APA 6th Edition Kliškić, D. (2006). Ostava sitnog srebrnog srednjovjekovnog novca iz špilje Turska peć iznad Zeljovića (Sumpetar) kod Dugog Rata. Vjesnik za arheologiju i povijest dalmatinsku, 99 (1), 329-367. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/8334
MLA 8th Edition Kliškić, Damir. "Ostava sitnog srebrnog srednjovjekovnog novca iz špilje Turska peć iznad Zeljovića (Sumpetar) kod Dugog Rata." Vjesnik za arheologiju i povijest dalmatinsku, vol. 99, br. 1, 2006, str. 329-367. https://hrcak.srce.hr/8334. Citirano 16.10.2019.
Chicago 17th Edition Kliškić, Damir. "Ostava sitnog srebrnog srednjovjekovnog novca iz špilje Turska peć iznad Zeljovića (Sumpetar) kod Dugog Rata." Vjesnik za arheologiju i povijest dalmatinsku 99, br. 1 (2006): 329-367. https://hrcak.srce.hr/8334
Harvard Kliškić, D. (2006). 'Ostava sitnog srebrnog srednjovjekovnog novca iz špilje Turska peć iznad Zeljovića (Sumpetar) kod Dugog Rata', Vjesnik za arheologiju i povijest dalmatinsku, 99(1), str. 329-367. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/8334 (Datum pristupa: 16.10.2019.)
Vancouver Kliškić D. Ostava sitnog srebrnog srednjovjekovnog novca iz špilje Turska peć iznad Zeljovića (Sumpetar) kod Dugog Rata. Vjesnik za arheologiju i povijest dalmatinsku [Internet]. 2006 [pristupljeno 16.10.2019.];99(1):329-367. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/8334
IEEE D. Kliškić, "Ostava sitnog srebrnog srednjovjekovnog novca iz špilje Turska peć iznad Zeljovića (Sumpetar) kod Dugog Rata", Vjesnik za arheologiju i povijest dalmatinsku, vol.99, br. 1, str. 329-367, 2006. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/8334. [Citirano: 16.10.2019.]
Sažetak Turska Peć cave is situated above the hamlet of Zeljovići at the height of about 355 metres abovesea level, above present-day village of Sumpetar, Dugi Rat County (picture 1). In 1989 a smaller scaleresearch has been made in that object. The excavated material showed that this was a prehistoric sitethat had been occupied in early and late Neolithic.In the year of 2003 the Archaeological Museum in Split started with the systematic archaeologicalresearch in this cave, and held two campaigns (2003 and 2005). At first two coins, and later 107 coinswere found in the last days of the research of the first campaign, in the soil from the eastern profile ofthe Probe 1 (picture 5). Substantial devastations happened in 2004 in the cave, especially in the Probe1 at the east side where in January 2005 the following 107 coins were found in the collapsed parts ofthe probe. So far we can state that a hoard exists in the Turska peć cave and it consist of 216 coins.154 examples have been typologically analysed. The rest of the examples were so glued togetherthat they could not be separated. The hoard of Turska peć consists of the coins of the cities of Verona– 1 example, Venice – 8 examples and Split – 145 examples (graph 1).The earliest examples coming from this hoard (cat. no. 1-8) belong to the Venetian silver denarithat were minted in Venice at the period of Dukes Orio Malipiero (1178 – 1192) and Enrico Dandolo(1192 – 1205). Other examples of the coins belonging to these dukes come from the hoards fromČiovo, Trilj and Nerežišća.Next in time-scale is a silver denar of the city of Verona (cat. no. 9). These coins were mintedduring the rule of the emperor Friedrich II of Schwabia (1218 – 1250). Other examples of these coinswere preserved in the hoards from Trilj and Nerežišća.The largest number of remaining coins belongs to the ones minted in Split (cat. no. 10 -154).Typological analysis is based upon the typology created by G. Stockert (graph 2).TYPE II, GROUP B:98 examples (67% of the total sum) of the remaining coins from Split belong to this group. Accordingto the reverse of the coins of this group, I have divided them into two variants. The first variantconsists of 66 examples (cat. no. 10 – 75). The second variant consists of 30 examples (cat. no. 76– 107). Examples of the coins of B group were found in hoards on Čiovo, in Trilj and Nerežišća.TYPE II, GROUP C:This group is represented within our hoard with 9 examples (cat. no. 108 – 116), that is 6 % of the totalsum. Analogies have been preserved in the hoards from Čiovo and Nerežišća.TYPE II, GROUP D:Only 3 examples from our hoard belong to this group that is only 2% out of total sum. It is interestingthat each example represents different variant within this group (cat. no. 117 – 119). As analogiesexamples from the hoards from Čiovo and Nerežišća should be mentioned.TYPE II, GROUP E:This group is represented by 3 examples from our hoard, or 2% of the total sum (cat. no. 120 -122).Similar examples have been found in the hoards from Čiovo and Nerežišća.TYPE II, GROUP F:This group is represented with 8 examples divided into two variants that make 6% of the total sum(cat. no. 123 – 130). The analogous examples come from the hoards from Žažvić near Skradin andfrom Čiovo and Nerežišća. TYPE II, GROUP G:Group G is represented in our hoard with 24 examples divided into two variants, that makes 17% ofthe total sum (cat. no. 131 – 154). The analogous examples to this group were found in the hoardsfrom Žažvić near Skradin, and from Čiovo and Nerežišća.Information about the earliest distribution and minting of the Split medieval coins of type I areconnected to the fist half of the 13th century (1237 – 1247), according to the archives used by G.Novak in his book „The History of Split“. The archive documents from the same source confirm theminting of Split coins of type I also in the period from 1258 to 1266.According to the majority of the authors, coins of type II started to be minted by the end of the13th century. At the same time type I was still minted and used. Furthermore, the authors believethat the coins of type III and IV appeared in Split at the beginning of the 14th century. None of theauthors states the opinion whether the type II coins were still minted in that period, but accordingto the hoards from Trilj and Nerežišća this type was certainly used as a legal tender. The examples ofthe coins of type I-II have been better preserved compared to the types III – IV. Therefore, I believethat coins of the type I-II was simultaneously minted with the types III-IV in Split in the beginning ofthe 14th century. Split statute dates from that period (1312) and it states through numerous laws theusage of coins that were minted in Split.From 1327 to 1357 Split was under the Venetian rule. Most of the authors believe that coins oftype V were minted in that period. I believe that, because of the number of preserved coins of type V,at that period as far as Split denari are concerned, types I-II,V were most commonly used. Hoards fromTrilj and Nerežišća lead to that conclusion. Present-day situation leads to the belief that Split denariwere minted in Split at that time of Venetian government, and not only coins of type V.According to the records of the Great Council assembly for the 1357 – 1384 period, Split denariare mentioned again, therefore they were minted in Split. I believe this is also type II in question,but we also have to take into consideration types I, III – V. According to the aforementioned, coins oftype II were probably minted in Split as late as the second half of the 14th century. This situation isconfirmed by hoards from Trilj and Nerežišća.The authors agree that the next money to be minted in Split was the one belonging to DukeHrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić who had minted several emissions of his coinage from 1403 to 1413. Theauthors do not state that any kind of coinage was minted between 1357 and 1403. Which coinswere used at that period as a legal tender? I am inclined to believe that those were the coins of typeI-V, especially type I-II and V that could have been minted in Split until the end of the 14th and thebeginning of 15th century. The existing archive material that mentions the same supports this.Duke Hrvoje Vukčić Hrvatinić minted his coins in Split from 1403 to 1413 (types VI-VIII). I aminclined to believe that besides Hrvoje’s coins, the same coins of type I-V were minted, especially typeI-II and V.In the year of 1420 Split was under the Venetian rule. Most of the authors believe that Venicestarted minting types IX-X in Venice only in 1491. No one is asking question about which coinswere minted, or which were used until 1491. It is important to note that the county of Split askedVenice for permission to mint lower value coins (probably split denari) because of the shortage ofthe same coins. Venetian government had decided in 1491, 1497 and 1518 to allow minting of Splitcoins – bagatin in Split itself. So which coins of lower value were used in Split until 1491 and slowlydisappeared from circulation? The idea that it were Split denary of type I-V suggests itself. If they werenot minted in Split at that time, they were definitely used as a legal tender until 1491.According to the historic data the most probable scenario is that the depositing of the coinshappened because of some danger, most probably war. Time intervals in which depositing couldhave happened are as follows: 1252; 1287-1290; 1322-1327; 1387-1390; 1401-1402; 1411-1412; 1416-1420.We can conclude that our hoard from Turska peć was probably deposited in the ground between 1252and 1491. The exact time when that happened we cannot say with certainty.