Maja Cepetić Rogić, PhD in Humanities

Maja Cepetić Rogić defended her doctoral thesis entitled The Episcopal Estates of Dubrava, Ivanić and Čazma in the 12th and 13th Centuries: Territorial Organisation, Settlements and Monuments, on 17 February 2015 at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb. The examination commission consisted of Assoc. Prof. Dr. Zrinka Nikolić Jakus (chair) from the Department of History, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Prof. Dr. Miljenko Jurković from the Department of Art History, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, and Dr. Marija Karbić, scientific advisor from the Croatian Institute of History – Branch for the History of Slavonia, Srijem and Baranja. The supervisors were Prof. Dr. Vladimir Peter Goss and Prof. Dr. Neven Budak.

The doctoral thesis is divided into basic chapters:

Maja Cepetić Rogić was born in 1984 in Zagreb. She graduated from high school in Ivanić-Grad in 2002 and enrolled in Art History and Czech Language and Literature at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb. In 2006 she enrolled in a supplementary course in museology at the same faculty. She graduated in Art History and Bohemian Studies in 2008 and in Museology in 2010.

From March 2009, she was employed as a junior researcher/assistant at the Department of Art History, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Rijeka, and up to the end of 2013, actively participated in research for the “Romanesque between the Sava and Drava Rivers and European Culture” Ministry of Science, Education and Sport project, headed by Prof. Dr. V. P. Goss. She enrolled in a doctoral programme in medieval studies at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb in 2009, under the supervision of Prof. Dr. Vladimir. P. Goss and Prof. Dr. Neven Budak, and gained her doctorate in 2015 for the dissertation The Episcopal Estates of Dubrava, Ivanić and Čazma in the 12th and 13th Centuries: Territorial Organisation, Settlements and Monuments. She was elected to the scientific title of scientific associate in the scientific area of the humanities, field of art history, in 2017. Since October 2018 she was been employed as a curator at the Centre for Culture, Čazma Civic Museum.

She was awarded CEEPUS research scholarships in 2008 at the Faculty of Philosophy, Masaryk University in Brno, and in 2011 for Medieval Studies at the Central European University in Budapest. From 2013 to 2016, she was an associate on the university project (UNIRI) “Kvarner Medieval Artistic Heritage”, led by Prof. Dr. Marina Vicelja Matijašić. From March to October 2018, she was a member of the research team of the establishment project of the Croatian Science Foundation, "Ars Lignea Adriatica. The wood-engraving artistic heritage of the northern Adriatic from 1300 to 1600" led by Asst. Prof. Dr. Barbara Španjol Pandelo. Since 2019, she has been a scientific associate on the university project (UNIRI) "Migration, identity and context in medieval Kvarner art", led by Prof. Dr. Marina Vicelja Matijašić.

Her research has centred on topics concerned with art in medieval Slavonia (construction heritage, urbanism, spatial communication) with an emphasis on the estates of the Zagreb episcopacy. She is an active participant in Croatian and international scientific and expert meetings at home and abroad. She is the author of a score of scientific and expert papers.

Her doctoral dissertation is 479 pages long with 1,099 scientific notes and 278 source units and scientific literature citations, 40 maps and 151 illustrations, a bibliography, a biography of the author and abstracts in Croatian and English.

The doctoral dissertation is the result of the author’s interdisciplinary processing of the cultural landscape of Dubrava, Ivanić and Čazma, the first estates of the Zagreb episcopacy. This formed part of a project dealing with the place of culture in the area between the Sava and Drava rivers in the later medieval period in the wider European context. It was the first comprehensive research undertaken regarding the spatial development and organisation of medieval settlements in the episcopal estates in Slavonia. The time frame covered the 12^th and 13^th centuries, from the foundation of the Diocese of Zagreb in the last decade of the 11^th century to the first census of parishes in the diocese conducted in 1334. It also covered earlier and later periods as necessary, since the author’s analysis of communications and archaeological traces in several instances indicated that the use of strategically suitable places for settlements – gentle, sunny slopes close to fertile river plains – stretched back to prehistoric times, and in terms of communication in particular, to classical times. The spatial framework of the research was the area determined by a document issued by King Emeric in 1201. The interdisciplinary approach to the topic was evident in the inclusion of methodology from several scientific disciplines – primarily from the fields of art history and history, but also from cultural anthropology and linguistics. Field research was used to analyse the landscape and territorial organisation, including the location of monuments, a comparative analysis established how artistic forms spread, establishing the visual and traffic communication key points in the area, and an analysis of written sources aimed to identify estates and localities which are mentioned in documents, but which are no longer extant. The author presented her research in five phases. The first included establishing the boundaries of the estates according to the document issued by King Emeric in 1201. The second was a reconstruction of the cultural landscape with the boundaries of the estates – defining the sites of settlements and fortifications, territorial organisation and communications. In the third phase, an analysis of surviving monument heritage was conducted and proposals for potential reconstructions were presented. The fourth phase was an attempt to reconstruct the early medieval cultural landscape in order to establish traces of Early Slavic presence. Since there was a lack of archaeological and historical sources about the period, the author applied methods from cultural anthropology and linguistics according to the ‘holy triangle’ theoretical postulations of Vitomir Belaj, Andrej Pleterski and Radoslav Katičić. In this regard, the commission pointed out that caution was required in linking the patron saints of medieval churches with Slavic deities (for example, St. Michael with Perun, St. Nicholas with Veles, or St. Mary Magdalene with Mokosh), because popular patron saints in medieval times may have had other sources of inspiration, and appeared at quite a distant time interval from paganism. The fifth and final step in the research was the production of maps according to the results of the earlier research phases.

The author analysed sources and came to the conclusion that the original estate granted by the Hungarian King Ladislav to the Zagreb bishop (the record is preserved in the Felician document of 1134), was administratively unified and, during the 12th century, was organised as the province of Dubrava with the bishop at the head and managed in his absence by an appointed vicar-curator (mentioned in 1193). In the 1201 document issued by King Emeric, the estate of Čazma, the south-eastern part of the great Dubrava estate, is mentioned as a separate unit. The author surmises that the reason for this was the development of the medieval settlement of Čazma, and this is borne out by the fact that Bishop Stephen II established the diocesan seat there in 1232, built the cathedral church of the Holy Trinity, and brought Dominicans to the newly-built church of St. Mary Magdalene, which is the most important cultural monument in Čazma today. The author thinks that the church was a joint investment by Duke Koloman and Bishop Stephen II, and that is why the duke was later buried there.

The author presents archival information showing that the duke’s tombstone was broken up in the 19th century and the pieces incorporated in the parish priest’s house and sacristy, therefore any hopes of finding the tombstone intact, which appear from time to time in historiography, are futile. She favours and develops an old theory posited by Juraj Ćuk that before 1232, the diocesan seat was probably in Old Čazma (Ivanska today), but after conflict between Kaptol and Bishop Stephen I, in which the church was burnt down, it was probably closed down and restored in a new location with a new church by Bishop Stephen II. In the 13th century, Čazma was a settlement with the most developed degree of centralisation. The author also indicates the significance of Čazma by analysing traces of construction activity there. Since the first census of parishes in the Diocese of Zagreb (1334) records 14 of the 56 parishes as being within the Čazma estate, in the area of the archdeaconry of the same name, she assumes that the Čazma estate was more heavily populated that the Dubrava and Ivanić estates. The last was situated in a favourable geostrategic position, but the size of its population was affected by the marshland area of Žutica Forest, between Črnac and Lonja, which made habitation impossible in spite of the economic significance of exploiting the forest, particularly for pig-breeding. Ivanić only became a separate unit in the second half of the 13th century, after the Tartar invasion.

The author rightly supports the theory (which is barely represented in historiography) that medieval Ivanić was on the site of present-day Kloštar Ivanić, rather than present-day Ivanić-Grad. Kloštar Ivanić was named after a convent, and the author agrees here with much of recent historiography that it probably belonged to the Cistercian order.

In the second half of the 13^th century, in the area of the former province, three episcopal districts were formed – Ivanić, Čazma and Dubrava, governed by comites terrestris (proved in the sources only for Čazma, but the author reasonably enough assumes that this also applied to the other two districts). The author draws attention to the parallel development of the administration in the neighbouring area of Križevci, which came under the jurisdiction of the king. The parallel development of the royal and episcopal territories can be seen in the fact that the bishop issued privileges to ‘free settlements’ (libera villa, oppidum), at the same as free royal towns were developing intensively. The appearance of estates owned by predialists (minor nobles) in the 13^th century also affected the administrative and economic development, according to which the bishop transferred direct responsibility for the management of feudal villages to these predialists, in whom we can glimpse a nascent nobility. The area of all three diocesan districts came under the province of Križevci in the 14^th century.

The author devotes a great deal of attention to the spatial organisation of the settlements, which was most obvious in Čazma and Ivanić. She assumes that both settlements, along with Dubrava, which is less well preserved, had episcopal fortresses, and developed longitudinally along the main roads, with market places at the crossroads and parish churches on the outskirts. The most prominent period of development was under Bishop Stephen II and Duke Koloman, and this is evident from the number of ecclesiastical buildings, particularly the prominent church of St. Mary Magdalene, “one of the best examples of mature medieval architecture in continental Croatia”.

By adopting a multidisciplinary approach and a clearly thought out, structured research plan, the author has successfully analysed the research topic and answered the research questions, showing that the unified estate of Dubrava, which the Hungarian king granted to the Zagreb bishop when the diocese was founded, was organised administratively as the province of Dubrava in the 12^th century, and divided into three episcopal districts, Ivanić, Čazma and Dubrava, in the 13^th century. Its most intensive period of development was during the episcopacy of Bishop Stephen II and the reign of Duke Koloman, in the second quarter of the 13^th century. This thorough analysis has enabled some corrections to be made to spatial and time coordinates concerning individual localities and monuments. Since this is the first comprehensive research into the medieval spatial development and organisation of the settlements within the episcopal estates, the dissertation makes a valuable contribution to Croatian historiography and may serve as a model for similar research into other estates in the future.

Maja Cepetić Rogić obranila je 17. veljače 2015. na Filozofskom fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu doktorski rad Biskupski posjedi Dubrava, Ivanić i Čazma u 12. i 13. stoljeću: teritorijalna organizacija, naselja i spomenici. U povjerenstvu su bili izv. prof. dr. sc. Zrinka Nikolić Jakus (predsjednica) s Odsjeka za povijest Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, prof. dr. sc. Miljenko Jurković s Odsjeka za povijest umjetnosti Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu i dr. sc. Marija Karbić, znanstvena savjetnica s Hrvatskog instituta za povijest – Podružnica za povijest Slavonije, Srijema i Baranje. Mentori su bili prof. dr. sc. Vladimir Peter Goss i prof. dr. sc. Neven Budak.

Rad je podijeljen na ova osnovna poglavlja:

Maja Cepetić Rogić rođena je 1984. godine u Zagrebu. Opću gimnaziju završila je u Ivanić-Gradu 2002. nakon čega upisuje studij povijesti umjetnosti i češkog jezika i književnosti na Filozofskom fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu. Na istom fakultetu, 2006. godine upisala je dodatni studij muzeologije. Zvanje diplomirane povjesničarke umjetnosti i bohemistice stekla je 2008., a zvanje diplomirane muzeologinje 2010. godine.

Od ožujka 2009. bila je zaposlena kao znanstvena novakinja/asistentica na Odsjeku za povijest umjetnosti Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Rijeci, a od tada je, do kraja 2013., aktivno sudjelovala u istraživanjima projekta MZOS-a „Romanika u međuriječju Save i Drave i europska kultura“ pod vodstvom prof. dr. sc. V. P. Gossa. Na Filozofskom fakultetu Sveučilišta u Zagrebu 2009. upisala je doktorski studij medievistike na kojem pod mentorstvom prof. dr. sc. Vladimira P. Gossa i prof. dr. sc. Nevena Budaka 2015. stječe titulu doktorice humanističkih znanosti s disertacijom „Biskupski posjedi Dubrava, Ivanić i Čazma u 12. i 13. stoljeću: teritorijalna organizacija, naselja i spomenici“. U znanstveno zvanje znanstvene suradnice u znanstvenom području humanističkih znanosti, polje povijesti umjetnosti, izabrana je 2017. godine. Od listopada 2018. zaposlena je na mjestu kustosa u Centru za kulturu, Gradskom muzeju Čazma.

Dobitnica je istraživačkih stipendija (CEEPUS) – 2008. za Filozofski fakultet, Masaryk Universty u Brnu i 2011. za Medieval Studies, Central European University u Budimpešti. Od 2013. do 2016. bila je suradnica na sveučilišnom projektu (UNIRI) „Srednjovjekovna umjetnička baština Kvarnera“, pod vodstvom prof. dr. sc. Marine Vicelja Matijašić. Od ožujka do listopada 2018. bila je članicom istraživačkog tima uspostavnog projekta Hrvatske zaklade za znanost, „Ars Lignea Adriatica. Drvorezbarska umjetnička baština sjevernog Jadrana od 1300. do 1600.“ voditeljice doc. dr. sc. Barbare Španjol Pandelo. Od 2019. znanstvena je suradnica na sveučilišnom projektu (UNIRI) „Migracije, identiteti i kontekst srednjovjekovne umjetnosti Kvarnera“ voditeljice prof. dr. sc. Marine Vicelja Matijašić.

U središtu istraživačkog rada su joj teme iz umjetnosti srednjovjekovne Slavonije (graditeljska baština, urbanizam, prostorna komunikacija) s naglaskom na posjede zagrebačkog biskupa. Aktivno sudjeluje na domaćim i međunarodnim znanstvenim i stručnim skupovima u zemlji i inozemstvu. Autorica je dvadesetak znanstvenih i stručnih radova.

Doktorska disertacija obuhvaća 479 stranica s 1099 znanstvenih bilješki i 278 jedinica izvora i znanstvene literature te 40 karata i 151 sliku, popis literature, životopis te sažetke na hrvatskom i engleskom jeziku.

Tema doktorske disertacije je interdisciplinarna obrada kulturnog krajolika Dubrave, Ivanića i Čazme, prvih posjeda zagrebačkog biskupa, a uklapa se u projekt obrade mjesta kulture Međuriječja Save i Drave u zrelom srednjem vijeku u širem europskom kontekstu. Riječ je o prvom cjelovitom istraživanju prostornog razvoja i organizacije srednjovjekovnih naselja na biskupskim posjedima u Slavoniji. Vremenski okvir je razdoblje 12. i 13. stoljeća – od osnivanja Zagrebačke biskupije u posljednjem desetljeću 11. stoljeća do prvog popisa župa te biskupije 1334. godine, sa zahvatima po potrebi i u raniji i kasniji period s obzirom da pristupnica analizom komunikacija i arheoloških tragova u više slučajeva pokazuje da iskorištavanje strateških pogodnih mjesta za naseljavanje – blage osunčane padine uz plodne riječne nizine – seže i u prapovijest, odnosno, posebno što se tiče komunikacija, antiku. Prostorni okvir istraživanja je područje određeno ispravom kralja Emerika iz 1201. godine. Interdisciplinarni pristup obradi teme vidljiv je u uključivanju metodologije više znanstvenih disciplina – u prvom redu iz polja povijesti umjetnosti i povijesti, ali i kulturne antropologije i lingvistike. Terenskim istraživanjem analizira se pejsažna i teritorijalna organizacija koja uključuje lokaciju spomenika, komparativnu analizu kojom se ustanovljuju putevi širenja umjetničkih oblika, utvrđivanje vizualne i prometne komunikacije ključnih točaka u prostoru kao i analiza pisanih izvora s ciljem prepoznavanja posjeda i lokaliteta navedenih u dokumentima, a koji danas više ne postoje. Pristupnica je istraživanje predstavila u pet faza. Prva uključuje utvrđivanje granica posjeda prema ispravi kralja Emerika iz 1201. godine. Drugu čini rekonstrukcija kulturnog krajolika unutar granica spomenutih posjeda – definiranje točaka naseljenosti i fortifikacije, teritorijalne organizacije i komunikacija. U trećoj se analizira još uvijek postojeća spomenička baština te daju prijedlozi mogućih rekonstrukcija. Četvrta faza je pokušaj rekonstrukcije ranosrednjovjekovnog kulturnog krajolika kako bi se utvrdili tragovi ranoslavenske prisutnosti. Budući da za to razdoblje ne postoje dostatni arheološki i povijesni izvori, pristupnica primjenjuje metode kulturne antropologije i lingvistike prema teorijskim postavkama o „svetim trokutima“ Vitomira Belaja, Andreja Pleterskog i Radoslava Katičića. Pri tome, povjerenstvo ipak upućuje na oprez prilikom povezivanja titulara srednjovjekovnih crkava sa slavenskim božanstvima (npr. Sv. Mihovila s Perunom, sv. Nikole s Velesom, sv. Marije Magdalene s Mokoš), jer su popularni srednjovjekovni titulari mogli imati i drugu inspiraciju, a i javljaju se ipak s priličnim vremenskim odmakom od vremena poganstva. Konačna peti korak u istraživanju je izrada karata prema rezultatima svih gore spomenutih faza istraživanja.

Pristupnica analizom izvora dolazi do zaključka da je izvorno posjed koji je je ugarski kralj Ladislav darovao zagrebačkom biskupu (a spomen mu sačuvan u Felicijanovoj ispravi 1134.) bio upravno jedinstven te tijekom 12. stoljeća bio organiziran kao Dubravska županija s biskupom na čelu u čijem odsustvu upravlja od biskupa imenovan kurijalni župan (spomenut 1193.). U ispravi kralja Emerika iz 1201. spominje se već kao posebna jedinica posjed Čazma, jugoistočni dio velikog dubravskog posjeda. Razlog tomu je po mišljenju pristupnice razvoj srednjovjekovnog naselja Čazma što se potvrđuje time što je biskup Stjepan II. ondje osnovao 1232. zborni kaptol biskupije, sagradio kaptolsku crkvu Sv. Duha i doveo dominikance u novosagrađenu crkvu Sv. Marije Magdalene, danas najznačajniji čazmanski kulturni spomenik. Pristupnica smatra da je ta crkva bila i zajednička investicija hercega Kolomana i biskupa Stjepana II. i da je upravo to razlog što je u njoj kasnije herceg i pokopan.

Pristupnica donosi arhivski podatak da je hercegova nadgrobna ploča u 19. stoljeću razbijena i uzidana u dijelovima u župni dvor i sakristiju te su prema tome uzaludne nade koje se ponekad javljaju u historiografiji o njezinom eventualnom ponovnom naknadnom pronalasku. Pristupnica se priklanja i razrađuje davnu tezu Jurja Ćuka da je i prije 1232. postojao zborni kaptol, s vjerojatnim središtem u tzv. Staroj Čazmi (današnja Ivanska), ali je nakon sukoba Kaptola i biskupa Stjepana I. u kojem je bila spaljena i crkva, vjerojatno ugašen da bi ga potom obnovio na novoj lokaciji, sagradivši i novu crkvu, biskup Stjepan II. Čazma je naselje u 13. stoljeću s najviše razvijenim stupnjem centraliteta. Pristupnica ujedno detaljno ukazuje na značaj Čazme analizom tragova građevinske djelatnosti. S obzirom na to da je u prvom popisu župa zagrebačke biskupije iz 1334. godine na Čazmanskom posjedu 14 od 56 župa na području istoimenog arhiđakonata, pristupnica smatra da je Čazmanski posjed bio naseljeniji u odnosu na dubravski i ivanićki. Potonji je bio smješten na povoljnom geostrateškom položaju, ali je na naseljenost utjecao velik dio močvarnih područja šume Žutice između Črnca i Lonje koji je onemogućavao naseljenost iako je imao gospodarsko značenje zbog iskorištavanje šume, posebno svinjogojstva. Ivanić se zato izdvaja kao posebna cjelina tek u drugoj polovini 13. stoljeća, nakon provale Tatara. Pristupnica s pravom podržava tezu, manje zastupljenu u historiografiji, da je srednjovjekovni Ivanić današnji Kloštar Ivanić, a ne današnji Ivanić-Grad. Kloštar Ivanić ime dobiva po samostanu redovnica za koje pristupnica dijeli mišljenje većeg dijela novije historiografije da su pripadnice cistercitskog reda.

U drugoj polovini 13. stoljeća na prostoru nekadašnje županije nastaju tri biskupska županata – Ivanić, Čazma i Dubrava kojima su na čelu comites terrestris (dokazani u izvorima samo za Čazmu, ali po pristupnici razložno pretpostavljeni i za druga dva područja). Pristupnica upozorava na paralelni razvoj uprave i na susjednom križevačkom području pod nadležnošću kralja. Na paralelu razvoja između kraljevskih i biskupskih teritorija pristupnica ukazuje i tim što je biskup davao povlastice „slobodnim naseljima“ (libera villa, oppidum) u isto vrijeme kad se intenzivno razvijaju slobodni kraljevski gradovi. Na upravni i gospodarski razvoj utječe i pojava predijalnih posjeda u 13. stoljeću čime biskup neposrednu odgovornost nad upravom nad dijelom kmetskih selišta prebacuje na predijalce u kojima možemo vidjeti uvjetno plemstvo. Prostor sva tri biskupska županata je u 14. stoljeću ušao u sastav Križevačke županije.

Veliku pozornost pristupnica poklanja i prostornoj organizaciji naselja koja je najuočljivija u Čazmi i Ivaniću. Pretpostavlja da su oba naselja i slabije sačuvana Dubrava imali biskupski kastrum te da su se razvijali longitudinalno uz glavnu prometnicu s tržnim prostorom na križištu puteva te župnom crkvom na rubnom dijelu. Najistaknutijim razdobljem razvoja smatra vrijeme biskupa Stjepana II. i hercega Kolomana interpretirajući u tom svjetlu više sakralnih gradnji, osobito najistaknutiju crkvu Sv. Marije Magdalene kao „jedan od najboljih primjera zrelosrednjovjekovne arhitekture na prostoru kontinentalne Hrvatske“.

Pristupnica je multidisciplinarnim pristupom kroz vrlo jasno promišljen i strukturiran plan istraživanja uspješno analizirala zadanu temu i odgovorila na istraživačka pitanja dokazavši da je jedinstveni posjed Dubrava, koji je ugarski kralj dodijelio zagrebačkom biskupu prilikom osnivanja biskupije, u 12. stoljeću u upravnom smislu organiziran kao Dubravska županija da bi u 13. stoljeću bio podijeljen u tri biskupska županata Ivanić, Čazmu i Dubravu. Kao najintenzivniji period razvoja prepoznato je razdoblje djelovanja biskupa Stjepana II. i hercega Kolomana u drugoj četvrtini 13. stoljeća. Temeljita analiza dovela je i do korekcija više prostornih i vremenskih odrednica pojedinih lokaliteta i spomenika. S obzirom na to da je riječ o prvom cjelovitom istraživanju srednjovjekovnoga prostornog razvoja i organizacije naselja na biskupskim posjedima, ova je disertacija vrijedan doprinos hrvatskoj historiografiji i moći će poslužiti i kao model za slična buduća istraživanja drugih posjeda.