j'Hu.rrr.
-i,Bi'
,, .(kntrki aUrhrrr) 5,i. l17, 119-)(). 200 llosnia). J jil :9, I1 l.
x'ie sn ih, x r rr, 1906, pp. l
1 9-30, )t l -l s, >l t
ll, t oo,i,' l t o',^i az r\prrlia. I lfi lirrrtltolorrrirt,us (t C:rthlr lcader), 74-
v 90, 891-9(y2.
,,\r'istrxlios (l)airnatian lreretic) l l8, 75
7'upani(, N
"5i{arro kunrstv. kod jugoist.rnih
slovenaca i ostalih srove'a,,, )t] llarthokrrrat'us of l)is;r (1.'ranc.iscan
GIasnik Il!nosruf-e kog institxta(SAN), I (t 2), t912,
pp. rtl-;)"^"""' i\thos, 1\1t.. ii, .ltlS vicar). (r(). l()tr, 192 9./r. 2(r().
r\torrt (pscurirltvrn ol a Scrbian l()9. 2tr.1
clc'ricul sclrolur). l Il;r\,rqit'. ll,r;rlrilrr I'r,13. S5
 436 Medieval Bosnian Church
llegislcr o[ N;lnlcs 437

Ilasel (Council of), 1l , 12,73, 195, Boniface IX, (popc), tl, l98-99, ltfr, tt9, 232 296, 312, 324, I )oboi , 2 .i 5 , 41
2/t8-50. 281 . 367 224, 307 -1.10 l)olror ( in
). 232 L)sora
.3

lJatkovi6i (village, with ste(ci), 288 Ijorai, 29, 205, 220, 23g. 241, 258,
Batalo, 1'epcYija (Bosnian nobleman)
Croatia, 17, 59, 75, 89, r19, t35, DobrovojeviC, Vlalr (llosnian noblc),
2.82, 283 , 288, 306, 347 137, r38, 154,1r5, l(r0, 170, 214, 268, 278
81, 109, 1t6, 201, 215_18, IloriC, Ilan, 28) 171. 179. l8(,, l9B, 199, 221, Dobrun, 191, 220, 282
220, 268, 279
tscla IV (King of [lungary t23t 70),
Boril (llulgarian Tsar), 17, lt> )2\. 232, 23J. 23r, 279. 381, I)orrdaine, A. 119-20
Ilosigchus (lSosnian swincller), 2tB 1,9./r Donji kraii, 10(r. 111t. 170. 172,
140, 142, 144-2t6, Ir3, 164, Bradina (village with patarin hiia), lilt, lgrj,212,
Cvatko gost, 290, 363 64 1ttu,9(), 219-20,
205,293
201.257,277.17) 223-24. 2rt
Cv jetko Patarin. 37 I , )74
Beloslav, Patarin . 37 I lJrauiv.,ievili (nuble fanrily of Hum), C:rlak. 88 Dorothca (of Vidin,'l'vrtko I's rvife),
Ilenedict Xll (pope), 179, jB0 t71 t"r,t"r,t,, (mountain). Jl 1 192
Bcnedict (Archbishop of Kalocsa), llrankovid, George (Serbian tlcspor, tihori.{ taur ilv. l9l l)orotlry (1'vrtko ll'.s rvilc), 242,247.
146
Benedict Ovetarius, )-1
1427 >6). 248, 30t, 3r0. 328 Crcrrr,Xrrik, G.,4t, 16/t, z/tr, 2/t6 210. 284
IJratislav (Catholic Ilishop of Bosnia), (irkt,viC. S., 2. I 2/t, lto-tl, 202. [)rageta (Brageta, 13ergeia, l)raYeta ;
Bcrnard, (Archbishop of Dubrovnik),
122.123
llt1 )r, 225, 216, 277, 278, 307, Ilosnian Catholic rnonk), 128,
Bcrnard (Archbishop of Split), l1g.
ISrdo (site
)40
of church near Vrhbosna), , lr2. il1. 328. 132, 338. 34t)
V.,2,201
133. 216-17
Dragice (Dragite : ian
CoroviC, Bosrr Catholic
I2/t-26 Ilribir, I t4, 17g monk), 128.216'17
,
BeYlagil, 5., zr,t 286, 288. 2g3 lluda, 221 , 232 i3 DabiYa (King of Bosnia, l39l-9t), Dragiliibrothers (Bosnian noblemen :
Bijela (village with Patarin hiia), 205,
372,378
Ilulgaria, l, t, 17 18, t>, >(),72, 2n, 216, 219 21. 277 Pavle, Nlarko, luri). 270-7 1,
flifeljina, 196, 207, 2(t0, 288-89
75,83 84, 10r, llt 17, 118, [)almatia, l(), 17,31 ,42,41 , t2, 271. 303 04
uite&. 92. 282 I19, 137 , ttt9, tJ3, 1tt, 1 tB 11, 57, 62, 7r, 76, 89, 90, 91, Dragohna (Catholic bishop of ISo.snia),
llilino poljc, ll, lt, tl, 1r26-34. 59. l(r8, 174, 192. 193.232. tt3, tt4, lt7, llB 21,124-26, 114.1)
100,101,320 129 t3 r-.11, r 31 37 , t47 . r54.
, l)ragovica, 5t, ll7, I ltt, l l9
I18, It(.), 174, 214, 217, 262, llu,qojno,
277. 166 369 l(r0 6.1, 177 -78, lBt, 197-200, l)raYivojevii Iaurily (llunr rrobility),
llutko, pop (Catholic priest, nrade a 203. 218, 220.21. 232, 234, r71
Biograd (villagc with hila), 2O1 , lll-
249 , 2rr, 308, 327 , )31 , 333, l)rc/nica,85
t2, 334 35, 363, 370, 37 2, 378 llyzantint' 82, 220, 221t, 268. 280
Gospel.1,

Biskup (near GlavatiL.evo, village with

L-nrf il-g. I I t, 1 15, lI(r, 134, 340, 341, 37r,380, 3Bl, l)riieva, 237, 3lt
117,161.272 390 I)rina, 136, 191, l9(r: 201,
1111,
cernetery), 191, 332 203, 208, 220, 241, 250, 2r4,
lJladostus (lllaclosius), IJosnian C-alixtus lll, Danilo (Serbian Archbishop and
(pope), 32(r author), 43, Ir4, 196, 289 218, 260, 261, 278, 2BI, 287-
(latholic nronk, l28, 217
Caloiannes (Oathar tlishop of l)anubc, 66, 72. 248 88, 311 , 327, 328, 343, 318,
lllagaj, 2<),213, 11, N,lanrua), llB, Il9
lllasius, St., (Patron saint of (--arrrpanus [)avitl (Nletropolitan at MileXevo), 319
I)ubrovnik), 24O,
(papal secretary), 61+ 71, 113, 116, l(;(r,292,361t, Dubo&ni, 8)
3O6 uzenl, Anna lwife rrf V Iaclislav Dubrovnik, 2, (r, 10, 13, 29. 41. rt2,
Ilobali. l)ornagna di Volzcr C.rrrtat K,,sa&;, 261 , 322 D'brr,
.16)
1t4 44, 45, t2, 62, (>3, 67, (rB. 70.
(l)ubrovnik cleric, aclvisor to (larrtar:uz-enus, 7 I, 7 ), 74. 78, 114 15, 121,26,
St jepan Kotrornani6), 66-67 , 68, (jclrrict
Manucl, 2(r3 Dcbirr,.ltlt
(viltage in I.lercegovina), Dclevica, lB5, 331, 332 t28, t34.36.140, r42 43.145
71, 167, 182. 202, 206 212.263 Dinid, N{., 42, 41, 211, 210, 255, 50, lr2 t3. l(r3, 1(r(r-68. 171-
lJcrlror':rc. (r). l(t(t-tl7 . 229, 247 (,harles Ilr:bert (King of IIungary, 72, t82, lB7, 190, )99203.
, 266, 281, 288
340, 153 t30t 42r, 177 DiniiEi6 larnily (Bosnian nobility) 208, 210, 212, 222 32. 236,
lloizc,30(r Clrieri (ltalian town, resiclcnce 238 44.248.249, 21t 6(),263-
of 217 , 262, 264, 265, 270, 27 1 ,
Bogutovo lvillagc n'ith cenretery), '[Josnian heretics') t6, 9i], 199 67, 269-72, 274, 277 79, 282_
276. 288, 322, 342
196.260 Clerrrcnr VI (popc), 48,6l-, 2(t3 \tt, 29 1 92, 296, 302. )(\3, 30t-
Llohemia, lB, 59, (r0, 110-lI, 1(rfl.
t)iniitiC, Peter, 270, 292, 311
C-olonran (Dukc of C-roaria), l2I, [)ioclea (Zeta), I21t 07. 311 17, 3r9 22, 327. 329,
247
Boliuni (village u,ith ste/ri), 9l
138 39, t4r, 142, 143. 144. D jakovo, 46, 9), 148, l t0, r 53, 331, 338, 340. 3tt9. 3)1, 3>9.
Irr3 169, lfl5 189, 192, 200, 207, 36t+ 68, 370 7), 371. 378
Boleslav (early Ilosnian Church I)ursurn beg (Turkish historian) 31li)
Conracl (papal legate to France). 233, 24t
leader), Lt6, 157, 215 7t, )37
71+_
Dnritar, starac (Patarin diplomat), Duvno. 170. 172, 220, 226. 227,
Boniface VllI (pope), j j4 Crrnstantinolrle, l l7, l19. 120. 238-40, 249, 264, 2(:1 , 27 2, 269,338. 380
136,
283. 29t
/rI[l Nlcrlieval llosnian Church Ilcgistcr ol Nirrrrr:s 439

'1.15,
I'.rit'r'. .l iJ (;()nrililnin llrr:tl. JOl Ilrrrn (t.r'tiorrol ), l.J ,'i1,,ifl, (r7. fl.l, .ll{) .ll, ll,}, l.l(), li1.
l' lcn;r lStt'lrrrr V rrklil's rlirtrglrtt'r), .15 3 (iorrriljiuri pruvir'r lsi tt' Ortlrotlix r'i , ll7, t22, tJi. l]6, t,io, .t5.1
. 17S. ilil
lrlizirlrt'th lSigisrrrurrtl ol Iltttrg:tty's clrLrrclt ruins ncar 'l lcbinje), 3()l 'i2, 155. ttfi, I 60, I ()1. l(i'i . llrrjir{i lvill:rgt' asst,ciltt'rl rvit}r tljcd).
r.lirrrglrtur),2.3.1 (,orrdola. (liovarrni di Nl:trino 7t. n), t7.\. l8n. 198.2()8, lll1. 20i. ))7. )7('. )())
l:ntirntrcl tlte Grcck (irtrthor o{ a lchronicler),74 )t 2. 22t), 2)1, 27 8, )(Yt , 1l \ .felcna (also kttou'tt its (irulrit. Qttecn
clrroniclc). 4l .11. 94 Go[rrYdc. 20t, )13. 25f]-)9. 261, llunr (town of), 369 of []osnia. ll9t 9t3). 221
Irrrtlrt' 1K in.q ol I Iurrgarl'. l 20t 3t), 2l(). 27 6-77 . 286. 3l I, 322-23, I Iutnsko (ncar lirrYa; site of inrlx)rtilnt .fclena (lllvoje's $ifc: latcr sifc o1
1.15. 1l(r. l(r() t6 3. 37f.t stciak),263 King osrrrja), )21. ))i, 237.
lrrrgcrrt' l\/ (po1rc). >4. 19. (r3, 2) I Corica, (ll('Yki on I.ukc Skatlar), 2)3 Iltrrrgirry (:rtrtl llungaritrtts), 41 /t6, )(t9. 2,92
4ft. t(), tL),67.7t, q\.9t.96,
,

lol, 102, lo,'i. 3()t, 106, ll4. Gorlanski. lvan (Joharrnt's ()arai), Jclena ([ lrvojc's rriccc: Santlrli's first
I tFt )12 l()(r-07, I l/t, l2l , u'ilc),221, 2ll.2ll
127, 124,
livuns. l\rthur'. ,8 (lostovic{ (Orthodox nronastcrl'). 3B() 126, 128, 133 >2,160 65. 170, .lclena (K ncz- L.az-al's darrghter ;

lrvirrrs l)r'itchir ttl. l:.., 2) 2j (imtljc\a lllosnian ludgc). 122 t71,177 ul, IB(,, lill] 90. 197 S;rrrd.rlj's st'torttl sift'). Jll. 2J').
I;;rlriirrr. fra., ( l;ranciscau rttissiortitr.v), (lrcecc (ancl ()n:cks). 11. (16, 72, 99. 202, 201. 212,220, 221, )11, )12,2t3 t.1, 2u3, 123,
111. t18. 119. )o1 l t9, r53. 261, 1)7 )21 2t, 228 jo. 232 33. 23' l5U, l(r5
liirlritn. Ira (lirarrcisc:arr vicar), 30 I St. Orcgory (patron sairtt of lhsrria), J6, 24)., )43, 246. 249 70, .fckrrra llrrl(i( (ll<'r'ccg Stclirrr's first
lirrrlati. l.51. f i,9tl. l()2 t73. 114. 2oo. 2()J 04, 3:19 )7\, )61, 29r, 3t)1, 305, 3l l. u'ifc), 30l. 1))
l;:rtrriclr. 2ll,l ()rrgrrry lX (grpt'), 11t,. l)7 ,\3 lli. ll(), 32tl. 129' 3lJ, l'io, .lt'lcrrl 1n'ilc ol I( irtri Stt'larr
l;t'jcr. (i.. (r() (,rcgor.v Xlipolx'). ll. 51. 59. lftl, J it, t,i't 46. lr). lTll , 3tlo. 'l t,nrrrKcvii. titkiug It:utrt' Nlrrria),
I;t'rrrrt'rrtlXirr. It-. (;0. -7(r, 21t6 192 97 , 20() ()l Iti(r.3tl7 ll0 ll,.ll9
Iiilipovic{, A'l .. 201 (t1i. 167-($ (ilcgory Xll (popc), 2 j2 I ltrrryirrli, 3(X), 3()l .fclcniC, J.. rr{)
liiliPovitl, N., ll4. lfl5 L,Ilg()rt)\'la, V., /l/l Ilvrrl Krstjarrin, Ul, ft2, 214,218' Jelisavcta 1l):ruglrtcr ril Sti.
l'ol:r, ll. 251. 258. 263 (irrrrtltrlil 1R:tgtts:tlr rttrtlt.tss:ttlor to 19. 224, ))t, 268, )57 Kotronlirr)ri). It{8
l;ofnica, 7t,76. ltl5, l3 l, 73). llosrri:r). ).\('.277 llvirr', 299 .lelisuvcta (l)tuglrtcr ol Stcfarr
lirirrrt'c, t.9 . '17. to, 55, \7 . 74-71, [)r'agrrtin), I \1t, l(tl
99, ll7, tt9 20. l2t. 1.37 3tl I lcrccllrrovi (Nrivi), .l 12, .120 lrrriirrri, ll7 ,9tl -f
clisuvcra (l)uchcss of N'lrrlvrr), 153
li ri u li . (r(r I lcrcegovina, Il 2. 190-91. 20fi, lrrrota, 17O,2(17 .jt'z.cro, J(17. l3l
)20, 223, 211, )70-lt, 278. Irrrrr:, (King of Ilungary, 1196 .lirciek. K., 17. 2/rl
Gircko, Lt , 203 , 208, 3U5 291. 312. 313, .ll5l(,, 318, t2o4). t)4,l33, l(,0 Joharrres clc Casantaris (paprrl lcgate),
(larsoian. N., 296 )22 27 . 311 34. 34t . 742. 344 Inrroccnt III (1rr1rc), tl, c)l , 124, itf, t2t, t)6 14, 118
(.lcnrrirrlius (Patriarch of Con- 15. 312, 363 74. 371-76. 3t8' r)5, 126. t2B. l3) .f ohanncs I lorvat,
l9(,
stirr.rtinoplc), 296, 1)4 26, 381 79, 381. 182, 186 Btl IV (1ropc), 145-48
Irrrrotetrt .fohanncs ol Korlula lllosnian vicar),
CleorgijcviC, Athanlsius (17th I Ilivno (Livno), 170. 172. 345 VI lppc), 48, 9i, 189
lnrroccr,rt 245. 251. 286
cclll11fv visitor), 38/t IJoditlicd ([ortress above Sarajcvo), lsak llcg ('l'trrkish govcrnor of Johirnncs von W ilclcshausctr (Clath()lic
Gcrard Oclinis (lirirrrciscart gcncral), 255t 3ll Skopic), 23J, 236,237 llishop of llo.snia). ll9, 140
ti() tt2
I I lofstadtcr, R. , 1() lstria, l t.1 . 37 1 Jolrn XXII (po1rc), 5l , 76. l6t), 177 ,
(lio:rrrrri. (larclinal cli S. Angt'Io,6.3, I lrrrrorius 15. I l(), l(,1
lll (1lopre). I Itrrly. 5. L), 4i, 11 )2, 5/t, !(r'5f1. 2l /l
70.3()3. l3() lllv:rrirri{ ll,rrrrily), l83. lll(). IqB. (ro, (r2, 65, 9it, 99, I 17 -20. John Angclus (of Srcur). 136. l6l
Cllarrro[. 171). 11 I. 172, 207, 22('t, 223, 211 . (Scc' also Stjepanil'i- 121, 178, lfl(r, 199 20o, 2o9' Jrrhn the [iaptist. (r, lti, ti2, 1l6,
226. 221, 269, 306. 3U0 Irvutini6i)
I 10, 295, 308, 322, 32<), 331, 2118. 357 , 375 I (St. J's cvc, l(r,
Clrtsitrirc. 241 . 27 -1 I lrvar iniC, Balla (son of I Irvo je Vuk 1)t. 336 t7.19,37. t2t).
ClavaticYcvo. l!)l i'i6),2.17 J,rlrrr t'l (..rPistrattr,. {(}(,. \)(,')7 ,

Glfi., 192. 207 tlrvirtinil, Vuk (lJrothcr of I lrvoje), Jacolr []cch (ltalian heretic), >6, 57, 3lt0
')) ) 99. .f orgl, N. . 4 5
Clu\ac. V.. 2 )10 9r.t 199,200
Clobcllinus (papal copvist), (r/l I Irvatinii, Vukac (or Vlkac). 107, .f acob de Marchia ([iranciscan vicar), .lrrv;ut {(,)rl ll(r(1,,x nlrrnki. l5J
(loil'in. pop,2(r0 r89. 198.216.2)o 18. 11)(ro. 70, ll0'11,2o7, Iur ijcvitl llrrothcrs). 25I
(loislavt of II urrr (Serbian I lrvrtinil, Vrrkoslav. 173, 269, 290 )'i1'18, 25(t, 28(). 2tt9
noblcwornan),208 llrv<rje VuktiC, 41 ,73,81, 82, 108- .l;rtolr ol I)rcttt'stc lpiryrirl lcgltc). I 38 Krriil faurily (yriratcs). 97. l lt
Gojisirv gost. 78, 25tl-60. 261 , 264, 09, 198, 219 26, 228-30.232- l,rgicl, V., u1z1
KaJiC, Ilartholonurcus (iTth century
273. 276. 277 37. )40, 243, 248. 21t. 264. Jrrice , 1()(r, 207, 220, 234, 237. Jcsuit visitor to Srcnr), I I
268 69. 27 1. 279, 281 . 282 24t 46, 24P,, 306, 107, 328, Ka jnrakovic', 7,., 15, 121
lt4o Medieval Bosnian Church Ilt'gistcr of Narucs 44t

Ktlocsa (Archbishopric of), l28, l( <rs<rvo. 198, 211 , 77 9 Ljubskovo (Village with Patarin hiia), N{ichacl of I)aris (chroniclcr). 71t-71
I 15 ]9. l4l')0. t5zr l(otor. 42, 155. 156-17, 16(r, 21),
Katarina (l)aughter of I Icrceg Stefan; 112,373
204, 2J6-r7 , 262, 270, 277 , N{ihailovi{, Konstantin (nrcclieval
287 8s historian),
u'i[c ol King Stcfan 'l orna(), 106, It ot ru IjiC, llcnko (llagusirn rrrrrchant-
-340
Ljubonritlja (Village; possibly sanrc .rs l\{iklosich, li.,2Bl
302, .10t, 310, 330 iruthor), 296,32.)-30 Ljubskovo),28t3 Milac, pop, (Chaplain for Dabi!a),
KlaiC, V. . 202, 219 Krafina, l7O, 172, 202, 315, 345, LiubuIak, Mehrnedbeg KapetanoviC, 220
Kl(tic{, })avlc (l}osnian nobleman), 3(r/r, 380, 3fl I B' l\1 ilaia pop, 24 I
l7l, 198. 220, 226-30. 24.), Krajinovic(, J., 289 Ljubu(ki,3tr,331 Milan,71
211.269, 271. 272,27tt, 281, Krbava, 179 Lockwood, W., 3l lVIilclevo (nronastery of), 19, 1t3,
2t)2. 72t. 319 Kri'clif. Il.A.. lo7 Lonrbardy. liB, ll9 106, t72, l9l. i92, 208,2()9,
K lcKi(', V laclislav ([]osniarr l( rctcvljani (mcclieval site), 91
Lomnica (Orthodox monastery). 380 277, 278,310, 322, )24, 126,
nobleman), 2t0't1 , 269, 31, Krelcvo, 73, 8t, l0(r, I tzl, lB5, Louis (or Lajosh, King of Hungary, 727,364,36r,767
K lis, 179. 223 2fl1-8(r. 331, 332
KljutY lirr llcrccgovin:t). 272. 253, Krnrpota,37l
1342,82), 188 89, 190, 207 Milich Velimiseglich. (medieval
l.ubin (Bosnian Catholic monk), 128, chronicler). 4l , 73
267. 165 K rupa (on the Vrbas, also called
113,216,217 iVIiloje, djed, 301-0zt
KliuE (on the Sana), 189,270, 304, Orcbcn). 87 Btl, 92, l9t. 201 ,
I-nccari, 65, 73'7 4, 244 N,Iilorad Patarin (of Rrldina), 217
319.32t5 l0(r
Kncz-ovir{ fanrih'. I (t6
I-r.rcius, 233, 23t Miloladovil farrrily, 1 75, 182
K utinic', Diurai (l Icrctical llosnian Luke, Saint (relics of), i30 31, 339 Nlilutin, gost, 263'64. 276
I(niewalcl. D., 2. 191. l(r(r rroblenran). 33 5 38
Ivlilutin (Serbian King. 1282 1321).
Krrin, I79.210,223 Kr-riava (Seconcl rvifc of l(irrg Ostoja),
ltt,
Krrrravli, 2l)8, 2lO, 222, 278, 242,
Macedonia, 44, 7t, I l(r, I 17 , 151, l)(r, 171,202
)8) t7l I\'lirohna, Abbot, 107
267. )69. 278. 314, 316, 327 Kulin. Ilan (liuler of Ilo.snia, ca. MaXva. 43. lt3. lt4. \96,2Ol, Miroslav, died. l13. ltl t7. 166,
Ir,,'rrjic. S5. l()1. 205, 25.3. 157. l l8() 1204), zts. l l3-lt. ll8, 207, 289, 351 2tt. 2t7. 373
282. ltt. 327. 311, 3.12, 335. I 21 29. 1j2, l-il, ll(). l'io,
.16.1 , f (r(r, .\7 2, .1 78 : (bogus 159, l(r0, l(>), 17,'t. 17t, 2o1 ,
l\'lakarska, 170, l7l ,Vl iroslav of I Iunr. ll2't'i.], 1 74 , l2tt,
MlndiC, D., (rl, I l0-ll 118, I(r0
"Council of K.," t4, i0B, 304) 2u5
Konstantin Filozof (Serbian author), KuriprXii ( l6th ('cnrury Austrian
Manoilo Grk. 94 Nlillien, gost, 227 , 262, 357
Mantua (I3agnolo), 118 N'todrida.207
44, 86. 2t+2 t'nvoy).80 N{araviC, N4ariian (l7th century Nloldavia. 59, 241 . 1Ol
Kosalrr {arnily, 220'21, 2t(), 211 t4,
258. 267 6t, 267. 270-71, 276,
visitor),3f34 Montenegro, 3t, il9, l2lt, 161, 16fl
lV (Hungalian Kirrg.
l.rrclislas 1272-
Marianus. fra. of Florence, 110-ll Nl<xin. V.,4t, t6, 164.213
2lH, )86, 3()0. 312. 721 24, 9o), It3 NIarica, battle of, 208 Mostar, 13, 29, 70, 306, 331
J32. See also \/[atkc, Vukovi6, l"adislas of Naples, 197 98,220-2t, Marinus (Archdeacon of Dubrovnik), Moltre (village with hila), 174, I7>,
Sanclall I Iranic(, Stefan Vuki'ic(. 230, 232-14, 2tt1. 3o(t 48, 121, 126-28 176, t84, 204, 216, 29o
K osa&r. Ilc'oka, 2B(,. 293 l.anrpredius (llishop of 'l'rogir), 18() -i
Nlarinus (Catholic Bishop of Ston), MrnaviC, fra lvan orrko, 107-08
Kosa&r, Ste{an VukIicf. See Stefan I"ungLrccloc,99
201 Ntuhalinoviii (village ; rnedieval site),
., , v. ,
V ukCt(' [-:ronikos Clralkokondyles, 32tt. 325, l\'[arinus (Bosnian Franciscan, 12r, 119, t7>,176
Krrsa[a, Stefan lAlrrned tlercegoviC, 126
(r0, l()(r, l0B, lB3, 184, 21(r, Custoclian father), 3l1t Musa Kesediiia, 282
sorr <rf Ilerceg Stefat)), 364,17) Lrr'sva,
Marko Kralievi(, 282
Kosata, Vladislav (Son of Herceg 2)O, 227, 260 MartiC, fra., B) Nazarius (Cathar Bishop of Con-
Stefan), 2>3 14, 263, 270, 290, l-aYvanin, Nikola (chronicler), 76. Nlassarechi, Peter (l7th century correzo), 84, 117
3r4, 1r5, 3t7, 322, 319, 34>, 177 visitor), 6r, 67 "68, 69, 7 3, 167, Nelipac lanily,761t, 17O, 119, 206,
349. 351, 17j local ruler),
L-az-ar, K ncz. (Serbian
384.389 279
Kosal'a, Vlatko (Son of Flcrceg 208, 233, 2>2, 283 (r1 Nelipiii, lvaniY, 223, 22rr. 279
Stcfarr), )54, 371, 371, l.ca, (lh., c)9
Matasovicl, J.,
379 Matheus (Dalnratian heretic), I l8 Ncretva, Ut, l0B, ll4, It7, 160,
Kosale (villagr of). 2tl6 l.cottarclo (A rchbishop o{ Dulrrovnik),
Nlatyas Corvinus (Flungarian King, 163. r72, 20t, 253, 282, 1(\6,
KosanoviC, S., 81 I .l/t 3t l1ri8'90), 328, 3rto, 341, 341, 311, 311, 334, 341, 364, 366,
K ofarili (vi llagc with nredieval l,cpenica, J83
313, 369 37 r. 372
ccmctery).2(r0 l.inr , 't./t, I l zt, l 5B, 17 2, l9l , 201 ,
Mcdiedji (location of medieval Ncvesirrje,91, 191. 282
Kosttturr (liortress of Santlalj antl 20r.i. 213. 277. 278. 281 lV (pope). I )zt
cernetery),2(rI Nicholas
I lcrceg Stefan), 213 Livrto. Sce I llivncr Mcnhtrcl of Ortenberg, I(r7 Nicholas V (pope), 53, t4,63,302,
MiaYa gost, 239, 243, 267, 291 1O7 lo, )t4
442 N{cclieval Ilosnian Church 441

Nicltolas Nloclmssienst's (Oatholic Pavlc Iladcnovi( ltlosnian rroblcnrarr ;

l)oljskir (stcy'ci site), 2(r0 llrrrlivt,jcvi(, l)juraj lllosnian
Ilishtrp). 14(t. 141. lt3 fr()rll tth()nl dcrivcti thc I)ar,krvic(i). [)onlrzarrif, l]crrrarcl (16th terrturl, nolrlcntittr). 213. ^15 l
Nicolu ((ltth:rr Ilislrop of Vicenza), 22o, )13, 2j/r. 2)(t, 231 , 26c), travclcr),385 11,,,1,11' llug(h)iza llirsrriinr lirntllorrl
llrJ 278, 281, 2rt2. 291. i50 I)onsir (()atlrolic llislrop oI l]osrria). irrrrl thiel), 257-13. .lt!)
Nicolrolis, 66, 7 2, 221, 377 [)rvlovic(farrrily, 220, )36, 237 . 2tt9, l/111 11t'1
, 146 /r8, 163 llatlolrn:r I(rstjanin, l7t i6
Nikarrilar of Jerusalent (Orthoclox 258, 262, 264. 267, 267. 269. I)trpovo poljc, 191, 282 Ilatlonrcr iltadornir. tljetl), tll, 213-
clder), 2)3 70, 271. 276. 278, 288, 293, ['r#ega, 136, 1) 3 tt.
2t9. 21r
Niketas (llogonril hishop), I l7 298, 3lI. 22. 329, Pra[a. (medieval fortress), 220 Ilitdosav, starac (Patarin cliplonrat for
321 342,
NikYid (Onogosr). 2)3. 2tt [)ricz-da (l3th century I]an in north of Pavlovi{:i), 292, 321-22
147
Nin, I3ishop of, )8, 296,33t,336, Pavlovil, IvaniY, 71r, 244, 215, 269, Ilosnia), llU, l)zt, 161 , 162, Iladositv llradievii, gost (Prtvl<lviC
337 300. .30(,, 309, 111 . 12,2, 347 , 27A diplourut and a stroinik), 292,
Ninoslav, [3an (nrid l3th centtrry 1t3 I'rijepolje, 208 32t 22
lJosrrian ruler). 11$. l)8 47,1tt9, I)avloviC, N ikola, 292, 121-22 I)rozor. 17. 345 lladosav. krstjanin (author of Radosav
lt3. I6l-(r5.278 [)avlovic/, Pcter I, 236 37, 269 PLrhovac (site of imlx)rtarlt steiak), Iiitual). Bl, ll.l, 296. 304-()1 .
NiY. .](x) I)avlovic'. Peter lI, 292, lll , 321 22 227. 262 tt9
No<lilo, S., 7/t Pav lovid, Radoslav , 7 4 , 2'J7 -,14 , 248 ,
I{rriki, lr., 2,54, 16, t7, 108, 33>, Ilrdoslav. died, lr6, 173-7 11,2lt,
Novi Pazar. 29 249. 25r. 2)(r. 25t1. 26)-67, 339 2t7
269 , 27 2 7 tt , 27 t't. 2tt I . 2llzt .
Ilrttlak. "Nltrrrichrc" , 65, 70, 319 I{ircloslav, 1tost, I t6, l7 3 7 4, 17 6,
OhiI,en. I)atarin, )ll. 77 I 29t 93, 3t3 40.34t.1)3 2t5. 2t7
OlrracloviC, Dositel, 2t+-21 PeI. l9 l{atlaYin Krstjanirr (Patarin diplonrat), Illrtl,'sl:r v I)irv krvic{, \ce unrh'r P,rvlov iC
OhrnLrlevil fanrily, l0tl PcljeYac, l7l 26r. 272. 291 lladovac krstjanin (l'avlovic{ ollicial in
Okiq, 'l'., 4,77-80, 261, 334, 369, Percgrin Saxon (Vicar and thcn lLadrfiin Krstjanir-r (referred to on Konavli),238
382 Bishop of Bosnia). 67, 67. 69. stc6ak inscription), 2(rl Iladoyt:ho of Ljubskovo, 217
Olcrvo, (r0, 183, l84, 220, 241 . 9).9(r, 1411, ltl2-83, llli-88 ll.rden .f ablanic! (llosnian rrobleman; Ilagninrr, N icolo tli (Ragusan
282, 293, 327 Nl., 3zi0
[)r:rolevid, fathcr of Pavle Iladenovi|, 220 clrronicler). 122. I3tt 121 ,
onri\, 97, l]t. l1l, 221 Pcrsia, llt, ll9 Ilacligost (Catholic 13ishop of Bosnia), llagusa, Sce I)ubrovnik
Orahovica (on the Neretva).331t l)c'tcr, 'l'sar of Ilulgaria, I l5 tt', 123. 28t Ilaincr (Alchbishop of Split), i 1zt
Orbini, lvl., 3, 41, 6171. 101-02, Pctcr (llishop of llo.srria), 95. l4tl. llailirnlja (Mcdieval cemctery site), Ita jkoviC, St jepan (rccipient ol grant in
t)t-22, 123, t34. lt0, 167, l88, lBg. lg2 89.175 dubious chirrter). lO(r 09, 200
181, t82, 187, 201, 20), 206, Pctcr. St. and St. Paul Chr:rch on the llarlin, gost (surnanrc, Ilutkovi{), 3, Ilanr:r, fJ1. 311,341 . )69
208, 2lB, 276, 277, 330, 332, I-inr. .l l1t. l>8, 172, 191, 277 4,6, 4t, (r0, 70, 73,79,89, llanrbcrto (l(rth centur)' trxveler),
152. 36). 377 Pt'tko Krstjartin. 262, 323 l)3, 15(r, 176, 204, 239. 24o. 36t
Osto ja( K in g of I] osn ia . 1 398' 14(t 4 , l,erriJ. NI .. c)2 244, 249 , 213, 254, 216, 260, Ilanz.anus, Petcr (FI ungarian
I zro9-18), 221, 222, 225 7I, PetroviC, L., 2 3, 343 264 6t,267.27 2 73,276. 283, histrrrian), 746. 3t9
233 34 , 236-78, 250, 255 . 261 , Philadelphia, tt. ll9 290, 29t, '292, 293, 2c)196, Ilrsturlije ([3osnian (lhrrrch leader),
)69, 27L, 274, 271, 28t, 282, Ilt, 1l7
Philippopolis (Plovdiv), l()0. 3ol. lo7. 311. 314, 117 it6.21l.2It-t1
)91. 292, 298, 299. 3(\2, 303. Piednront, t6,57.98 ll. ll4. 317. 344. 1,\1. 1t]- I{a(ko gost (possihlv R..rtko. f ronr
(){}. _l6i-7(), 17:. 17.i. lTtj Ko\ari'ci steiak). :6o. ISE
319 Pictro Livicr of Vcrona, 3, 4, /rl , 62,
Ostoja klstiarrin (of Zp,tnje). 261, 63, 6) 73. 101. 167. 202 llirdrn Sconitan (Clost Ilaclin's Il a!ta rr i . .l06
29o. 3t+1 Pi(cYc (villagc on Pivska planina), 290, rrt'phcw; also a gost), 20), 3(r(r- liirtko (early Ilosniarr Clrurch leadcr),
Ottocar o[ I]ohenr ia. I ) 3 )17,323,350 69, 372 116, 157, 216,217,218
Ozren (Orthoclox nronastery), 380 Pius II (pope; Enea Silvio cle Pic- lludin. starac (Patarin cleric), Bl, 2l(r Itatko, djed, .104
colorrini), 1, 1t6, 62'6), 68-7l, Iladisav Patarin, 37 I 72 Ilatko (Presbyter and protovcstijar for
I'adua.33l 71, 76, 111, lt0, 300, 303,
RadiXid brothers (Pavle and one rvhose J'vrtko I). 200, 210
I)agarrrinrrs (Bishop of Lllcini), 316 l7 narne unknown), 225, 228, 2>6, llatko. pop,222
310, 332-40, 78t
I)al (--hupor (l l ungarian ntrblerlan), l)iva River, 220. 262. 327, 763 272.321 llatkoviC, Raclohna (noblcnran in
236 l)ivska planint. 317, 323, 1t0 lladivoj g()st (of Ilijela, surnanre servicc of Sandalj), 212
I)irlavestra, V., 92, 2u8 Plevlie,3Bl Priljubr:rvi6), 369, 37 2 llaynaldi, l, tl, 109, 3t3
l'apraFa (Orthoclox nronasterv), 380 PodbreY-ja (rnedieval sitc), I 22
lladivoj (llrothcr of K ing llayncr Saccorti (lnquisitor). )4, 11
Stefan
'l'orrrir!). 2t0, , 299, 306, Ilesa (llatalo's u'ife; Hrvo je's sister).
l)rrtrl of Sarrrosata, 66.72,73 Pollice, 331 211
33t. 338. 347 2t6.220
 1tlt4
Nledieval Bosnian Church ll cg i ster o[ Nanres /(+t

Lt. 123, l3t+-31,

Ilesti, Junius, 7 4, I Scorrica, 2Ot, 342, 366, 372 Stcfan l)uYan (King then Tsar -'- of Syrneon (Archbishop of Salonika),
2t8, 222. 240, 2r2, 2c)9, 303 Scrbia (including references to Serbs Serbia, I13l-tt),- 66 67 , 1.71, 124 26
Restoje, protovesriiar, 306, 309 and to Ralka), 48, 19, 5, 89-91, lfil, 20fr, 278
7 Synreon ('l-sar of [Sulgaria). l l(r
Roger of Wendover (Medieval l0(r-08, I14, II7, llc), l2t+, Stefan Laz.arevi( (Serbian I)espot, Synreort Semconis (l;ranciscan
chronicler),7/r-75 1.49, lt3 57,I(r0, 168, 17173, t3B9 1427), 44, 86, 233. 241 visitor), l(rB. l)9
Ilomanija lnrountain), 311 lBl, l9l-94, t9(,, 197. 203, 42,282 Sabanovii. Il., 215, 3u3
Ilome (excluding re{erences to 208, 2t4, 211, 232, 233_34, Stefan Nernania (Grancl Lupun t f iicpan potic. 123 24
papacy), 66, 2r+I 42, 241t, 2t+8, 2tO, 214,
Rudnik, 191, 192, 208
33f-, Serbia, l168 !(r), 171t, 117 , Sid,,t . j.,2, tt2.8.i, lo7. lril, ltJJ,
278, 279, 284, 300, 301, 310 i58, i60 206
li.uncirnan, S., 108 12, 314, 322, 326 28, 330, Srefan Ostoji6 (King of Ilosnia, 1418- Si(i.., n.,41,46, gt, ro7
lluthenia, )9 344, 379,381, 388 2t),237 38,279.282 5urrii6, N4.,4,370
Ruxin (Patarin of Ljubskovo),217 Sibislav of Usora, I40, 162 Stefan Prvoventani (Ruler of Serbia, lubi6 farnily. l7/t. lt() 57. l(t4.
llycaut, Paul, l8-19 Sigisnrund (King of FIungary, 1387- 1196 1227). t24, 16O t(r7, 170. 173, 179.201'o2,
1431), 197 99, 220, 22r_ Stefarr 'l-onraX (King of l)<tsnia, l1t1tJ- 206
Sabellico, Marc Antonio , ], (t4, 6), 't, 212 3), 236,
26, 228-30, 242, (rl), )3, >4, 63,70, 7), 76. 81, 5ubi6 Djuraj, 171)
67,68,69.7r 2tt3, 24c)-)o, 2ii. 307 t06, 251. 256, 270. 27), 275, Srrhil, lclcn:r, lllT
Sirint lirlix rlc Cararnln (lirance ), I l7 Sigisnrurrd (Son of Stcfan 'l't,rnr$, 37lr 278, 2991t2, 314 tt, )18, Kul,il, ll l,,.,icn I, I t4. 2o I
Salonika,.l2) r.. \24,
Sin;ri, i\l l2t.
t8S 328 35, 318,342, 1t2 SulriC, N'lladt'n 11,16, 167 , 169, 2Ot .
Sarnobor (on the I)rina), 2)3 Skari( V.. 261. 12t Stcfarr 'l onraXevid (King of llosnia, 202
Sarra,2l(r,220.270 Skople,23l t46t 63), 70, 279, 300, 328, Strbii. Pavle, 20l, 202
Sandali IJranic', (Bosnian noblemarr Skr'batno (nronastery ol), fl1, 2i)
;
rrl Kosrla Ianrily), (>. 172,22(\- Slavonia, tt6, 59, 9t, 136-17, 139, 310, 111, 338, 339,34r Surmin, Di., l0(r
Stefan Vuk[iC (tlerceg Stefan), 70,
2t, 222, 225, 270 31. 233 41. t40, 144, 1218, t)0, tt3, It4, 13, tt3, 116, l(16, 172, 238, 'l'ara liiver, 220, 323, 363
2/t3, 248 t3, 262, 264, 2(t7, t6t, 16), r77, 178,179, 180, 240, 2/14, 249 , 2)2 t6, 2tB 59 , 'l'ardislavic/, Geo. (Ilunr nobleman),
269, 270, 273, 274, 278, 281, tB7 , 223, 224, 22t , 233 , 30t , 26265, 267, 270, 272, 273,
282, 283, 286, 291, 299, 321, )06
38l 276, 283, 286, 290. 291, 292, -l'atars,
144. 164
123, 324, 158. 3(,1 Srrredcrevo. 328, 370, 3i2 296, 298 302, 30t-07, 309-2rt, 'l'tvan. 92
Sanko iVliltenovic{ (Bosnian Soko (Sokograd in Plivska Iupa), l0(r- 128 33, 135, 339. 71t0, 142, -l'avna (Orthodox rnonastery),
380
nobleman: froln whom derived 07. 189 'l'cphrice, I l1
J4/r_/t(t, 349't, 353. 357, 3r8.
rlre Sankovit{i.;. t7l. l9l, 2j7 Sokolgracl (on Drina above 56epan -l'erbipolensis
363 6), 369 71, 373, 378, 388 bishop, tl, t2, 97 ,
S.rrrkoviC Iarrrily. 203,O4. 281 , 282, polje), 2)3, 262, 290, 323, 350.
132
Stephen, Ilrother (a Franciscan used rgt. 249-5()
163,378 as a diplonrat). 237, 238, 282 'lcXani, 331
Sankovicr, IJcljak, li I , 191 Scrl ('l uz-la), 43,10(t, 115, 140, 1j4, Stjepan (a l3th century ban), 1/10, 'l'lrallocz-y, 1.., 17 3 , 224
Sankovii, RadaIa, l9l l6t, 170, 172, 18r,212, 231, t62 -l'heobald
of Rouen (chronicler), 71r
Sarrkovii, RadiI, I 7 t, l9l, 278, 321 33r Stjepan Kotronran, 122, 114, 167, 75
Sarajevo, 29, 2tr, 311, 326, 379, Solovjev, A., 2, lB, 82, 83, 203, tgr, 2ot, 278 'l'heodora (Sister of [lerceg Stefan;
3U0, 3Bl{, 38) (Oriental Institute 2t3, 217, 320, 321, 368 Stjepan KotronranidlBan of Ilosnia ca. wifc of Radoslav PavloviC), 238,
of, 77 : Zenraljski nruz-ej of, tl8. Split, 1r2, 45, 118, 123 24, 126, rlt 51), 66-67, 70. 71, 73. 255
93, r2t , 263) t28, 134, t3t, t47, 163, 164, 9t, 1'22, 154, 167-71, 173 7t, 'l'heoclore (Archdeacon of Scutari),
Sardica (Solia), lt5, 300 170, 190, 198, 219, 223, 224, t77 88,20t 04,206,207. 268, ) )) )74
Sava Iliver, 111+, 136, 139, 144, ) )\ )1?, 274. 278, 279, 290, 307 'l'lrcrrras (l3ishop of F.gcr), )72
196, 248, 260. 289 Srcbrnica, 29, 44, 86, 189, 207, Stjeparri6i'l-lrvatini6i (Noble farnily of 'l hornas
Sava, saint (including his cult and lBishop o{ Ilvar; papal legate
220, 241 -42, 2r7, 283-54, 287. l)onli kraji;. l7(). 173;. see to Bosnia; surname Tornasini),
relics), 19, 39, 1(r0, 191, 310 88, 3r t, 312 I lrvarirri[i t3, 6.1, 299, 302. 303, 309.
t 1, 324, 3tB. 388 Srebrnik (in Usora), 106, ltl9, 34) Stolac, 175,382 310. 314, 3l(t, 3t7, 329, 3t1
"Sclavania" (Region in which a Srem, lI, t9.61, l3(t, 161,221, Stcrn, 13, 67, 1.14, 13(r, 1)8, 171, '['hornas (Despot of the N'lorea), 263
dualist "Church"), 14, tt, l17 , 248, 289 203. 127 'lhonras (Archdeacon of Split), z1zl
,
l lB-21 , 125, 133, 139, Ltg, Stanko Kronririienin, 216 Suibcrt (Pcter Patak ;
Donrinican(r2, I lti, 120-21 . 124, i35,
162. 199,200 Stcfan l)ragutin (Serbian King, later clrroniclcr), 121 , 133, 139, 162l (r -t , (r3 . 164, 217 1
Senj (llishop ot, 147), (Prince of. ru aYva etc.) 43 , l j3-:4 ,
ler M Sutjeska (Klalfeva S.), 60, 77, 7t, 'l'[rracc, 66,72, 1lt, ll7
179) 167, t70, 191, 196, 201, 278, 16. 183, lB4, 198, 220. 236, -l'hurocz-i, Janos (tl ungarian
289. ltl 2,16. 277. 138. 389 clrronicler), 23t 36
 Il eg i ster of Narnes A41
446 Medieval Bosnian Church

Vlatko Vukovid (of Kosata fanrilY), Watlding. 1.., 70, 16'17. lll, 245'
'l'orif-arr, 216, 220 UroX, 'l-sar ('I'sar of Sclbia I3)5 71),
'I'orqucutatlit, Joltanncs CarclinaI of St. 208 )"20.278 248. 309. 310
20,, 342, 344, Voic, [. ]15 16 Wcrtz.cl. Nl ., ,qtl. 91, l0l
Sixtus, 3, tB, 33, 37, 3t5 Uskqrlje (in Bosnia),
Wolff . li.L., 23)
'l'oulouse, ll7 34r, 361), 372, 375, 378, 387, VojsaliC. I)iural lllrvoie 's nepltew
-l'ransy
lvania, 19 , 66 , 69 , 7 2 388 :intl successor\, )17, 251 , 261),
'l ravrrik. 20. 29, 220, 260 Uskoplje (ncar'['rebinje), 3(r!) 281 8(r. J01+. 30(r Z,rtlar,1t2. ll8, 178'79, 191 , 222,
'l rcbinje, 62, 142, 208, 210, 282, Usora, 1t3, (r7, 10(r, l()u, 131, 140, V,'is:rlit(, Pt'tcr, 2(r9. .t(l()' 115 ))4. 2l . 231, 2"rtt
I
Vt,irlirv Voirrovi{ 1St'l'lrirtrr ll(rbl('lllilll)' 7tt1lrclt, 4), 56, 137
305, 327, 369, 376, 317, 384 141 , l)tt, l(rl, I(r2, 16i, 17A,
ZavrYie, 170, r12, 202, 345
Trn jaEka (site of medieval stedak), 172, 18r,188, lB9, 2\2, 212, 208
233, 3rr Voislava (wife of Ban Kulin), 121' Zr:mlianik, 161
260
'frogir, 121, l(t4. 179. 180.232 Ustikolina, 220, 282 121+ Tenicr, 10(r, 113, 114. 122' I4L '
l, 64, (t1 61 220, '227 , 262
l(t1 .
Truhelka, c., 13, 17, 85. 243, 2tl. UYice,20B Volaterrano, RaPhael, ' '
(16th century travelcr),
371r
(r8, (r9, 70, 7l Zeno
260, 263, 26/+, 289, 314, 320, Zcta, 119, 124, Itt, 1(r0, 19 l, 203'
Valentinus (Bishop of Makarska), 17i Vrarrduk. 307 , 331
368,370
'fudisiC, S. (18th century visitor), Vrbas, 76, l(tl, 172, 196, 220, 377 2oB. 23), 24,4, 211, 2tt' 301,
Valjevo, 89
Vrbica,207 379
376 Vardid Radovan (secular diplomat), rvith rnedieval
2)9, Vrlrbosna. 1l1t, 140-41 , 143,144, Zgunic (villagc
Turbe,220 320
, cemetery), 20t' 261 62, 290'
'I'urin, )(r, 18,98, 199 Varna, 301, 346 47 22(\, 237 , 241 , 2i7 , 269 282
'
I'urks, 60, 61, 66, 69, 7(), 77-80, Vr{inic', Radmilo (heretical Ilosnian )|t. 3rt, 379 343
(t' Zvijezdovi(, Angclo
Vuk (Brother of 'l'vrtko t), 106 (l3osnian
86, 144, ltl, r72, 198, 208, nobleman), 33t-38
I''ranciscan leader), 351 , 119
221 , 223, 234 37 , 242, 2>0, Vrgo, NL, BB, 286, 287, 288, 293, t8g. tqtl, l()2, 203, 208. 277
29, 250, J ll.
Vuk. sost (rrl Uskopliel surnitlll(' /.vornik.(villagc Jf{4
254 )), 261, 279, 287 , 290, 11t u itlr llp" rrredieval
293, 298-30r, 307, 309,1>, VeliUani (site of medieval cemetery), Ilrrtliv,rlcvil;. Jt\9, J7 2
Vr-rkan oi 7eta, 124, 126, 1(r0 cemcterv),92
321, 326, 328-29, 331, 333, r91 .
v.t.f it (Regent for T'sar UroY in Zitomislid (Hercegovinian Orthodox
334, 338-4r, 352, 3r3, 363, Venanzio da Fabriano, fra (Franciscan
with title King), 20tt nronastery),382
author),60 Serbia
364, 369, 370, 37), 37684, l'3, IC)6
Venice (and Venetians), 42, )6, 17 , Vukovska ZuPa in Slavonia,
386, 387, 39A
'fvrdisav krstlanin (Patarin dipiomat), 84, 186. 222. 23t. 2)2. 240.
292. 16t+'61 241, 2Br, 287 , 299, 31.5 17 ,
Tvrtko I (Ban, then King, of Bosnia, 322, 330, 33t, 334,340, 344,
t3t3 91), 41, 101, 106 07, 364, 370, 373, 37>, 378
108, 114, 17o, 184. rB7 92, Vesela straYa,34)
l9(,98, 200'04' 207-12' 216, V icenza. 1 18
2t9, 221, 21), 268, 274, 277, Vidin. t92
27 8,.307 V inodol, 375
'lvrtko lI (King of Bosnia, 1404-()9, V iYegrad, 29 , 91 , 261 , 287 '88
142143), t3, 70, 107, 229, Visoki De"cani (Serbian nronastery),
no 33, 23' 38, 24t-5r, 2tt, l9
216, 27 1, 274, 278, 281, 281t, Visoko, 29,60,114,121 ,14I ,167,
285, 287, 2.)1, 299, 307 174, 176, l83, lflzr, 187. 220,
'I'vrtko Pripkovid (Copier of a gospel), 213, 211,246, 741 44, 371
30t Visoko Srebrnica bishopric. 2t I . 138
'fvrtkoviC. StojYan (Bosnian heretical Vita,va (firsr wife of Kint Ostoja), 282
noblernan),13>-38 Vlachs. 89, 90, 9), 102. 2t6 >7,
3t2, 37>, 381-82, 388-89
Ugrin (Archbishop oi Kalocsa), 13) V ladinriroviC, Radivo j, 108
16, t4tt Vladislav KotromaniC (brother ol
Ukrina River, 196 Stiepan KotromaniC), 187 , 206,
Ulcinj, 12t8,316 207
Urban V (pope), 190 Vlatko l'umarli6 (Patarin diplomat),
226, 228, 23(t-37 , 239 , 261t,
261. 269,'272,274,291
\tq (

EAST EUROPEAN MONOGRAPHS

1. Political Ideas and the Enlightenment in the Romanian Prin-

cipalities, 1750-1831. By Vlad Georgescu. 1971.

2. America, Italy and the Birth of Yugoslavi a, l9l7'1919, By Dragan

R. Zivojinovic. 1972.

3. Jewish Nobles and Geniuses in Modern Hungary. By William O.

McCagg, Jr. 1972.

4. Mixail Soloxov in Yugoslavia: Reception and Literary Lnpact. By

Robert F. Price. 1973.

t. The Historical and Nationalistic Thought of Nicolae lorga. By

William O. Oldson. 1973,

6. Guide to Polish Libraries and Archives. By Richard C. Lewanski.

1974.

7. Vienna Broadcasts to Slovakia, 1938-1939: A Case Study in

Subversion. By Henry Delfiner. 1974.

8, The 1917 Revolution in Latvia. By Andrew Ezergailis. L974.

9, The Ukraine in the United Nations Organization: A Study in

Soviet Foreign Policy, 1944-1950. By Konstantyn Sawczuk. 1975.

10. The Bosnian Church: A New Interpretation. By John V. A. Fine,

Jr.1971.