Novo Brdo Fortifications

REPUBLI^KI ZAVOD ZA ZA[TITU SPOMENIKA KULTURE BEOGRAD

STUDIJE I MONOGRAFIJE 20

INSTITUTE FOR THE PROTECTION OF CULTURAL MONUMENTS OF SERBIA

STUDIES AND MONOGRAPHS 20

Marko POPOVI]

Gordana SIMI]

UTVR}EYA

IZDAVA^

ZA IZDAVAÂ

UREDNIK

RECENZENTI

LEKTOR I KOREKTOR

PREVOD

CRTE@I

OBRADA CRTE@A

LIKOVNO I GRAFI^KO URE\EWE

[TAMPA

TIRA@

Republi~ki zavod za za{titu spomenika kulture Beograd

Beograd, Radoslava Gruji}a 11

www.heritage.gov.rs

Mirjana Andri}

Ivana Prodanovi}-Rankovi}

prof. Branislav Todi}, dr Nevena Debqovi} Risti}

dr Marina Spasojevi}

Verica Risti}

Gordana Simi}

Svetlana Vukadinovi}

Danijela Paracki i D_SIGN, Beograd

BiroGraf Comp doo, Zemun

500 primeraka

ISBN 978-86-6299-038-9

Marko POPOVI]

Gordana SIMI]

Fortifications of the Medieval Town

SREDYOVEKOVNOG GRADA

NOVOG BRDA

of NOVO BRDO

Belgrade Beograd 2020

Beograd 2020

Marko POPOVI]

Gordana SIMI]

UTVR}EYA

SREDYOVEKOVNOG GRADA

NOVOG BRDA

IZDAVA^

ZA IZDAVAÂ

UREDNIK

RECENZENTI

LEKTOR I KOREKTOR

PREVOD

CRTE@I

OBRADA CRTE@A

LIKOVNO I GRAFI^KO URE\EWE

[TAMPA

TIRA@

Republi~ki zavod za za{titu spomenika kulture Beograd

Beograd, Radoslava Gruji}a 11

www.heritage.gov.rs

Mirjana Andri}


prof. Branislav Todi}, dr Nevena Debqovi} Risti}


Verica Risti}

Gordana Simi}


Danijela Paracki i D_SIGN, Beograd


500 primeraka

ISBN 978-86-6299-038-9

Marko POPOVI]

Gordana SIMI]

Fortifications of the Medieval Town

of NOVO BRDO

Belgrade 2020

Contents

12 |

16 |

24 |

44 |

46 |

54 |

64 |

80 |

88 |

92 |

120 |

172 |

172 |

196 |

214 |

226 |

226 |

242 |

270 |

277 |

278 |

304 |

INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS

GEOGRAPHIC POSITION AND THE TOPOGRAPHY OF NOVO BRDO

FOUNDING AND DEVELOPMENT OF NOVO BRDO IN THE 14 th AND THE 15 th CENTURIES

SURVEYS OF THE FORTIFICATIONS OF NOVO BRDO CONDUCTED TO DATE

Surveys 1952–1957

2015 and 2016 explorations

STRATIGRAPHYOF THE CULTURAL LAYERS AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS

Archaeological findings

CASTLE OF THE TOWN OF NOVO BRDO (THE UPPER TOWN)

Fortifications of the Castle – Towers and Ramparts

Buildings in the Castle

LOWER TOWN – FORTIFIED SECTION OF THE TOWN'S SETTLEMENT

Fortifications of the Lower Town

Buildings in the Lower Town

THE SUBURB

FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

Construction phases and functions of different sections of Novo Brdo fortress

Place of Novo Brdo fortress in the development of fortifications in medieval Serbia

BIBLIOGRAPHY

APPENDICES

G. Simi}, S. Radovanovi}, Protection Methods and Techniques of the Novo Brdo Castle

V. Biki}, Pottery from Novo Brdo – View at the pottery technology, use and style in the late Middle Ages

Sadr\aj

11 |

17 |

25 |

45 |

47 |

55 |

65 |

79 |

89 |

93 |

119 |

173 |

173 |

199 |

215 |

227 |

227 |

243 |

270 |

277 |

279 |

305 |

UVODNA RAZMATRAWA

GEOGRAFSKI POLO@AJ I TOPOGRAFIJA NOVOG BRDA

NASTANAK I RAZVOJ NOVOG BRDA U 14. I 15. VEKU

DOSADA[WA ISTRA@IVAWA NOVOBRDSKIH UTVR\EWA

Istraìvawa 1952–1957. godine

Istraìvawa 2015–2016. godine

STRATIGRAFIJA KULTURNIH SLOJEVA I ARHEOLO[KI NALAZI

Arheolo{ki nalazi

ZAMAK GRADA NOVOG BRDA (Gorwi grad)

Fortifikacije Zamka – kule i bedemi

Gra|evine u Zamku

DOWI GRAD – UTVR\ENI DEO GRADSKOG NASEQA

Fortifikacije Doweg grada

Gra|evine u Dowem gradu

PODGRA\E

ZAKQU^NA RAZMATRAWA

Etape gra|ewa i funkcije delova utvr|ewa Novog Brda

Mesto novobrdskog utvr|ewa u razvoju fortifikacija sredwovekovne Srbije

BIBLIOGRAFIJA

PRILOZI

G. Simi}, S. Radovanovi}, Metode i tehnike za{tite zamka Novog Brda

V. Biki}, Keramika Novog Brda – pogled na tehnologiju, upotrebu i stil keramike u kasnom sredwem veku

EDITOR

EDITOR IN CHIEF

EDITOR

REVIEWERS

READER AND PROOF/READER

TRANSLATOR

DRAWING CREDITS

DRAWINGS PROCESSING

GRAPHIC DESIGN & PREPRESS

PRINTED BY

NUMBER OF COPIES

Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments of Serbia

Belgrade, Radoslava Gruji}a 11

www.heritage.gov.rs

Mirjana Andri}


prof. Branislav Todi}, dr Nevena Debljovi} Risti}


Verica Risti}

Gordana Simi}


Danijela Paracki & D_SIGN, Belgrade


500

[tampawe ove kwige omogu}ilo je

Ministarstvo kulture i informisawa Republike Srbije

This Publication is funded by

the Ministry of Culture and Information of the Republic of Serbia

11

Uvodna razmatraya

NASTANAK I RAZVOJ SREDWOVEKOVNIH GRADOVA, KAO URBANIH

naseobina na podru~ju srpskih zemaqa predstavqao je relativno poznu pojavu.

U vremenu kada je nastajala dràva Nemawi}a, tokom druge polovine 12. veka,

pa i kasnije, u prvim decenijama 13. veka, u sredi{wim, odnosno mati~nim

srpskim oblastima nije bilo naseqa urbanog tipa. Trgovi kao mesta razmene

dobara jo{ uvek su bili privremenog karaktera i bez stalnih naseobina. Ni uz

tvr|ave, kao prevashodno vojna upori{ta, u tom razdobqu nema tragova stalnih

civilnih naseobina. 1 Tek od sredine 13. veka zapo~iwu prvi jasni procesi urbanizacije,

koji su bili podstaknuti razvojem intenzivnije eksploatacije

rudnika i brìm razvojem trgovine, posebno sa gradovima na Jadranskom primorju.

Pored gradova koji su nastajali uz upravna sredi{ta, zna~ajne urbane

aglomeracije obrazovale su se u rudarskim oblastima, kao i uz va`ne komunikacije.

Neki od tih gradova bili su u celini ili samo delimi~no utvr|eni, ali

postojale su i trgova~ke naseobine bez ikakvih fortifikacija. Za prou~avawe

procesa urbanizacije sredi{wih srpskih oblasti svakako se na prvom mestu nalazi

Novo Brdo, sigurno najve}i i najzna~ajniji srpski sredwovekovni grad, 2

koji }e biti tema na{ih daqih razmatrawa.

Razvoj urbanih sredi{ta u unutra{wosti srpskih zemaqa, kasnije posvedo-

~en primerima Beograda i Smedereva, zapo~iwe i najboqe se sagledava upravo

na primeru Novog Brda. Wegov nastanak i razvoj upe~atqivo je svedo~anstvo i

simbol ekonomskog prosperiteta sredwovekovne Srbije, wene sloène dru{tvene

strukture i otvorenosti prema evropskim uticajima. Bogati rudnici, iz kojih

se dobijalo najfinije srebro, veoma ceweno u tada{wem svetu, obezbe|ivali

su ne samo napredak grada ve} su donosili i zna~ajne prihode vladaru. U nemirnim

vremenima turskih osvajawa na novobrdskom srebru je u dobroj meri

po~ivao i opstanak dràve. Bogatstvo Novog Brda, koje je bilo nadaleko poznato,

ostavqalo je snaàn utisak na savremenike. Za Konstantina Filozofa, biografa

despota Stefana Lazarevi}a, Novo Brdo je bilo „grad srebreni i u istinu

1 Popovi} 1999, 301–306.

2 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004

(sa starijom literaturom).

EDITOR

EDITOR IN CHIEF

EDITOR

REVIEWERS

READER AND PROOF/READER

TRANSLATOR

DRAWING CREDITS

DRAWINGS PROCESSING

GRAPHIC DESIGN & PREPRESS

PRINTED BY

NUMBER OF COPIES

Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments of Serbia

Belgrade, Radoslava Gruji}a 11

www.heritage.gov.rs

Mirjana Andri}


prof. Branislav Todi}, dr Nevena Debljovi} Risti}


Verica Risti}

Gordana Simi}


Danijela Paracki & D_SIGN, Belgrade


500

[tampawe ove kwige omogu}ilo je

Ministarstvo kulture i informisawa Republike Srbije

This Publication is funded by

the Ministry of Culture and Information of the Republic of Serbia

11

Uvodna razmatraya

NASTANAK I RAZVOJ SREDWOVEKOVNIH GRADOVA, KAO URBANIH

naseobina na podru~ju srpskih zemaqa predstavqao je relativno poznu pojavu.

U vremenu kada je nastajala dràva Nemawi}a, tokom druge polovine 12. veka,

pa i kasnije, u prvim decenijama 13. veka, u sredi{wim, odnosno mati~nim

srpskim oblastima nije bilo naseqa urbanog tipa. Trgovi kao mesta razmene

dobara jo{ uvek su bili privremenog karaktera i bez stalnih naseobina. Ni uz

tvr|ave, kao prevashodno vojna upori{ta, u tom razdobqu nema tragova stalnih

civilnih naseobina. 1 Tek od sredine 13. veka zapo~iwu prvi jasni procesi urbanizacije,

koji su bili podstaknuti razvojem intenzivnije eksploatacije

rudnika i brìm razvojem trgovine, posebno sa gradovima na Jadranskom primorju.

Pored gradova koji su nastajali uz upravna sredi{ta, zna~ajne urbane

aglomeracije obrazovale su se u rudarskim oblastima, kao i uz va`ne komunikacije.

Neki od tih gradova bili su u celini ili samo delimi~no utvr|eni, ali

postojale su i trgova~ke naseobine bez ikakvih fortifikacija. Za prou~avawe

procesa urbanizacije sredi{wih srpskih oblasti svakako se na prvom mestu nalazi

Novo Brdo, sigurno najve}i i najzna~ajniji srpski sredwovekovni grad, 2

koji }e biti tema na{ih daqih razmatrawa.

Razvoj urbanih sredi{ta u unutra{wosti srpskih zemaqa, kasnije posvedo-

~en primerima Beograda i Smedereva, zapo~iwe i najboqe se sagledava upravo

na primeru Novog Brda. Wegov nastanak i razvoj upe~atqivo je svedo~anstvo i

simbol ekonomskog prosperiteta sredwovekovne Srbije, wene sloène dru{tvene

strukture i otvorenosti prema evropskim uticajima. Bogati rudnici, iz kojih

se dobijalo najfinije srebro, veoma ceweno u tada{wem svetu, obezbe|ivali

su ne samo napredak grada ve} su donosili i zna~ajne prihode vladaru. U nemirnim

vremenima turskih osvajawa na novobrdskom srebru je u dobroj meri

po~ivao i opstanak dràve. Bogatstvo Novog Brda, koje je bilo nadaleko poznato,

ostavqalo je snaàn utisak na savremenike. Za Konstantina Filozofa, biografa

despota Stefana Lazarevi}a, Novo Brdo je bilo „grad srebreni i u istinu

1 Popovi} 1999, 301–306.



12

Introductory considerations

1 Popovi} 1999, 301–306.


(with older literature).

THE FOUNDING AND DEVELOPMENT OF MEDIEVAL TOWNS, AS WELL AS

urban settlements on the territory of the Serbian lands constituted a relatively late

phenomenon. At the time when the state of the Nemanides was being created, during

the second half of the 12 th century, and even later in the first decades of the 13 th

century, there were no settlements of the urban type in the native Serbian regions.

Market squares as the places where the goods were exchanged still had a temporary

character and had no permanent settlements to go along. Not even alongside fortifications,

as primarily military forts, there are any traces of permanent civil settlements

during this period. 1 It was only from the middle of the 13 th century that first

clear urbanisation processes started to take place and these were instigated by the

development of more intensive exploitation of mines and faster development of

trade, especially with the towns and cities in the coastal areas by the Adriatic Sea.

In addition to the towns that were created beside administrative seats, significant

urban agglomerations were also created in the mining areas, as well as next to important

communication lines. Some of these towns were entirely or only partially

fortified, but there were also trading settlements with no fortifications. For the purpose

of studying the urbanisation process related to the central Serbian areas, the

prime position is certainly held by Novo Brdo, by all accounts the biggest and the

most important Serbian medieval town 2 , which will be the subject of our further

considerations.

The development of urban centres in the interior of the Serbian lands, later

reflected also in the examples of Belgrade and Smederevo, started at and may be

best viewed precisely in the example of Novo Brdo. Its creation and development

constitute a striking testimony and symbol of the economic prosperity of medieval

Serbia, its complex social structure and openness towards the European influences.

The rich mines that provided the finest silver, very much valued in the then world,

ensured not only the progress of the town, but also they brought significant income

for the ruler. In the turbulent times of the Ottoman conquests, the survival of the

UTVR}EYA SREDYOVEKOVNOG GRADA NOVOG BRDA 13

Sl. 1. Srpska despotovina u prvoj polovini 15. veka (prema N. [uleti}u)

Fig. 1. Serbian despotate in the first half of the 15 th century (according to N. [uleti})

14

FORTIFICATIONS OF THE MEDIEVAL TOWN OF NOVO BRDO

state rested to a large extent on the silver of Novo Brdo. The riches of Novo Brdo,

that was known far and wide, made a powerful impression on its contemporaries.

For Constantine of Kostenets, the biographer of Despot Stefan Lazarevi}, Novo Brdo

was “the town of silver and indeed of gold.” 3 The same impression of the town was

shared a few decades later by Constantine of Ostravica who called it “mount of silver

and gold.” 4 The admiration towards the wealth of Novo Brdo was also expressed by

Byzantine chronicler Doukas, calling it “the mother of all cities,” while his contemporary

Critobulus, also a Greek, emphasises in particular the wealth of Novo Brdo in

silver and gold. 5 A French traveller from Burgundy, Bertrandon de la Broquiere, who

passed through Serbian in 1433, also recorded an account saying that “the despot

has a town called Novo Brdo … (where) there is a mine of gold and silver together and

each year more than 200,000 ducats are excavated there and if it hadn’t been for

that I believe he would have already been exiled from his Serbia.” 6

Disproportionate to the significance which Novo Brdo used to have, the life of

this medieval town, observed in its entirety, has remained insufficiently known and

only partially studied. The preserved original historic materials, which are almost

solely limited to the documents from the coastal archives, in Dubrovnik (Ragusa) and

Kotor, sheds light primarily on the activities of the residents of Novo Brdo, most often

foreigners, coming from these two cities. There is significantly less data, mostly

indirect ones, on the local Serbian population that constituted the majority of the

inhabitants of Novo Brdo. With the exception of the well-known Law on Mines of

Despot Stefan, in which there is a section of the town statute of Novo Brdo, 7 there are

almost no preserved Serbian original materials about this town. Despite the fact that

the available data, exceptionally uneven, do not allow for a possibility to look at the

development of Novo Brdo during the 14 th and the 15 th centuries in its entirety, they

still do provide a basic picture of the town that will be added upon by the future

surveys. On this occasion, our attention will be focused on the findings concerning

the defence system of this town, its Castle, ramparts and towers.

3 @itije despota Stefana 1989, 98.

4 Konstantin iz Ostrovice 1986, 121.

5 Jire~ek, Radoni} 1978, 406.

6 B. de la Brokijer, 133.

7 Radoj~i} 1962, 51–57;

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 162–177

(S. ]irkovi}).


zlatni“. 3 Isti doìvqaj grada imao je i nekoliko decenija kasnije Konstantin

iz Ostrovice, koji ga naziva „gora srebrena i zlatna“. 4 Divqewe bogatstvu

Novog Brda iskazuje i vizantijski hroni~ar Duka, nazivaju}i ga „majkom gradova“,

a wegov savremenik Kritovul, tako|e Grk, posebno isti~e bogatstvo Novog

Brda u srebru i zlatu. 5 Francuski putnik iz Burgundije, Bertrandon de la

Brokijer (Bertrandon de la Broquiere), koji je kroz Srbiju pro{ao 1433. godine,

tako|e je zabeleìo kazivawe kako „despot ima jedan grad zvani Novo Brdo …

(gde) postoji rudnik zlata i srebra zajedno i svake godine se iskopa vi{e od

200.000 dukata, a da nije toga verujem da bi ve} bio izgnan iz svoje Srbije.“ 6

Nesrazmerno zna~aju koje je Novo Brdo nekada imalo, ìvot tog sredwovekovnog

grada, posmatran u celini, ostao je nedovoqno poznat i samo delimi~no

prou~en. Sa~uvana izvorna istorijska gra|a, koja je gotovo iskqu~ivo ograni-

~ena na dokumenta iz primorskih arhiva, Dubrovnika i Kotora, osvetqava na

prvom mestu delovawe novobrdskih ìteqa, naj~e{}e stranaca, poreklom iz

ovih gradova. O lokalnom srpskom stanovni{tvu, koje je ~inilo ve}inu gra|ana

Novog Brda, raspolaè se sa znatno mawe podataka, i to uglavnom posrednih.

Sa izuzetkom poznatog Zakona o rudnicima despota Stefana, u kome se nalazi

i deo novobrdskog gradskog statuta, 7 o ovom gradu gotovo da i nema sa~uvane

srpske izvorne gra|e. Uprkos ~iwenici da raspoloìvi izvori, izrazito neujedna~eni,

za sada ne pruàju mogu}nost da se u celini sagleda razvoj Novog

Brda tokom 14. i 15. veka, oni ipak daju osnovnu sliku grada, koju }e dopuwavati

budu}a istraìvawa. Ovom prilikom na{a pa`wa bi}e usmerena na saznawa

o sistemu odbrane ovog grada, wegovom Zamku, bedemima i kulama.



5 Jire~ek, Radoni} 1978, 406.

6 Brokijer 1950, 133.

7 Radoj~i} 1962, 51–57;

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 162–177

(S. ]irkovi}).

16

Geographic Position

and the Topography of Novo Brdo

8 Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955, 256.

9 Cviji} 1911, 1124–1125.

NOVO BRDO IS LOCATED IN THE MOUNTAINOUS REGION OF SOUTH SERBIA,

between the heights of Kopaonik and Skopska Crna Gora mountains, east of Kosovo

Polje, in a sparsely populated area and far from the then main roads. The medieval

town lay on top of Palaeozoic limestone and was partially built from that same limestone

quarried in the vicinity. As a building material, limestone is good and has kept

to the present days, unlike the built-in andesite which is crumbly. Dark red breccia

was used for the corner stones of walls and gates. The andesite and breccia were

quarried in Kiseli potok below the town, while tufa was brought from Prilepni~ka

Reka. 8

The basic economic resource, which in fact led to the formation of the town,

constituted of rich deposits of lead and particularly silver ores. The traces of the

mining of these ores appear to go back to the period of late Antiquity. In the middle

of this old mining region, there is Velika Planina, and farther towards the west the

high plateau of Novo Brdo itself. This is, generally speaking, an area at the altitude

of 1000–1300 m that extends to Janjevo in the south and in the west to the very

edge of the field of Kosovo above Gra~anica. In the north, this spacious surface is

cut through by the course of the Kriva Reka, a left tributary of the Bini~ka Morava.

According to the observations of J. Cviji}, who spent some time here at the beginning

of the 20 th century, “Velika Planina descends towards the surfaces from which small

hillocks rise among which the highest and the sharpest is Novo Brdo itself, consisting

of layers of grey sturdy limestone, with the north-south direction. Under the range

towards the south, there is large lowland of Novo Brdo: slopes between which there

are deep valleys, with no proper forest, only shrubs, predominantly oak, or barren

land.” 9 In his detailed analysis of the ore-bearing area, he recorded: The ores appear

in a series of rocks especially in the salbands between the serpentine and the limestone

and in the sturdy grey limestone that is characterised by numerous hollows; in

these there are extracted calcite cores and jacks. There are some meagre ore veins

also in mica-bearing sandstones and shale claystones with serpentine. The ore veins

17

Geografski polo\aj

i topografija Novog Brda

NOVO BRDO SE NALAZI U PLANINSKOM PREDELU JU@NE SRBIJE, IZME\U

pobr|a Kopaonika i Skopske Crne Gore, isto~no od Kosova poqa, u slabo naseqenoj

oblasti i daleko od onovremenih glavnih puteva. Sredwovekovni grad leào

je na paleozojskom kre~waku, a delom je i izgra|en od istog kre~waka va|enog

u blizini. Kao gra|evinski materijal, kre~wak je dobar i sa~uvao se do danas,

nasuprot ugra|enom andezitu, koji je tro{an. Za ivi~wake zidova i kapija upotrebqena

je mrkocrvena bre~a. Andezit i bre~a su va|eni u Kiselom potoku ispod

grada, a bigar (siga) u Prilepni~koj reci. 8

Osnovni ekonomski resurs, koji je i uslovio nastanak sredwovekovnog grada,

predstavqale su bogate naslage olovne i posebno srebrne rude, ~iji tragovi

eksploatacije seù, izgleda, do razdobqa kasne antike. U sredi{tu ove stare rudarske

oblasti nalazi se Velika planina, a daqe prema zapadu visoka zaravan

samog Novog Brda. U pitawu je uop{teno posmatrano povr{ na nadmorskoj visini

1000–1300 m, koja se pruà na jugu do Jaweva, a na zapadu do ivice Kosova

poqa iznad Gra~anice. Na severu ovu prostranu povr{ preseca tok Krive reke,

leve pritoke Bini~ke Morave. Prema zapaàwima J. Cviji}a, koji je ovde boravio

po~etkom 20. veka, „Velika Planina se spu{ta na povr{i sa kojih se izdiù

male glavice me|u kojima je najvi{a i najo{trija samo Novo Brdo, sastavqena

od slojeva sivog jedrog kre~waka, pravca Sever–Jug. Ispod venca je prema jugu

velika podgorina Novog Brda: kose izme|u kojih su duboke doline, nema prave

gore, ve} samo `buwe, poglavito hrastovo, ili golet.“ 9 U svojoj detaqnoj analizi

rudonosnog podru~ja on je zabeleìo: „Rude se javqaju u fri{olikoj seriji

stena pogotovu na salbandama izme|u serpentiona i kre~waka i u jedrom sivom

kre~waku, koji se odlikuje mnogobrojnim {upqinama; U ovima su izlu~ene kore

i gnezda od kalcita. Neznatnih rudnih ìca ima i u liskunovitim pe{~arima

i {kriqastim glincima sa serpentinom. Rudne ìce su paralelne sa 8 Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955, 256.

slojevima, i zato svi rudarski kopovi imaju pravac severozapad – jugoistok i

9 Cviji} 1911, 1124–1125.

sever-severozapad – jug-jugoistok.“ 10 10 Isto.

18

10 Ibid.

11 [krivani} 1974, 28.

12 Ibid., 40–42.

13 Ibid., 95.

14 In the earlier documentation, this main

section of Novo Brdo fortification was

denominated using the term Upper Town,

which may be considered a technical name.

After the surveying conducted in

2015–2016, when this part of the

fortification was completely explored,

it was noticed that in functional terms

this was a castle as the centre of the city’s

fortifications and a fortified residential

complex and thus in our further

considerations this terms is going to be

used exclusively.

15 ]irkovi}, Koji}-Kova~evi}, ]uk 2002,

41–42; Savi} 1954–1955, 283–287.


are parallel to the layers and for this reason all mining pits follow the direction

northwest/southeast and north-northwest/south-southeast. 10

The mining of the ores and the urbanisation of the area were accompanied by

the development of a new and dispersed road network, as was the case with other

mining areas of the medieval Serbian lands. Judging by all, the main roads led towards

the west. From Novo Brdo, via Gra~anica, the road led to Kosovo Polje. From there,

it continued towards the north, via Zve~an and Banjska, in the direction of Bosnia.

Another road led from Kosovo via Polimlje (the Lim river valley) to Prijepolje, that

is, to Mile{eva (Monastery), from where it went on towards Dubrovnik (Ragusa). It

was through Polimlje that two main roads led towards the coastal regions (Primorje

– the Littoral), one via Nik{i} and Jezero, and the other one via Gora`de and Fo~a. 11

Taking into account the significance of the connections between Novo Brdo and the

Littoral, these roads certainly had a very high importance. According to the available

data, it may be calculated that in summer months it was possible to get from

Novo Brdo to the City of Saint Blaise, the main destination on the Adriatic coast, in

around seven days, while in winter, on account of the mountainous relief and snowedin

passes, it would take some 12 to 15 days to cover this same distance. 12 There was

also a third road which led from Gra~anica via Prizren to Skadar (Shkodër). East of

Novo Brdo, there used to be Vranjski put (Vranje road), mentioned in the rulers’

charters, that led from Kosovo via Novo Brdo and Konculski gorge towards Vranje.

The charter of Prince Lazar for the monastery of Ravanica also mentions Saski put

(Saxon road), which is presumed to have led along the valley of the Bini~ka Morava

where it joined Vranjski put and in the west Velika cesta (Big road) which went from

Kosovo farther towards Skopje. 13 In addition to these roads of broader significance,

the area around Novo Brdo was also covered in roads of local character that linked

the town with the mines and the areas where the ore was processed.

The urban zone of the complex of Novo Brdo incorporated a fortification that

had two specifically defended sections. On the top of a flat height there used to be

a Castle or a citadel as the stronghold of the last line of defence, 14 while on its west

side there was the so-called Lower Town that included a more significant section of

the fortified urban settlement. The wide area on the east side included Podgra|e

(Suburb), which was also incorporated into the town’s broader defence system. It

may be presumed that it was surrounded by a feebler solidly built rampart and

probably also with a land dyke with palisades, which will be dealt with later. In addition,

Novo Brdo’s urban complex also includes remains of older mines in the direct

proximity of the town, as well as a number of smaller residential insulae scattered

across the surroundings. Numerous remains of older mining works may be found

throughout the area east of the town. Only on the southwest slopes of Velika planina

and in the areas at its foot, over 630 mining pits of different sizes have been recorded.

In the closer or more distant surroundings of the town there are many gravel pits,

while the main ones were in Trni~evac, Krnjevska reka and under Le{tar. Numerous

toponyms have survived to the present days testifying to the mining works. 15 They

are particularly frequent along the Kriva Reka where smelting processes used to

take place.

Along the mining pits and the installations for the processing of ore, there also

used to be smaller separated residential insulae that belonged to the broader complex

of Novo Brdo, but they were not linked to the urban structure of the Suburb.


Sl. 2. Novo Brdo, situacioni plan lokaliteta 1952 (prema \. Bo{kovi}u)

Fig. 2. Novo Brdo, location’s layout plan, 1952 (according to \. Bo{kovi})

20


Sl. 3. Novo Brdo, pogled sa zapada

(foto \. Bo{kovi}, 1933)

Fig. 3. Novo Brdo, view from the west

(photo by \. Bo{kovi}, 1933)

16 Dini} 1962, 29–30.

17 Popovi} 2019, 245–256;

Popovi} 2019a, in print.

18 Dini} 1962, 29.

19 Ibid., 34–35.

For most of them, their former names are not known taking into consideration that

they are not mentioned in the preserved documents from Dubrovnik. One such

insula, which apparently was the closest to the Suburb, is mentioned under the name

of Provalija, and a little farther there was Plavica, now one of the mahallas of the

nearby village of Bostane. 16 It is certain that the most important section outside the

Suburb, which used to lie at around one kilometre southeast from the fortified part

of the town, was Donji Trg (Lower Market Square) that is mentioned several times

in the preserved archive materials. The main Catholic church of Novo Brdo – Sa{ka

crkva (Saxon Church), 17 which is mentioned in the documents from Dubrovnik as

Santa Maria in Nouamonte de Dogni Targ, 18 used to be located there.

The broader complex of Novo Brdo also included protruded fortifications the

function of which, judging by all, was to control the main accesses to the town and

they constituted a part of the exterior defence of the overall mining area. The historic

documents have preserved mentions of only two fortifications east of Novo Brdo,

while the position of some others may only be presumed, taking into conside-ration

that the field surveys have not been carried out. Remains of the fortification of Prilepac,

the birth place of Prince Lazar, are located in the valley of the Prilepni~ka Reka,

west of village Boòvac, while the exact position of the Prizrenac fortress has still not

been reliably established. At the beginning of the 15 th century, next to this fortification,

there was a market square where residents of Dubrovnik used to stay for some

time while doing business. Judging by the toponyms and traces of ruins, it seems

that remains of fortifications used to exist in some other sites around Novo Brdo:

Gradi{te near Marevac, then near Koprivnica and on hill Kaljaja near Ajkobila. 19

According to our findings so far, the topographic picture of Novo Brdo complex

observed in its entirety still remains very fragmented. This refers particularly

to the traces of mining operations that could provide a significantly more complete

picture of the life of this medieval town. As opposed to this, which constituted the

economic basis of the town, so far, we are most familiar with the basic fortification

ensembles, which are the main topic of our considerations on this occasion.


Sl. 4. Novo Brdo, pogled sa istoka


Fig. 4. Novo Brdo, view from the east


Eksploataciju ruda i urbanizaciju podru~ja pratio je razvoj nove razgranate

putne mreè, kao {to je to bio slu~aj i u drugim rudarskim oblastima

sredwovekovnih srpskih zemaqa. Prema zapadu su, po svemu sude}i, vodili

glavni putni pravci. Od Novog Brda preko Gra~anice put je vodio na Kosovo

poqe. Odatle je prema severu, preko Zve~ana i Bawske nastavqao putni pravac

prema Bosni. Drugi put vodio je od Kosova preko Polimqa do Prijepoqa, odnosno

Mile{eve, odakle se daqe putovalo ka Dubrovniku. Kroz Polomqe su

i{la dva glavna puta prema Primorju, i to jedan preko Nik{i}a i Jezera, a

drugi preko Gora`da i Fo~e. 11 Imaju}i u vidu zna~aj veza Novog Brda sa Primorjem,

ovi putni pravci su sigurno imali poseban zna~aj. Prema raspoloìvim

podacima moè se izra~unati da se od Novog Brda do Grada Svetog Vlaha,

glavne destinacije na Jadranskom primorju, moglo sti}i u letwim mesecima

za oko sedam dana, dok se zimi zbog planinskog reqefa i zavejanih prevoja ta relacija

prelazila za dvanaest do petnaest dana. 12 Postojao je i tre}i put, koji je

od Gra~anice vodio preko Prizrena prema Skadru. Isto~no od Novog Brda nalazio

se Vrawski put, posvedo~en u vladarskim poveqama, koji je od Kosova preko

Novog Brda i Kon~ulskog tesnaca i{ao ka Vrawu. U poveqi kneza Lazara za manastir

Ravanicu pomiwe se i Saski put, za koji se pretpostavqa da je i{ao dolinom

Bini~ke Morave, gde se spajao sa Vrawskim putem, a na zapadu sa Velikom

cestom, koja je od Kosova i{la daqa prema Skopqu. 13 Osim ovih puteva {ireg

zna~aja, oblast Novog Brda bila je premreèna i putevima lokalnog karaktera,

koji su povezivali grad sa rudnicima i prostorima gde je ruda prera|ivana.

Urbana zona kompleksa Novog Brda obuhvatala je utvr|ewe, koje je imalo dva

posebno brawena dela. Na vrhu zaravwenog visa nalazio se Zamak ili citadela

kao upori{te posledwe odbrane, 14 a sa wegove zapadne strane tzv. Dowi grad,

sa zna~ajnijim delom utvr|enog gradskog naseqa. [iroki prostor sa isto~ne

strane obuhvatao je Podgra|e, koje je tako|e bilo ukqu~eno u {iri sistem odbrane

grada. Moè se pretpostaviti da je bilo opasano slabijim zidanim bedemom,

a verovatno i zemqanim nasipom sa palisadama, o ~emu }e daqe biti

11 [krivani} 1974, 28.

12 Isto, 40–42.

13 Isto, 95.

14 U ranijoj dokumentaciji ovaj glavni

deo novobrdskih utvr|ewa ozna~avan je

terminom Gorwi grad, {to bi se moglo

smatrati tehni~kim nazivom.

Posle istraìvawa 2015–2016. godine,

kada je ovaj deo utvr|ewa kompletno

istraèn, uo~eno je da je to u

funkcionalnom smislu bio Zamak,

kao sredi{te gradskih fortifikacija

i utvr|eni rezidencijalni kompleks,

te }e u na{im daqim izlagawima biti

kori{}en iskqu~ivo ovaj termin.

22



re~i. Pored ovoga, novobrdskom urbanom kompleksu pripadaju i ostaci starih

rudnika u neposrednoj blizini grada, kao i ~itav niz mawih stambenih insula,

rasutih po okolini. Brojni ostaci starih rudarskih radova nalaze se na

celom prostoru isto~no od grada. Samo na jugozapadnim padinama Velike planine

i povr{ima u wenom podno`ju evidentirano je preko 630 rudarskih jama,

svrtweva i zakopina. U bliòj i daqoj okolini grada nalaze se mnoga {qaki-

{ta, a glavna su bila u Trni~evcu, Krwevskoj reci i pod Le{tarem. O rudarskim

radovima ostali su do na{ih dana sa~uvani brojni toponimi. 15 Posebno

su ~esti du` Krive reke, gde su se odvijali topioni~arski radovi.

Uz prostore sa rudarskim jamama i postrojewima za preradu rude postojale

su i mawe izdvojene stambene insule koje su pripadale {irem kompleksu Novog

Brda, ali nisu bile povezane sa urbanom strukturom Podgra|a. Za ve}inu wih

nisu poznati nekada{wi nazivi budu}i da se ne navode u sa~uvanim dubrova~kim

dokumentima. Jedna takva insula, koja je, izgleda, bila najblià Podgra|u,

pomiwe se pod imenom Provalija, a ne{to daqe nalazila se Plavica, sada jedna

od mahala obli`weg sela Bostane. 16 Sigurno je izvan Podgra|a najzna~ajniji

deo, koji je leào oko 1 km jugoisto~no od utvr|enog dela grada, bio Dowi Trg,

vi{e puta pomiwan sa~uvanoj arhivskoj gra|i. Na wemu se nalazio se i glavni

novobrdski katoli~ki hram – Sa{ka crkva, 17 koja se u dubrova~kim dokumentima

pomiwe kao Santa Maria in Nouamonte de Dogni Targ. 18

[irem kompleksu Novog Brda pripadala su i isturena utvr|ewa, koja su,

po svemu sude}i, imala funkciju kontrole glavnih prilaza gradu i ~inila deo

spoqne odbrane celog rudarskog podru~ja. U istorijskim dokumentima sa~uvani

su pomeni samo dva utvr|ewa isto~no od Novog Brda, dok se poloàj nekih

drugih moè jedino naslutiti, budu}i da terenska istraìvawa nisu vr{ena.

Ostaci utvr|ewa Prilepac, rodnog mesta kneza Lazara, nalaze se u dolini Prilepni~ke

reke, zapadno od sela Boòvca, dok ta~an poloàj tvr|ave Prizrenac

jo{ uvek nije pouzdano utvr|en. Uz ovo utvr|ewe, po~etkom 15. veka postojao je

i trg gde su se povremeno poslom zadràvali Dubrov~ani. Sude}i prema toponimima

i tragovima ru{evina, ostaci utvr|ewa postojali su izgleda jo{ na

nekim lokalitetima u okolini Novog Brda: Gradi{tu kod Marevaca, zatim kod

Koprivnice i na brdu Kaqaja kod Ajkobile. 19

Posmatrana u celini, topografska slika kompleksa Novog Brda, prema na-

{im dosada{wim saznawima, ostaje veoma fragmentarna. To se posebno odnosi

na tragove rudarskih radova, koji bi mogli da pruè znatno potpuniju sliku o

ìvotu ovog sredwovekovnog grada. Za razliku od ovoga {to je ~inilo ekonomsku

osnovu grada, za sada su nam najboqe poznate osnovne fortificirane celine,

koje su ovom prilikom glavna tema na{ih razmatrawa.

15 ]irkovi}, Koji}-Kova~evi}, ]uk 2002,

41–42; Savi} 1954–1955, 283–287.

16 Dini} 1962, 29–30.

Sl. 5. Novo Brdo, izgled sa jugozapada 1952

Fig. 5. Novo Brdo, appearance from the south-west, 1952

17 Popovi} 2019, 245–256;

Popovi} 2019a, u {tampi.

18 Dini} 1962, 29.

19 Isto, 34–35.

24

Founding and Development of Novo Brdo

in the 14 th and the 15 th centuries 20

20 The text of this chapter,

with some modifications and supplements,

has been taken over from monograph

Popovi}, Bjeli} 2018, 11–36.

21 Dini} 1962, 37.

22 Poveqe i pisma 1929, 41.

23 Ivani{evi} 2001, 64.

AS WE’VE SEEN ABOVE, THE MEDIEVAL TOWN OF NOVO BRDO IS SITUATED

in the mountainous region of south Serbia, east of Kosovo Polje, at a site that used

to be far from the main roads. Despite its unfavourable geographic position, thanks

to the rich deposits of the silver ore, the town experienced an unusually fast development

during the 14 th century and in the first half of the 15 th century. The preconditions

for the mine operations, and in relation to that for the founding of the town,

were met at the beginning of the reign of King Stefan Uro{ II (1282–1321), after the

stabilization of the Serbian authority in this region. Like in the other parts of Serbia,

here too, the opening of the mine was encouraged by the settling of the Saxons,

miners of the Germanic origin. The first mining operations in the area around Novo

Brdo most probably started in the last years of the 13 th century. There are no reliable

data on what the very beginnings of mining used to look like. One gets an impression

that the community of the Saxon miners, which enjoyed significant autonomy,

was not numerous in this early period. In the list of the Catholic parishes in the

most important mining towns in Serbia, compiled in 1303, there was still no mention

of Novo Brdo. Judging by all, the abrupt development of the town started at

the very beginning of the 14 th century. The first indirect piece of data suggests that

there was a market square in Novo Brdo in 1319. 21 Already less than a decade later,

in 1326, in a letter from King Stefan Uro{ III (1321–1331) to the Prince of Dubrovnik,

there is a clear testimony of the Novo Brdo market square being leased, which

suggests a well-regulated urban settlement. 22 An abrupt rise in the silver production

of Novo Brdo mines cannot be followed in all the details. The indirect data suggest

that already before the middle of the 14 th century Novo Brdo was fortified, which

will be dealt with in more detail later on, and that by its importance Novo Brdo had

surpassed the older Serbian mining centres – Brskovo, Rudnik, Trep~a, etc.

At that time, in 1350, there is a mention of the first specimens of coins minted

in Novo Brdo – dinari de Nouaberda, but it is believed that the work of the mint had

started significantly earlier. 23 The economic rise based on the mining operations

25

Nastanak i razvoj Novog Brda

u 14. i 15. veku 20

SREDWOVEKOVNI GRAD NOVO BRDO, KAO [TO SMO NAPRED VIDELI,

nalazio se u planinskom predelu ju`ne Srbije, isto~no od Kosova poqa, na mestu

koje je bilo udaqeno od glavnih saobra}ajnica. Uprkos svom nepovoqnom

geografskom poloàju, zahvaquju}i bogatim nalazi{tima srebrne rude, grad je

doìveo neobi~no brz razvoj tokom 14. i u prvoj polovini 15. veka. Preduslovi

za eksploataciju rudnika, a sa tim u vezi i nastanak grada, ostvareni su po-

~etkom vladavine kraqa Stefana Uro{a II (1282–1321), nakon stabilizacije

srpske vlasti na ovom podru~ju. Kao i u drugim oblastima Srbije, tako je i ovde

otvarawe rudnika bilo podstaknuto doseqavawem Sasa, rudara nema~kog porekla.

Prvi rudarski radovi na podru~ju Novog Brda najverovatnije su zapo~eti

u posledwim godinama 13. veka. Nema pouzdanih podataka o tome kako su izgledali

po~eci rudarewa. Ima se utisak da u ovom ranom razdobqu zajednica saskih

rudara, koja je uìvala zna~ajnu autonomiju, nije bila brojna. Na spisku katoli~kih

ùpa u zna~ajnim rudarskim mestima Srbije, sa~iwenom 1303. godine,

Novo Brdo se jo{ uvek ne pomiwe. Po svemu sude}i, nagli razvoj grada zapo~iwe

negde na samom po~etku 14. veka. Prvi posredan podatak ukazuje na postojawe

trga u Novom Brdu 1319. godine. 21 Ve} nepunu deceniju kasnije, 1326. godine, u

pismu kraqa Stefana Uro{a III (1321–1331) dubrova~kom knezu, postoji jasno

svedo~anstvo o tome da je trg u Novom Brdu izdavan u zakup, {to ukazuje na ve}

ure|enu urbanu naseobinu. 22 Nagli porast proizvodwe srebra u novobrdskim

rudnicima ne moè se pratiti u svim pojedinostima. Posredni podaci ukazuju

na to da je ve} pre sredine 14. veka Novo Brdo bilo utvr|eno, o ~emu }e daqe

biti vi{e re~i, i da je po svom zna~aju prevazi{lo starije srpske rudarske

centre – Brskovo, Rudnik, Trep~u i dr. U to vreme, 1350. godine, pomiwu se i

prvi primerci novca kovani u Novom Brdu – dinari de Nouaberda, ali se smatra

da je ovde rad kovnice zapo~et znatno ranije. 23 Privredni uspon zasnovan

na eksploataciji rudnika uticao je, bez sumwe, na ubrzan urbani razvoj Novog

Brda. U ovom gradu u usponu boravio je septembra 1349. godine li~no car Stefan

20 Tekst ovog poglavqa uz izmene

i dopune preuzet je iz monografije

Popovi}, Bjeli} 2018, 11–36.

21 Dini} 1962, 37.


23 Ivani{evi} 2001, 64.

26


25 Stara srpska pisma 1868,

271–275, br. 12.

26 Spomenici srpski 1892, 48, br. 36.

27 Jire~ek, Radowi} 1978, 352.



30 @itije despota Stefana 1989,

114–115.

31 Dini} 1962, 39.

32 Mihaq~i} 1975, 152–153.

33 Novakovi} 1879, 294–298.

34 Mihaq~i} 1975, 212–213;

Dini} 1962, 39.


unquestionably had an impact on the accelerated urban development of Novo Brdo.

In September 1349, Emperor Stefan Du{an himself stayed in this town on the rise

and on that occasion the emperor issued a gold seal charter for the people from

Dubrovnik. 24 It may be presumed that this was not the first or the only stay of the

monarchs in Novo Brdo during the 14 th century, but the rare preserved sources

contain no mention of that. During the later period, as it appears, the rulers did

occasionally stay in Novo Brdo, but the lack of sources prevents us from reliably

supporting such sovereign visits. At the end of the 14 th century – in 1394 or in 1395

– Princess Milica, nun Eugenia at the time, visited Novo Brdo together with her sons

Stefan and Vuk. 25 She also visited the town in the first years of the 15 th century. 26

It is believed that Despot Stefan stayed in Novo Brdo on several occasions and that

he in fact had his court there. 27 The Despot’s biographer notes that after the battle

with the Ottomans near Gra~anica, at the end of 1402, Stefan withdrew with his

brother Vuk “to his town Novo Brdo.” 28 A few years later, in May 1411, the Despot

was in Novo Brdo, 29 and two years later, when he was expecting an attack by the

Ottoman Sultan Musa, he was again staying at this, well fortified town. 30 Despot

\ura| also must have stayed several times in Novo Brdo, but there are no written

traces left regarding that.

After the death of Emperor Stefan Du{an, in the period marked by the processes

related to the disintegration of the state, in the first dozen of years Novo Brdo was

directly reigned by Emperor Uro{. His ruler’s residence was located in Nerodimlje or

in some of the neighbouring courts, in the area that bordered the Novo Brdo district.

The revenue from the town’s customs was paid out to the Emperor until 1366 or

1367, 31 when the full control over Novo Brdo, as well as the south parts of Kosovo,

was taken over by King Vuka{in who joined them with his family estates. 32 However,

the reign of the King, the Emperor’s co-ruler and the not-meant-to-be heir,

did not last long. After the death of Vuka{in in the Battle of Maritsa, at the end of

September 1371, and the death of Emperor Uro{ two months later, his former estates

in Kosovo, including Novo Brdo as well, came under the reign of Prince Lazar. The

broader area around Novo Brdo included the inherited estates of the prince’s father,

Pribac, a logothete at the court of Emperor Stefan. 33 The estates also included

Prilepac, the place of birth of Prince Lazar – a smallish fortification that belonged

to the broader system of Novo Brdo’s defence. 34

It is difficult to follow how these political changes reflected on the destiny of

Novo Brdo on the basis of the available original data, but, judging by all, they did

not have a decisive impact on the development of the town and the operations of

its mines. The high productivity of the Novo Brdo mines is testified to by the large

quantities of silver which the rulers, starting with Emperor Stefan Du{an, donated

to monasteries. A significant expansion in the mining production took place during

the times of Prince Lazar, when Novo Brdo became the most important economic

centre of Serbia. The abundance of revenues coming from silver allowed the Prince

to make wealthy donations to monasteries, in particular to his new endowment

Ravanica. During his reign, the work of the mint was quite significant and along

with several different series there were also those coins that bore the name of the

mint NOVOMONTE on the obverse. Even later, during the times of Lazar’s heir

Despot Stefan, and then during the reign of \ura| Brankovi} as well, the successful

work of Novo Brdo’s mint also continued. The production of silver continuously


Du{an, koji je tom prilikom Dubrov~anima izdao jednu zlatnope~atnu povequ. 24

Moè se pretpostaviti da to nije bio prvi i jedini boravak vladara u Novom

Brdu tokom 14. veka, ali o tome u retkim sa~uvanim izvorima nema pomena. I u

kasnijem razdobqu vladari su, kako izgleda, povremeno boravili u Novom Brdu,

ali nedostatak izvora onemogu}ava da se sve te vladarske posete pouzdano posvedo~e.

Krajem 14. veka – 1394. ili 1395. godine – u Novom Brdu je boravila knegiwa

Milica, tada monahiwa Evgenija, sa sinovima Stefanom i Vukom. 25 Ona

je posetila grad i u prvim godinama 15. veka. 26 Smatra se da je despot Stefan

vi{e puta boravio u Novom Brdu i da je tu imao i svoj dvor. 27 Despotov biograf

beleì da se posle sukoba sa Turcima kod Gra~anice, krajem 1402. godine, Stefan

sa bratom Vukom povukao „u svoj grad Novo Brdo“. 28 Nekoliko godina docnije,

maja 1411. godine, despot je bio u Novom Brdu, 29 a dve godine kasnije, kada

se o~ekivao napad turskog sultana Muse, on je ponovo boravio u ovom, dobro

utvr|enom gradu. 30 U Novom Brdu je sigurno u vi{e navrata boravio i despot

\ur|e, ali o tome nisu ostali pisani tragovi.

Posle smrti cara Stefana Du{ana, u razdobqu obeleènom procesima dezintegracije

dràve, Novo Brdo je prvih desetak godina bilo u neposrednoj vlasti

cara Uro{a. Wegova vladarska rezidencija nalazila se u Nerodimqi, ili

nekom od susednih dvorova, na podru~ju koje je bilo u susedstvu novobrdske oblasti.

Prihod od gradske carine ispla}ivan je caru sve do 1366. ili 1367. godine,

31 kada je punu kontrolu nad Novim Brdom, kao i ju`nim delovima Kosova, preuzeo

kraq Vuka{in i prikqu~io ih svojim porodi~nim posedima. 32 Me|utim,

vlast kraqa, carevog savladara i nesu|enog naslednika, nije bila dugog veka. Nakon

Vuka{inove pogibije u bici na Marici, krajem septembra 1371. godine, i

smrti cara Uro{a, dva meseca kasnije, wegovi nekada{wi posedi na Kosovu,

ukqu~uju}i i Novo Brdo, do{li su pod vlast kneza Lazara. Na {irem podru~ju

Novog Brda nalazili su se ba{tinski posedi kneèvog oca, Pripca, logoteta na

dvoru cara Stefana. 33 Me|u posedima bio je i Prilepac, rodno mesto kneza Lazara

– mawe utvr|ewe, koje je pripadalo {irem sistemu novobrdske odbrane. 34

Na osnovu raspoloìvih izvornih podataka te{ko je pratiti kako su se ove

politi~ke promene odraàvale na sudbinu Novog Brda, ali, po svemu sude}i,

one nisu bitno uticale na razvoj grada i rad wegovih rudnika. O visokoj produktivnosti

novobrdskih rudnika svedo~e velike koli~ine srebra koje su vladari,

po~ev{i od cara Stefana Du{ana, poklawali manastirima. Do zna~ajne ekspanzije

rudarske proizvodwe do{lo je u vreme kneza Lazara, kada je Novo Brdo postalo

najzna~ajnije privredno sredi{te Srbije. Obiqe prihoda od srebra omogu-

}ilo je knezu Lazaru da bogato daruje manastire, naro~ito svoju novu zadu`binu

u Ravanici. U wegovo vreme veoma je bio zna~ajan rad kovnice, gde se, uz vi{e

razli~itih emisija, pojavquju i one sa imenom kovnice NOVOMONTE na aversu.

I kasnije, u vreme Lazarevog naslednika despota Stefana, a potom i \ur|a

Brankovi}a, nastavqen je uspe{an rad novobrdske kovnice. Proizvodwa srebra

stalno se pove}avala, pa se procewuje da je u vreme najve}eg uspona iznosila

vi{e od sedam tona godi{we. 35 Zahvaquju}i uspe{nom radu rudnika, tokom prve

polovine 15. veka prihod vladara samo od novobrdske carine procewuje se na

iznos izme|u 120.000 i 200.000 dukata. 36

Urbani razvoj Novog Brda bio je u neposrednoj vezi sa radom rudnika i

obimom proizvodwe srebra. Prvi ìteqi novozasnovane naseobine bili su,


25 Stara srpska pisma 1868,

271–275, br. 12.





30 @itije despota Stefana 1989,

114–115.

31 Dini} 1962, 39.

32 Mihaq~i} 1975, 152–153.

33 Novakovi} 1879, 294–298.

34 Mihaq~i} 1975, 212–213;

Dini} 1962, 39.

35 Ivani{evi} 2001, 64.


28


Sl. 6. Zapadni bedem Zamka,

Kula 4 i Kula 5


Fig. 6. West rampart of the Castle,

Tower 4 and Tower 5


35 Ivani{evi} 2001, 64.


37 Ibid., 90–91.

kept going up and it is estimated that at the time of its highest peak it amounted to

more than seven tons a year. 35 Thanks to the successful operation of the mines,

during the first half of the 15 th century, the revenues of the rulers, coming solely

from Novo Brdo’s customs, are estimated at the amount between 120,000 and

200,000 ducats. 36

The urban development of Novo Brdo was directly linked to the work of the mine

and the scope of the silver production. The first inhabitants of the newly founded

settlement were undoubtedly the Saxons – miners of the German origin who organized

mining production and started with the extraction and processing of silver

ore. Due to the importance which their work had for the state and the ruler, the

Saxons enjoyed significant privileges. In the newly founded urban mining settlements,

they had the right to have their own court, consisting of citizens, which was

chaired by a royal judge. In addition, they also had their own notary and a clerk who

kept the records of the mining tithe, that is, the mandatory fiscal payments. They

also had religious freedom to build their churches practicing Latin rites which were

under the jurisdiction of the Kotor bishopric. 37

Attracted by the work and possible earnings, other foreigners of different crafts

also kept coming to Novo Brdo. In the first years of the town’s expansion, there was

among the settlers a large number of merchants from the Littoral, especially from

Kotor that was reigned by the Serbian king. From the kept documents it may also

be seen that among the newly arrived foreigners there were particularly many people

from Dubrovnik. Most of them were merchants. Along with trading, which was

their primary activity, the people from Dubrovnik were often lessees of customs or

owners of mining pits, as well as of smelters. Their colony in Novo Brdo, which was

also the case in other Serbian towns, enjoyed certain autonomy. The people from

Dubrovnik lived in accordance with their own legal regulations and they abided by

the laws of their own city. They had the privilege to select their own judges. Due to

the rise in the number of merchants, among whom there were representatives of

almost all noble families, as well as in the importance which Novo Brdo had for the



Kula 3 i Kula 4



Tower 3 and Tower 4


nesumwivo, Sasi – rudari nema~kog porekla, koji su organizovali rudarsku proizvodwu

i zapo~eli va|ewe i preradu srebrne rude. Zbog va`nosti koju je wihov

rad imao za dràvu i vladara, Sasi su uìvali zna~ajne privilegije. Oni su u

novoosnovanim urbanim rudarskim naseobinama imali pravo na sopstveni

sud, sastavqen od gra|ana, kojima je predsedavao kraqevski sudija. Osim toga,

imali su svog notara i ~inovnika koji je kwiìo rudarski desetak, odnosno

obavezno fiskalno davawe. Imali su i versku slobodu da podiù svoje crkve

latinskog obreda, koje su bile pod jurisdikcijom Kotorske biskupije. 37

Privu~eni poslom i mogu}om zaradom, u Novo Brdo su stizali i drugi

stranci razli~itih zanimawa. Me|u naseqenicima se, ve} u prvim godinama

uspona grada, sre}e veliki broj trgovaca sa Primorja, posebno iz Kotora, koji

se nalazio pod vla{}u srpskog kraqa. Iz sa~uvanih dokumenata moè se videti

da je me|u prido{lim strancima bilo posebno mnogo Dubrov~ana, me|u kojima

su najbrojniji bili trgovci. Uz trgovinu, kojom su se bavili kao primarnom

delatno{}u, Dubrov~ani su ~esto bili zakupci carina ili vlasnici rudarskih

okana, kao i topionica. Wihova kolonija u Novom Brdu, {to je bio slu~aj

i u drugim srpskim gradovima, imala je odre|enu autonomiju. Dubrov~ani su

ìveli prema regulama sopstvenog prava i pokoravali su se zakonima svoga

grada. Imali su privilegiju da sami biraju sopstvene sudije. Usled rasta broja

trgovaca, me|u kojima je bilo predstavnika gotovo svih plemi}kih porodica,

kao i zna~aja koje je Novo Brdo imalo za trgova~ke interese Dubrova~ke republike,

ve} u posledwim decenijama 14. veka u ovom gradu je imenovan generalni

konzul, biran na godinu dana. Pored obavqawa lokalnih poslova, wegova je

du`nost bila da obilazi sve trgove i naseobine gra|ana Republike Svetog Vlaha

i bude wihov predstavnik pred srpskim vladarem. 38 Brojni Dubrov~ani bili su

i stalno naseqeni u Novom Brdu. Osim privilegija koje su uìvali, imali su i

odre|ene obaveze, kao i svi ostali gra|ani. U poveqi kneza Lazara izdatoj 1387.

godine, u kojoj se knez poziva na raniju povequ cara Stefana Du{ana, posebno

je istaknuta obaveza za Dubrov~ane stalno naseqene u Novom Brdu da u~estvuju

37 Isto, 90–91.

38 Dini} 1962, 44–45.

30

38 Dini} 1962, 44–45.


40 Ibid., 202; Poveqe i pisma 1934, 16.

41 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 52–54.


trading interests of the Republic of Ragusa (Dubrovnik), a general consul with oneyear

tenure was appointed already in the last decades of the 14 th century. Other

than carrying out local business, his duty was also to visit all the market squares

and the settlements of the citizens of the Republic of Saint Blaise and act as their

representative before the Serbian ruler. 38 Numerous people from Dubrovnik had

permanent residence in Novo Brdo. In addition to the privileges they enjoyed, they

also had certain obligations, just like all other citizens. Prince Lazar’s Charter issued

in 1387, in which the Prince refers to the earlier charger issued by Emperor Stefan

Du{an, puts a special emphasis on the obligation of the people from Dubrovnik with

permanent residence in Novo Brdo to take part in the building, maintenance and safeguarding

of the town’s fortifications. 39 This obligation kept being literally repeated

also in the subsequent charters of the Serbian rulers. 40

Despite the numerous foreigners, first the Saxons and then the people from

Dubrovnik, the predominant part of the town’s population consisted of the local

Serbian inhabitants. Among them there were representatives of the nobles who dealt

with lucrative mining business. Along with the numerous miners and domestic

craftsmen, whose activity was more and more pronounced, the real power among

the domestic urban population were merchants. Their numbers and the role they

played in the economic life of the town were on a constant rise. Since not all of them

worked with equal success, social layering started to occur among them. The wealthier

merchants had greater social distinction and they gained a certain status not

only in their own setting, but also in the broader surroundings. It was from this

upper, wealthier layer that came the people who, thanks to their riches and reputation,

acquired the citizenship of Dubrovnik, which was considered to be a special

privilege. The position of a Dubrovnik citizen had noteworthy advantages for the

residents settled in the Serbian towns, since this entailed a possibility to use all the

benefits which the government of the Republic of Saint Blaise provided for its merchants.

First and foremost, these were significant customs subsidies. The attempts to

acquire the citizenship of Dubrovnik, particularly pronounced among the wealthy

Serbian citizens and primarily guided by economic interests, also had visible cultural

consequences. Namely, the aspiration to be on an equal footing with the citizens of

the coastal communes had a powerful reflection in the different spheres of the daily

life – in the manner of dressing and behaving, as well as in the adoption of certain

town’s customs, which had not been present in the Serbian setting before.

The ethnic diversity in Novo Brdo was particularly pronounced during the first

half of the 15 th century. At that time, while withdrawing before the Ottomans, a

significant number of Greeks found their haven in Serbia where some of them attained

quite high positions. Thus, the Angelos (An|eli) family settled in Novo Brdo and

they belonged to the line of the last regional lords of Thessaly. Two of their descendants,

natives of Novo Brdo, were brothers An|elovi}i. 41 While serving the Serbian

administration, one of them acquired the title of high headman, while the other,

having converted to Islam under the Ottomans, became the beylerbey of Rumelia.

Among the Serbian high nobles there was also Kalojan Rusota who started his career

as a customs officer in Novo Brdo, after which he continued working as a close

associate of Despot Stefan and his heir \ura| Brankovi}. Among the citizens of Novo

Brdo, a noble Greek family of the Kantakouzenos also enjoyed great reputation. In

addition to the duties of customs officers, which members of this family mostly


Sl. 8. Severni deo Zamka

sa Kulom 6 i Kulom 5


Fig. 8. North part of the Castle

with Tower 6 and Tower 5


u gra|ewu, odràvawu i ~uvawu gradskih utvr|ewa. 39 Ta obaveza je doslovno ponavqana

i u kasnijim poveqama srpskih vladara. 40

I pored brojnih stranaca, prvo Sasa, a potom i Dubrov~ana, prete`ni deo

gradske populacije ~inilo je lokalno srpsko stanovni{tvo. Me|u wima je bilo

i predstavnika vlastele koji su se bavili unosnim rudarskim poslovima. Uz

mnogobrojne rudare i doma}e zanatlije, ~ija je delatnost bila sve izraènija,

stvarnu snagu me|u doma}im gradskim stanovni{tvom predstavqali su trgovci.

Wihova brojnost i uloga u privrednom ìvotu grada bila je u stalnom porastu.

Kako nisu svi poslovali sa podjednakim uspehom, me|u wima je dolazilo do

socijalnog raslojavawa. Bogatiji trgovci posedovali su ve}i dru{tveni ugled

i sticali odre|eni status ne samo u svojoj sredini nego i u {irem okruèwu.

Iz tog gorweg, imu}nijeg sloja poticali su qudi koji su, zahvaquju}i bogatstvu

i ugledu, sticali dubrova~ko gra|anstvo, {to je smatrano posebnom privilegijom.

Poloàj dubrova~kog gra|anina imao je nezanemarqive prednosti za ìteqe

nastawene u srpskim gradovima, budu}i da je podrazumevao mogu}nost kori{}ewa

svih pogodnosti koje je vlada Republike Svetog Vlaha obezbe|ivala

svojim trgovcima. Na prvom mestu, to su bile zna~ajne carinske povlastice.

Nastojawe da se stekne dubrova~ko dràvqanstvo, veoma izraèno kod bogatog

srpskog gra|anstva i prevashodno rukovo|eno ekonomskim interesima, imalo

je i vidne kulturolo{ke posledice. Naime, te`wa ka izjedna~avawu sa gra|anima

primorskih komuna imala je snaàn odjek u razli~itim sferama svakodnevnog

ìvota – u na~inu odevawa i opho|ewa, kao i u usvajawu odre|enih

gradskih obi~aja koji nisu bili ranije odoma}eni u srpskoj sredini.

U Novom Brdu etni~ko {arenilo stanovni{tva bilo je posebno izraèno

tokom prve polovine 15. veka. Tada je, povla~e}i se pred Turcima, znatan broj

Grka na{ao uto~i{te u Srbiji, gde su neki od wih dospeli i do visokih poloàja.

U Novom Brdu se tako naselila porodica An|ela, iz roda posledwih oblasnih

gospodara Tesalije. Dvojica wihovih potomaka, ro|enih Novobr|ana, bila su


40 Isto, 202; Poveqe i pisma 1934, 16.

32

42 Popovi} 2016b, 154–156.

43 Kova~evi} 2001, 271–273.

44 Dini} 1962, 81–82;

Koji}-Kova~evi} 1978, 225–228.

45 Radoji~i} 1962, 52.

46 Dini} 1962, 73–77.

47 The programme of the surveying,

conservation and partial restoration

of Novo Brdo fortifications is organized by

the UNESCO, with the funds provided by

the European Union. The implementation

of the works was commissioned through

an international tender to the Company for

construction, restoration and reconstruction

of buildings “KOTO d.o.o.” from Belgrade.

The systematic archaeological surveys

that are conducted within the scope of this

project are led by Marko Popovi}, PhD.


worked as, one of them, Dimitrije, was also a writer and a poet who wrote both in

Serbian and in Greek. While encountering in Novo Brdo diverse spiritual trends of

those times, he expressed his admiration for the heritage from the Antiquity, although

he was deeply permeated with the Christian religious mysticism. In addition to the

Serbs and Greeks, educated Latins also lived in Novo Brdo. One of them, who was

certainly the most distinguished, was Martin Segon, a priest at the Saxon church of

St. Maria in Novo Brdo, who was subsequently, until his death in 1485, the Bishop

of Ulcinj. In his works, only few of which have been preserved, he described the

events, as well as the areas which the Ottomans attacked and conquered. 42

Thanks to an increase in the mining production and the overall economic

development, the number of the residents of Novo Brdo multiplied at an accelerated

rate. It is believed that at the time of the greatest prosperity, there were between

4,000 and 5,000 inhabitants living in Novo Brdo, while the total figure including

neighbouring settlements outside the fortified suburb reached 8,000 to 10,000 residents.

43 For the sake of comparison, it is estimated that there were around 3,500

inhabitants living in Srebrenica, while around the middle of the 15 th century Dubrovnik

with its suburbs had around 6,000 permanently settled residents. 44

Parallel to its urban development, the administration of the town was also organized

and in some of its elements it could be linked to the similar establishments of

the coastal towns. At the time when the ruler was Despot Stefan, it had its own

town’s statute. 45 During the first half of the 15 th century, the highest position in

the administration of Novo Brdo was held by a vojvoda (a military commander or a

governor) who was appointed by the ruler. As a representative of the Serbian ruler,

he was in charge not only of the urban settlement with its surrounding mines, but

also of the broader town’s district – Novobrdska vlast (the Novo Brdo authority). A

knez (a royal or noble title) was in charge of maintaining the order of the town and

he was often selected from among the citizens. Like in the other Serbian towns, the

defence of the town, that is, the fortification with the town’s garrison, fell under the

competence of a kephale. When it comes to small-scale disputes among Serbs, the

exercising of the judicial duty was done by the knez, as well as by the protopresbyter

who was the chief orthodox priest in the town. There was also a church court, which

along with the protopresbyter included other appointed priests. The town’s administration

also included a council consisting of 12 selected citizens – the burghers.

In addition to these main representatives of the authority, there was also some kind

of the town’s administrative department, which most probably did not significantly

differ from the similar services in the coastal towns. Here, a particular role was played

by a public notary, who was in charge of registering all trading transactions. 46

During the 14 th century and the first half of the 15 th century, Novo Brdo developed

as a typical fortified medieval town which is clearly corroborated by the

remains of the fortifications that were the subject of our surveying, which will be

dealt with in more detail further on. In the centre of Novo Brdo urban complex, at

the most prominent location, there was a town’s castle or a citadel as the central

defence stronghold. Within the ramparts of the Castle, during the recent archaeological

surveying, remains of a residential complex of structures were discovered,

with a small single-nave church in the middle. 47 On the slope on the west side of the

Castle, there used to be a relatively spacious fortified part of the town, the so-called

Donji grad (Lower Town), which was strengthened on its corners with two towers.


bra}a An|elovi}i. 41 Jedan od wih je u srpskoj slu`bi stekao titulu velikog

~elnika, dok je drugi, kao potur~ewak, postao beglerbeg Rumelije. Me|u srpskim

velikodostojnicima je bio i Kalojan Rusota, koji je svoju karijeru zapo-

~eo kao carinik u Novom Brdu, a potom nastavio kao blizak saradnik despota

Stefana i wegovog naslednika \ur|a Brankovi}a. Me|u novobrdskim gra|anima

je veliki ugled uìvala i znamenita gr~ka porodica Kantakuzina. Pored

du`nosti carinika, kojom su se ~lanovi te porodice ve}inom bavili, jedan od

wih, Dimitrije, bio je pisac i pesnik koji je stvarao na srpskom i gr~kom jeziku.

Susre}u}i se u Novom Brdu sa raznolikim duhovnim strujawima onoga

vremena, on je izraàvao svoje divqewe prema anti~kom nasle|u, iako je bio

duboko proèt hri{}anskim religioznim misticizmom. Pored Srba i Grka, u

Novom Brdu su ìveli i obrazovani Latini. Jedan od wih, svakako najistaknutiji,

bio je Martin Segon, sve{tenik u novobrdskoj sa{koj crkvi Svete Marije,

koji je potom sve do svoje smrti, 1485. godine, bio ulciwski biskup. U svojim

delima, od kojih su samo neka sa~uvana, bavio se opisivawem doga|aja, kao i

oblasti koje su Turci napadali i zaposedali. 42

Zahvaquju}i pove}avawu rudarske proizvodwe i ukupnom ekonomskom razvoju,

broj novobrdskih gra|ana ubrzano se umnoàvao. Smatra se da je u vreme

najve}eg prosperiteta u Novom Brdu ìvelo izme|u 4.000 i 5.000 stanovnika,

a sa prigradskim naseqima izvan utvr|enog Podgra|a, taj broj dosezao je 8.000

do 10.000 stanovnika. 43 Pore|ewa radi, procewuje se da je u to vreme u Srebrenici

bilo oko 3.500 stanovnika, dok je sredinom 15. veka Dubrovnik sa predgra|ima

imao oko 6.000 stalno naseqenih ìteqa. 44

Istovremeno sa urbanim razvojem, organizovano je i upravqawe gradom,

koje bi se u nekim svojim elementima moglo povezati sa sli~nim ustrojstvom

primorskih gradova. U vreme vladavine despota Stefana Novo Brdo je imalo

i svoj gradski statut. 45 Tokom prve polovine 15. veka najvi{i poloàj u upravi

Novog Brda imao je vojvoda, koga je imenovao vladar. U wegovoj nadle`nosti,

kao zastupnika srpskog vladara, bila je ne samo urbana naseobina sa okolnim

rudnicima ve} i {ira gradska oblast – Novobrdska vlast. O poretku u gradu

starao se knez, koji je ~esto biran iz redova gra|ana. Odbrana grada, odnosno

utvr|ewe sa gradskom posadom, kao i u drugim srpskim gradovima, bila je u

nadle`nosti kefalije. U vr{ewu sudske du`nosti, kada su u pitawu bili mawi

sporovi me|u Srbima, uz kneza je u~estvovao i protopop, glavni pravoslavni

crkveni velikodostojnik u gradu. Postojao je i crkveni sud, koji su, uz protopopa,

~inili i izabrani sve{tenici. U upravi grada u~estvovalo je i ve}e od

dvanaestorice izabranih gra|ana – purgara. Osim ovih glavnih predstavnika

vlasti, postojala je i neka vrsta gradske administracije, koja se, najverovatnije,

nije bitno razlikovala od sli~nih slu`bi u primorskim gradovima. Tu je

posebno zna~ajnu ulogu imao javni bele`nik, kod koga su bile registrovane sve

trgova~ke transakcije. 46

Novo Brdo se tokom 14. i prve polovine 15. veka razvijalo kao tipi~an

utvr|eni sredwovekovni grad, o ~emu re~ito govore ostaci fortifikacija, koje

su bile predmet na{ih prou~avawa, {to }e daqe biti tema. U sredi{tu novobrdskog

urbanog kompleksa nalazio se, na najistaknutijem mestu, gradski Zamak

ili citadela kao sredi{we upori{te odbrane. U okviru bedema Zamka, u toku

nedavnih arheolo{kih istraìvawa, otkriveni su ostaci rezidencijalnog

41 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 52–54.

42 Popovi} 2016b, 154–156.

43 Kova~evi} 2001, 271–273.

44 Dini} 1962, 81–82;

Koji}-Kova~evi} 1978, 225–228.

45 Radoji~i}1962, 52.

46 Dini} 1962, 73–77.

34


Sl. 9. Dowi grad,

Kula 8 sa unutra{we strane


Fig. 9. Lower Town,

Tower 8 from the interior side


48 Popovi}, Biki} 2017, 387–407

49 Zdravkovi} 1953–1954, 809–812.

50 Popovi} 2016a, 58.

51 Stari srpski hrisovuqi 1890, 51.

According to the surface traces of houses, it may be presumed that it was densely

populated. This is also suggested by the first results of the exploration of the space

along the northeast rampart of the Lower Town. 48 On the slopes to the east and

southeast from the Castle, there used to spread an urban settlement in the suburb

which, as it seems, was mostly surrounded by a built rampart. In the space of the

former suburb there are numerous traces of stone walls of buildings and former

communications. Through superficial observation, considering that there have been

no extensive archaeological surveys, it is possible to notice the positions of the former

town’s quarters. 49 In the centre of the settlement, where streets from different

directions converged, there used to be a spacious market square. 50

The existence of the former churches of Novo Brdo is today testified to by

archaeological remains, only some of which have been explored in more detail. There

is almost no data in the historic sources on the orthodox churches of Novo Brdo.

On an elevation in the centre of the settlement, there used to be the main town’s

church – the Cathedral Church of Saint Nicholas. Concerning the other orthodox

churches in the Suburb of Novo Brdo, the historic materials provide almost no data.

There is only one document that sheds a trace of light on the religious life in this

town. This document says that on 4 September 1434, monk Savatije adopted priest

Bogdan and gave him a part of his heritage in Novo Brdo’s suburb – a half of a

church and a half of a house, with a provision that he should possess them until the

end of his life under the laws of the town of Novo Brdo. In the capacity of a witness to

this act of donation, along with representatives of the authority – the Vojvoda and

the Knez, there were seven more priests mentioned, as well as Novo Brdo’s protopresbyter,

51 which would imply that the town with large orthodox population also

had a large number of priests.


Sl. 10. Dowi grad,

Kula 7 sa turskim obzi|em


Fig. 10. Lower Town,

Tower 7 with the Ottoman enclosure wall


kompleksa gra|evina, sa mawom jednobrodnom crkvom u sredi{tu. 47 Na padini

sa zapadne strane zamka nalazio se relativno prostran utvr|eni deo grada tzv.

Dowi grad, koji je na uglovima bio oja~an dvema kulama. Prema povr{inskim

tragovima ku}a, moè se pretpostaviti da je bio gusto naseqen. Na to ukazuju i

prvi rezultati istraìvawa prostora uz severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada. 48

Na padinama isto~no i jugoisto~no od Zamka {irilo se gradsko naseqe u Podgra|u,

koje je, kako izgleda, ve}im delom bilo opasano zidanim bedemom. U prostoru

nekada{weg Podgra|a postoje brojni tragovi kamenih zidova zgrada i

nekada{wih komunikacija. Povr{inskim osmatrawem, s obzirom na to da

obimnija arheolo{ka istraìvawa nisu vr{ena, mogu se uo~iti poloàji nekada{wih

gradskih kvartova. 49 U sredi{tu naseqa, gde su se susticale ulice

iz razli~itih pravaca, nalazio se prostrani trg. 50

O nekada{wim novobrdskim crkvama sada svedo~e arheolo{ki ostaci, od

kojih su samo neki detaqnije istraèni. O pravoslavnim crkvama Novog Brda u

istorijskim izvorima gotovo da i nema podataka. Na jednom uzvi{ewu u sredi-

{tu naseqa nalazila se glavna gradska crkva – katedralni hram Svetog Nikole.

O ostalim pravoslavnim crkvama u Podgra|u Novog Brda u istorijskim izvorima

gotovo da i nema podataka. O~uvana je samo jedna isprava koja baca tra~ak

svetla na verski ìvot u ovom gradu. Taj dokument svedo~i da je 4. septembra

1434. godine monah Savatije usinio popa Bogdana i dao mu deo svoje ba{tine u

novobrdskom Podgra|u – polovinu crkve i polovinu ku}e, i to da ih poseduje do

veka po zakonu grada Novog Brda. U svojstvu svedoka ovog ~ina darovawa, uz predstavnike

vlasti – vojvodu i kneza – navedeno je jo{ sedam sve{tenika i novobrdski

protopop, 51 {to bi ukazivalo na to da je u gradu sa brojnim pravoslavnim

stanovni{tvom tada bilo i dosta sve{tenika.

47 Program istraìvawa, konzervacije

i delimi~ne obnove fortifikacija

Novog Brda izvodi se u organizaciji

Uneska, sredstvima koja je obezbedila

Evropska unija. Izvo|ewe radova na

me|unarodnom tenderu povereno je

Privrednom dru{tvu za izgradwu,

obnovu i rekonstrukciju gra|evinskih

objekata „KOTO d.o.o.“ iz Beograda.

Sistematskim arheolo{kim

istraìvawima koja se izvode

u okviru ovog projekta rukovodi

dr Marko Popovi}.

48 Popovi}, Biki} 2017, 387–407.

49 Zdravkovi} 1953–1954, 809–812.

50 Popovi} 2016a, 58.

51 Stari srpski hrisovuqi 1890, 51.

36

52 Jankovi} 1985, 187.

53 Jankovi} 1983, 32–36.

54 For more details on Catholic churches

in Novo Brdo, see Gogi} 2016, 1–25.

55 êr{kov 1958, 338–340;

Bo{kovi} 1974, 108;

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 106–114.

56 Recently, a misinterpretation has been

made that this church is located in

the Lower Town of the fortification,

Gogi} 2016, 8–10.

57 Ibid., 14.


From the end of the 14 th century, the metropolitans from Gra~anica also occasionally

had their seat in Novo Brdo, 52 but it is not known for how long the metropolitans

stayed in Novo Brdo. One of the important reasons for the possible transfer

of the seat of the church was, unquestionably, the intention to move the church

official to the fortified town. In the periods marked by occasional warfare with the

Ottomans, such causative events could be rather frequent. It may be presumed that

the first temporary move took place already in 1383 when Gra~anica was plundered

and burned down. During subsequent Ottoman campaigns, judging by all, Gra~anica

metropolitans stayed in Novo Brdo for longer periods of time. On those occasions,

undoubtedly, the main town’s church of St. Nicholas served as the cathedral church

of the metropolitanate, but there are no preserved written records about that. It is

known that during the 16 th century and at the beginning of the 17 th century, Gra~anica

metropolitans were also called the metropolitans of Novo Brdo, which was an

indirect testimony showing that this church seat was located in Novo Brdo even

before the Ottoman conquests. 53 The orthodox churches of Novo Brdo, whose trace

has been lost in the written records, may still be reliably testified to by archaeological

remains, some of which have been explored. In addition to the already mentioned

big cathedral church, there were certainly a dozen smaller single-nave churches. It

seems to us we are not going to be wrong if we presume that these were most often

relatively modest family endowments of noblemen – such as the case was, for

instance, in Prizren.

As opposed to the orthodox citizens, there is some more data in the original historic

materials on the religious life of the citizens of Novo Brdo of the Latin faith,

i.e., there are documents from the archives of Dubrovnik and Kotor. The Catholics

– the Saxons and the coastal merchants, who constituted a significant share of the

Novo Brdo population – were organized within a single rectory (parish), which, like

in the case of other Serbian towns, fell under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Kotor.

Novo Brdo’s catholic parish, probably founded in the first decades of the 14 th century,

was first mentioned in 1346. As a parish of the Kotor Bishopric, it was under

the spiritual authority of the church of this town even later, when Kotor was no

longer under the Serbian rule. 54 Only in the first decades of the 15 th century Novo

Brdo’s Catholics moved under the authority of the Archbishop of Bar.

The main Roman-Catholic church of Novo Brdo, Santa Maria in Novomonte,

known as Sa{ka crkva (the Saxon Church) was built during the first half of the 14 th

century. It was located within the suburban Lower Market Square, a little shy of a

kilometre southeast of the fortified suburb. 55 Another, smaller catholic church, dedicated

to Saint Nicholas, which originally served as a chapel (capella Santi Nicolai),

was built around 1380 in the fortified suburb of Novo Brdo. Its more accurate location

is not known. 56 In the first decades of the 15 th century, both of these churches

were joined into a single parish. 57 As the catholic temples used for the services,

occasionally or continuously, they were regularly mentioned until the middle of the

17 th century.

The Ottoman attacks, which started in the areas of the central Balkans after

the Christian defeat in the Battle of Maritsa in 1371, had a decisive impact on the

fate of Novo Brdo. With increasingly more frequent Ottoman incursions, Novo Brdo

district was exposed already from the last decade of the 14 th century. The first failed

attack on Novo Brdo, with an intention to take over the town, was undertaken by


U Novom Brdu su od kraja 14. veka povremeno stolovali i gra~ani~ki mitropoliti,

52 ali nije poznato koliko su dugo oni boravili u ovom mestu. Jedan

od bitnih razloga za eventualno preseqewe crkvenog sedi{ta bila je, bez sumwe,

te`wa ka tome da se crkveni poglavar skloni u okvire utvr|enog grada. U

razdobqima koja su bila obeleèna povremenim ratovawima sa Turcima, takvi

povodi mogli su biti u~estali. Moè se pretpostaviti da je do prvog privremenog

preseqewa do{lo ve} 1383. godine, kada je Gra~anica poharana i spaqena.

I u vreme kasnijih turskih pohoda gra~ani~ki mitropoliti su, po svemu sude}i,

duè vreme boravili u Novom Brdu. Glavna gradska crkva Svetog Nikole u tim

prilikama je, bez sumwe, bila katedralni hram mitropolije, ali o tome nema

sa~uvanih pisanih svedo~anstava. Poznato je da su tokom 16. i po~etkom 17. veka

gra~ani~ki mitropoliti nazivani i novobrdskim, {to bi bilo posredno

svedo~anstvo o tome da se ovo crkveno sredi{te nalazilo u Novom Brdu i pre

turskog osvajawa. 53 O ostalim pravoslavnim novobrdskim hramovima, ~iji je

trag izgubqen u pisanim svedo~anstvima, jo{ uvek pouzdano svedo~e arheolo-

{ki ostaci, od kojih su neki i istraèni. Osim pomenute velike katedralne

crkve, postojalo je sigurno jo{ desetak mawih jednobrodnih hramova. îni nam

se da ne}emo pogre{iti ako pretpostavimo da su to naj~e{}e bile relativno

skromne vlasteoske porodi~ne zadu`bine – kakav je bio slu~aj, na primer, u

Prizrenu.

O verskom ìvotu novobrdskih gra|ana latinske veroispovesti, za razliku

od pravoslavnih, postoji ne{to vi{e podataka u izvornoj istorijskoj gra|i,

odnosno u dokumentima iz dubrova~kog i kotorskog arhiva. Katolici – Sasi i

primorski trgovci, koji su ~inili znatan broj stanovni{tva Novog Brda – bili

su organizovani u okviru jedne plebanije (ùpe), koja je, kao i u drugim srpskim

gradovima, spadala pod jurisdikciju kotorskog biskupa. Novobrdska katoli~ka

ùpa, osnovana verovatno u prvim decenijama 14. veka, prvi put se pomiwe 1346.

godine. Kao parohija Kotorske biskupije, bila je pod duhovnom jurisdikcijom

crkve ovog grada i kasnije, kada Kotor vi{e nije bio pod srpskom vla{}u. 54

Tek u prvim decenijama 15. veka novobrdski katolici su pre{li u nadle`nost

barskog nadbiskupa.

Glavna rimokatoli~ka crkva Novog Brda, Santa Maria in Novomonte, poznata

kao Sa{ka crkva, podignuta je tokom prve polovine 14. veka. Nalazila se u

okviru prigradskog Doweg trga, nepun kilometar jugoisto~no od utvr|enog Podgra|a.

55 Druga, mawa katoli~ka crkva, posve}ena Svetom Nikoli, koja je prvobitno

sluìla kao kapela (capella Santi Nicolai), podignuta je oko 1380. godine

u Podgra|u Novog Brda. Wena blià lokacija nije poznata. 56 Obe ove crkve su

u prvim decenijama 15. veka spojene u jednu ùpu. 57 Kao katoli~ki hramovi u

kojima je obavqano bogosluèwe, povremeno ili stalno, pomiwu se sve do sredine

17. veka.

Za sudbinu Novog Brda presudan uticaj imali su turski napadi, koji su na

podru~ja centralnog Balkana zapo~eli posle hri{}anskog poraza na Marici

1371. godine. Sve ~e{}im turskim prodorima novobrdska oblast bila je izlo-

èna ve} od posledwe decenije 14. veka. Prvi neuspeo napad na Novo Brdo, sa

ciqem da zauzme grad, preduzeo je sultan Musa 1412. godine. 58 Uz posadu i gra-

|ane, u odbrani su u~estvovali i Dubrov~ani. Napada~i su kona~no potisnuti

kada je pristigao despot Stefan sa vojskom. U velikoj opasnosti grad je bio i

52 Jankovi} 1985, 187.

53 Jankovi} 1983, 32–36.

54 Detaqnije o katoli~kim crkvama

u Novom Brdu v. Gogi} 2016, 1–25.

55 êr{kov 1958, 338–340;

Bo{kovi} 1974, 108;

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 106–114.

56 Nedavno je izneta pogre{na

pretpostavka o tome da se ova crkva

nalazila u Dowem gradu utvr|ewa,

Gogi} 2016, 8–10.

57 Isto, 14.

58 Novakovi} 1879, 317–326.

38

58 Novakovi} 1879, 317–326.

59 Dini} 1962, 46–49.

60 Novakovi} 1879, 336–338;

Dini} 1962, 60–61.

61 Dini} 1962, 62.



Sultan Musa in 1412. 58 Along with the garrison and the citizens, the people from

Dubrovnik also took part in the defence. The attackers were finally pushed back when

Despot Stefan arrived with his army. The town was in a dire danger also towards

the end of Stefan’s reign. Following the news that the Serbian monarch had died,

Sultan Murad II arrived with his army under Novo Brdo, but the conflict was avoided

and the peace was soon negotiated. 59 The peaceful period, however, did not last

for long. At the end of the fourth decade of the 15 th century, a large Ottoman attack

on Serbia started and around the middle of 1439 the Despot’s capital Smederevo

was taken. In this period, Novo Brdo was also exposed to occasional attacks, but it

was not conquered. It appears that the Ottomans were in no hurry to lay siege to

the town and take it. More serious battles started only in the spring of 1441. The

Ottomans first managed to conquer Novo Brdo’s suburb, while the fortification itself

surrendered only at the end of June. Judging by the documents from Dubrovnik,

the establishment of the Turkish authority did not change the state of affairs in the

town much. 60 A temporary liberation of Novo Brdo took place already at the end of

1443, after the victories of the Hungarian and Serbian army. However, as early as in

February of next year, the Ottomans managed to recapture the town which then suffered

greatly from the revenge-based repressions. After the peace had been negotiated,

Novo Brdo was given back to Despot \ura| in August 1444. 61 One decade later,

battles were fought around Novo Brdo again. These were the early signs of a major

attack that would finally bring this rich and prosperous town under the Ottoman

rule. The siege of the town was started by the Rumelian beylerbey in April of 1455,

while the next month Sultan Mehmed II himself arrived with the army. After fierce

bombing from cannons that discharged large stone balls, 50–70 cm in diameter, the

town’s fortifications were seriously damaged. Facing the significantly stronger

Turkish forces, the defenders finally laid down their weapons and surrendered the

town on 1 July 1455. The condition for the surrender was that the population of the

town with all of their properties should be spared. However, as soon as the surrender

had taken place, the sultan ordered all the gates, but one, to be closed. The entire

population had to leave the town, leaving their possessions in their houses. The sultan

himself stood in front of the gate and separated young men on one side, adult males

on the other and women and girls on the third one. He had the most prominent men

executed right away, gave a part of the female population to his soldiers as slaves,

and selected a part of the young men for the Janissaries. The remaining population

was returned to the town and their property was not touched. 62

A large quantity of weaponry and provisions were seized in the fortification of

Novo Brdo. A document on this seizure was drawn directly after the Ottoman conquest

which is of exceptional importance for our considerations, taking into account

that it provides a fundamental insight into the resources that were at the disposal

of the crew of Novo Brdo during the siege. When it comes to food, the town was relatively

well supplied. The Ottomans found here 6 granaries with wheat, 2 with oats

and 1 with millet. Along with this, there were 5 barrels with salt and a total of three

containers with oil and honey.

As for the weaponry, the conquerors found 30 crossbows, 25,000 quarrels, 3

cases with arrows, 4 bows and 8 quivers for arrows, then 47 sabres, 6 daggers and

5 short spears. As for the protective equipment, 36 armours were recorded, as well

as 110 helmets and 45 shields. A part of this inventory which clearly shows that the


pri kraju Stefanove vladavine. Na vest o tome da je srpski vladar umro, sultan

Murat II stigao je sa vojskom pod Novo Brdo, ali sukob je izbegnut i mir je

ubrzo sklopqen. 59 Mirno razdobqe, me|utim, nije dugo potrajalo. Krajem ~etvrte

decenije 15. veka zapo~et je veliki turski napad na Srbiju, a sredinom

1439. godine zauzeta je despotova prestonica Smederevo. U tom razdobqu i Novo

Brdo je bilo izloèno povremenim napadima, ali nije osvojeno. Izgleda da

se Turcima nije ùrilo da grad opsednu i zauzmu. Ozbiqnije borbe zapo~ete su

tek u prole}e 1441. godine. Turci su najpre uspeli da osvoje novobrdsko Podgra|e,

dok se samo utvr|ewe predalo tek krajem juna. Sude}i prema dubrova~kim

dokumentima, sa uspostavqawem turske vlasti u osvojenom gradu stawe se

nije bitno promenilo. 60 Do privremenog oslobo|ewa Novog Brda do{lo je ve}

krajem 1443. godine, nakon pobeda ugarsko-srpske vojske. Me|utim, ve} februara

naredne godine Turci su uspeli ponovo da zaposednu grad, koji je tom prilikom

u osvetni~kim represalijama te{ko postradao. Posle sklapawa mira,

Novo Brdo je vra}eno despotu \ur|u u avgustu 1444. godine. 61 Jednu deceniju

kasnije, oko Novog Brda su se ponovo vodile borbe. Bili su to predznaci velikog

napada, koji }e kona~no ovaj bogati i prosperitetni grad dovesti pod tursku

vlast. Opsadu grada zapo~eo je rumelijski beglerbeg u aprilu 1455. godine,

dok je narednog meseca sa vojskom stigao i li~no sultan Mehmed II. Posle èstokog

bombardovawa iz topova, koji su izbacivali velike kamene kugle, pre~nika

50–70 cm, gradske fortifikacije su znatno o{te}ene. Pred mnogo ja~om

turskom silom branioci su kona~no poloìli oru`je i predali grad 1. jula

1455. godine. Uslov predaje je bio da stanovni{tvo grada sa svim svojim imawem

bude po{te|eno. Me|utim, ~im je izvr{ena predaja, sultan je naredio da

se zatvore sve kapije, osim jedne. Celokupno stanovni{tvo moralo je da napusti

grad, ostavqaju}i svoje imawe u ku}ama. Sam sultan je stajao pred otvorenom

kapijom i svrstavao mladi}e na jednu stranu, odrasle mu{karce na drugu, a

ènsku ~eqad na tre}u. Najuglednije qude odmah je pogubio, deo èna razdelio

kao robqe svojim vojnicima, a deo mladi}a odabrao za jani~are. Preostalo stanovni{tvo

vra}eno je u grad, a wihovo imawe nije dirano. 62

U novobrdskom utvr|ewu zaplewena je ve}a koli~ina naoruàwa, opreme i

provijanta. O toj zapleni sa~iwen je, neposredno po turskom zaposedawu, dokument,

koji je za na{a razmatrawa od izuzetnog zna~aja, budu}i da pruà osnovni

uvid u resurse kojima je raspolagala novobrdska posada tokom opsade. Kada

je u pitawu bila hrana, grad je bio relativno dobro snabdeven. Turci su zatekli

6 ambara p{enice, 2 zobi i 1 ambar prosa. Uz to, bilo je 5 buradi soli i ukupno

3 kr~aga uqa i meda.

Od naoruàwa zate~eno je 30 samostrela, 25.000 strelica, 3 sanduka strela,

4 luka i 8 tobolaca za strele, zatim 47 sabaqa, 6 bodeà i 5 kratkih kopaqa.

Od za{titne opreme zapleweno je 36 oklopa, 110 kaciga i 45 {titova. Posebno

je zanimqiv deo ovog popisa koji jasno svedo~i o tome da je grad bio

snabdeven i vatrenim oru`jem. Zapleweno je ukupno 8 topova, i to 3 velika i

5 mawih „braku“ topova, uz koje je na|eno 15 kesa {alitre i samo 3 futrole za

upaqa~e topova. Osim topova, zapleweno je i 55 pu{aka kuka~a sa odgovaraju}im

streqivom. 63

Pad pod tursku vlast ozna~io je veliku prekretnicu za daqu sudbinu Novog

Brda. Odmah po zauzimawu grada Turci su, kao i u drugim osvojenim mestima,

59 Dini} 1962, 46–49.

60 Novakovi} 1879, 336–338;

Dini} 1962, 60–61.

61 Dini} 1962, 62.


63 Zirojevi} 1974, 287.

40

63 Zirojevi} 1974, 287.

64 Dini} 1962, 68.

65 Popovi} 2016, 74–75.

66 Zirojevi} 1974, 135–137.

67 Filipovi} 1954, 71.

68 Ibid., 66–69.


town was also equipped with fire arms is particularly interesting. A total of 8 cannons

were seized, including three large ones and five smaller ones, next to which 15 bags of

saltpeter and only three casings for cannon igniters were found. In addition to the

cannons, 55 rifles of the kuka~a type with the relevant ammunition were seized. 63

The fall under the Ottoman rule marked a major turning point for the further

fate of Novo Brdo. Right after they had captured the town, the Ottomans, like they

did in the other conquered places, changed the administration that had run the town

until then. A Turkish vojvoda was appointed as the head of the town, the fortress was

commanded by a dizdar, while the judiciary authority was in the hands of a qadi. 64

Soon after the conquest, the works started on the reconstruction of the damaged

ramparts and towers of the fortification, and of the Castle and the Lower Town, where

access was no longer permitted to Christians. 65 At this point, two churches that had

been found there were demolished – one in the Castle and the other one, judging

by all, in the Lower Town. These churches, which under the new conditions became

inaccessible to their former faithful, now served as a source of stone material required

for the repairs on the fortifications. A military crew of around 50 mustahfizes

(fortress guards) with a dizdar, headed by a kethüda, were stationed in the fortress.

This number of soldiers of Novo Brdo’s crew practically did not change until the

end of the 17 th century. 66 The crew was stationed within the ramparts of the Lower

Town, while the space in the citadel, the former Castle, remained covered in ruins

and uninhabited.

After the repressions that accompanied the act of conquest, the Ottomans tried

to bring order back to the conquered town and renew the operations of the mines.

For this purpose there was a certain tolerant attitude towards the Christians which

otherwise was not common in the other occupied places. This is the reason why

Novo Brdo even several decades after it had been taken over managed to keep its

Christian character. In the early stages of the Ottoman rule, the mining and crafts

production had its base in the residents already living there. Until the beginning of

the 16 th century, the Ottoman Islamic population was mostly limited to the fortress

crew, the administration and the staff working at the mint, with few colonists, who

were actually by the rule converts. 67

Judging by the data recorded in the defter of the Vu~itrn Sanjak from 1498/9,

at the end of the 15 th century, Novo Brdo was predominantly a Christian town.

Most of the 38 mahallas or town’s quarters were named after a priest (a presbyter

or a protopresbyter), a monk or a church. At the time, in the town there were 887

Christian houses and several churches which had existed in the suburb before the

conquering of the town. At the end of the 15 th century, still no mahalla was marked

as a Muslim one. This defter, like the earlier one from 1477, contains no mention

of a mosque in Novo Brdo or any waqfs, as religious endowments, which were the

first ones to be established in the occupied lands and towns. 68

In the first decades of the 16 th century, the situation in Novo Brdo changed

significantly, which clearly shows an advanced process of islamization. In the 1526

defter of the Vu~itrn Sanjak, in the Christian mahallas that had been mentioned in

the previous census there is a noticeable reduction in the number of houses, while

some of them were completely abandoned. This was also the first time when four

new Muslim mahallas, with 139 houses, were mentioned. The heads of more than

a third of these houses were the first generation converts. One of those new Muslim


promenili dotada{we gradsko ure|ewe. Na ~elo grada postavqen je turski vojvoda,

tvr|avom je zapovedao dizdar, dok je sudska vlast bila u rukama kadije. 64

Ubrzo po osvajawu, preduzeti su radovi na obnovi o{te}enih bedema i kula

utvr|ewa, odnosno Zamka i Doweg grada, gde hri{}anima vi{e nije bio dozvoqen

pristup. 65 Tom prilikom, sru{ene su dve zate~ene crkve – i to jedna u

Zamku, a druga, po svemu sude}i, u Dowem gradu. Ove crkve, koje su u novim uslovima

postale nedostupne svojim nekada{wim vernicima, posluìle su kao izvori{te

kamene gra|e neophodne za popravku fortifikacija. U obnovqeno utvr-

|ewe sme{tena je vojna posada od oko 50 mustahfiza, sa dizdarom i }ehajom na

~elu. Ovaj broj vojnika novobrdske posade prakti~no se nije mewao sve do kraja

17. veka. 66 Posada je bila sme{tena u okviru bedema Doweg grada, dok je prostor

u citadeli, nekada{wem Zamku, ostao zasut ru{evinama i nenastawen.

Nakon represalija koje su pratile ~in osvajawa, Turci su nastojali da se

u osvojenom gradu ponovo uspostavi red i obnovi rad rudnika. U tu svrhu pokazan

je odre|en tolerantan odnos prema hri{}anima, koji nije bio uobi~ajen u

drugim osvojenim gradovima. To je razlog {to je Novo Brdo i vi{e decenija posle

osvajawa zadràlo svoj hri{}anski karakter. U ranom razdobqu osmanske

vlasti, rudarska i zanatska proizvodwa imala je oslonac u zate~enom gra|anstvu.

Tursko islamsko stanovni{tvo bilo je sve do po~etka 16. veka uglavnom

ograni~eno na tvr|avsku posadu, administrativni aparat i osobqe kovnice, uz

malobrojne doseqenike, i to gotovo po pravilu konvertite. 67

Krajem 15. veka, sude}i prema podacima zabeleènim u defteru Vu~itrnskog

sanxaka iz 1498/9. godine, Novo Brdo je bilo prevashodno hri{}anski grad.

Ve}ina od 38 mahala ili gradskih ~etvrti nosila je naziv prema imenu sve-

{tenika (popa ili protopopa), kalu|era ili crkve. U gradu se tada nalazilo

887 hri{}anskih ku}a i nekoliko crkava, koje su u Podgra|u postojale pre

osvajawa grada. Nijedna mahala krajem 15. veka jo{ uvek nije bila ozna~ena kao

muslimanska. U ovom defteru, kao ni u ranijem – iz 1477. godine, u Novom Brdu

se ne pomiwe nijedna xamija, a ni vakufi, kao pobo`na zave{tawa, koji su prvi

osnivani u zaposednutim zemqama i gradovima. 68

U prvim decenijama 16. veka stawe u Novom Brdu se zna~ajno promenilo,

{to jasno pokazuje poodmakli proces islamizacije. U defteru Vu~itrnskog

sanxaka iz 1526. godine, u hri{}anskim mahalama koje se pomiwu u prethodnom

popisu uo~qivo je zna~ajno smawewe broja ku}a, dok su neke i opustele. Tu

se prvi put pomiwu i ~etiri nove muslimanske mahale, sa 139 ku}a. Stare{ine

vi{e od jedne tre}ine ovih ku}a bili su konvertiti u prvoj generaciji. Jedna

od tih novih muslimanskih gradskih ~etvrti – Mahala ~asne xamije – bila je

najgu{}e naseqena. Imala je 48 ku}a, od kojih je 18 pripadalo konvertitima. 69

U nazivu ove mahale prvi put se pomiwe xamija u Novom Brdu. Zanimqivo je da

u ranijim defterima, kao jedinoj sa~uvanoj pisanoj gra|i iz prvih decenija

turske vlasti, nema podataka o islamskoj bogomoqi u Novom Brdu, mada, kako su

pokazali rezultati dosada{wih istraìvawa, najkasnije 1466. godine u xamiju

je pretvorena glavna novobrdska crkva – katedralni hram Svetog Nikole. 70

Osim posrednih pomena xamije – nekada{we katedrale, u raspoloìvim i do

sada obra|enim izvorima nema podatka o drugim islamskim bogomoqama u Novom

Brdu. Na osnovu podataka iz pomenutih deftera o brojnosti sve{tenika,

ali i saznawa koje pruàju drugi izvori, moè se zakqu~iti da je u decenijama

64 Dini} 1962, 68.

65 Popovi} 2016, 74–75.

66 Zirojevi} 1974, 135–137.

67 Filipovi} 1954, 71.

68 Isto, 66–69.

69 Isto, 79.

70 Popovi}, Bjeli} 2018, 185–198.

42


town quarters – Mahala ~asne dàmije (Honourable Mosque Mahalla) – was most

densely populated. It had 48 houses, 18 of which belonged to the converts. 69 The

name of this mahalla mentions a mosque in Novo Brdo for the first time. It is interesting

that in the earlier defters, as the only preserved written records from the first

decades of the Ottoman rule, there are no data on an Islamic house of prayer in

Novo Brdo although, as it has been shown by the results of the surveying conducted

so far, not later than in 1466 the main church of Novo Brdo – the Cathedral Church

of Saint Nicholas was turned into a mosque. 70 In addition to the indirect mentioning

of the mosque – the former cathedral, the available sources that have been processed

so far contain no data on any other Islamic houses of prayer in Novo Brdo.

On the basis of the data from the said defters regarding the number of priests, as

well as on the basis of the findings provided by other sources, it may be concluded

that in the decades following the Ottoman conquest, as well as later during the 16 th

century, Novo Brdo remained an important Christian spiritual centre.

During the 16 th and most part of the 17 th centuries, the work continued in the

mines of Novo Brdo, but the production kept declining. Some rich ore deposits had

already been exhausted, but the results were also impacted to a significant degree by

increasingly poorer organization of the work. In the first decades after the Ottoman

conquest, a large number of experienced miners moved out, in addition to which

Novo Brdo was also abandoned by all coastal merchants. This all had an impact on

the gradual decline of the town and a decrease in the number of its residents. 71 The

mint, which used to earn significant revenue, stopped working during the reign of

Sultan Murad IV (1623–1640). 72

According to the data from one of the last Ottoman defters, around the middle

of the seventh decade of the 17 th century, there were still ten Christian mahallas in

Novo Brdo, with 142 households. Some of these mahallas kept their former names.

The biggest one was Sveta Petka (Parascheva of the Balkans) mahalla, with 23 houses,

where a clergyman, priest Boà, was also enumerated, and its former name was also

kept by Sveti Petar (Saint Peter) mahalla, which had 11 houses at the time. 73

Before the Austro-Ottoman war, a Janissary crew in Novo Brdo consisted, like in

the past, of around 40 men. They did not reside in the fortress, which contained only

a dozen of semi-destroyed houses, but rather in the suburb, which still had around

150 Christian and Muslim homes. The Austrian army, commanded by General Piccolomini

captured Novo Brdo in 1689, but the Ottomans managed to recapture it

already the following year. During those hostilities, the town suffered greatly and a

large share of the population moved away. In the 18 th and the 19 th centuries, Novo

Brdo survived as a small settlement with almost solely Turkish population. 74

69 Ibid., 79.

70 Popovi}, Bjeli} 2018, 185–198.

71 Filipovi} 1954, 84–85.

72 Evlija êlebi, 308.

73 Zirojevi} 1990, 7–14.

74 Kosti} 1922, 134–162.


nakon turskog osvajawa, pa i kasnije tokom 16. veka, Novo Brdo ostalo zna~ajno

hri{}ansko duhovno sredi{te.

Tokom 16. i ve}im delom 17. veka nastavqen je rad u novobrdskim rudnicima,

ali je proizvodwa sve vi{e opadala. Neka bogata rudi{ta su ve} bila iscrpena,

ali je na rezultate u zna~ajnoj meri uticala i sve slabija organizacija

rada. U prvim decenijama posle turskog osvajawa iselio se veliki broj iskusnih

rudara, a Novo Brdo su napustili i svi primorski trgovci. Sve to je imalo

uticaja na postepeno opadawe grada i smawewe broja stanovnika. 71 Kovnica

novca, koja je nekada donosila zna~ajne prihode, prestala je sa radom za vlade

sultana Murata IV (1623–1640). 72

Prema podacima iz jednog od posledwih turskih deftera, sredinom sedme

decenije 17. veka, u Novom Brdu je bilo jo{ uvek 10 hri{}anskih mahala, sa 142

doma}instva. Neke od ovih mahala su zadràle svoja nekada{wa imena. Kao

najve}a, javqa se mahala Sveta Petka, sa 23 ku}e, gde je popisan i jedan sve{tenik,

pop Boà, a sa ranijim imenom je i mahala Sveti Petar, koja je tada imala

11 ku}a. 73

Pred austrijsko-turski rat jani~arska posada u Novom Brdu brojala je, kao

i ranije, oko 40 qudi. Oni nisu boravili u tvr|avi, gde se nalazilo svega desetak

polurazru{enih ku}a, ve} u Podgra|u, gde je jo{ uvek bilo oko 150 hri{}anskih

i muslimanskih domova. Austrijska vojska, kojom je komandovao general

Pikolomini, zauzela je Novo Brdo 1689. godine, ali su Turci ve} naredne godine

uspeli da ga preotmu. Tokom tih ratnih dejstava grad je postradao, a veliki

deo stanovni{tva se raselio. U 18. i 19. stole}u Novo Brdo je opstajalo kao

malo naseqe sa gotovo iskqu~ivo turskim stanovni{tvom. 74 71 Filipovi} 1954, 84–85.


73 Zirojevi} 1990, 7–14.

74 Kosti} 1922, 134–162.

44

Surveys of the Fortifications

of Novo Brdo Conducted to Date

75 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 14.

76 Cviji} 1911, 1126.

77 Ibid.

78 Ibid., 126–127.

79 Ibid.

THE DESERTED REMAINS OF THE TOWN OF NOVO BRDO, THE FORMER MOST

important urban settlement of medieval Serbia, first caught the attention of experts

already at the end of the 19 th century. The first data on this important monument

complex, with a description of visible ruins, were recorded in 1890 by an Austrian,

Raphael Hoffmann, who was looking for old ore deposits. 75 Several years later, the area

around Novo Brdo was also visited by Jovan Cviji}, as a part of his geographic and geological

explorations. On that occasion, Cviji} recorded his observations concerning

both the archaeological traces and the historic toponymy. Along with the traces of

mining operations in the area of Novo Brdo, he also described the pronounced ruins

of the fortress. Speaking of the visible remains of the ramparts and the towers, he

noticed that there used to be two fortified ensembles – “the walls of the town and the

interior fortress.” 76 Together with a brief description, he also wrote down the following

piece of data: “there is an old well in the middle of the interior town; farther on,

one can see the foundations of houses and of one small church that is located right

next to the town’s wall.” 77 The remains of buildings in the suburb made a particular

impression on Cviji}: “From all the sides of the town, except from the southwest, it is

possible to see numerous foundations of houses, one foundation next to another,

apparently with no regular streets. The main section of the settlement was around the

elevation, which is now called Bair, and was directly under the town on the northeast

side.” 78 For our considerations, Cviji}’s observations on numerous traces of old roads

are particularly valuable, since these have been lost in the relief of Novo Brdo until the

present times. He noticed that the easiest to recognise are “the roads to Vranje and Pri-

{tina, then others that connected the mines and led to Kriva Reka, most certainly to

the smelters. Around meadows and in forests it is possible to see cuts in the sides, of

flattened length, along which these old roads used to lead… All the traces created an

impression as if the old roads had been accommodated just for the caravan traffic.” 79

In the period between the two world wars, in 1933, small-scale field explorations

of the surface remains in Novo Brdo were conducted by architect \ur|e Bo{kovi}.

45

Dosada[ya istra\ivaya

novobrdskih utvr]eya

ZAPUSTELE RU[EVINE NOVOG BRDA, NEKADA[WEG NAJZNAÂJNIJEG

grada sredwovekovne Srbije, prvi put su privukle pa`wu nau~ne javnosti jo{

krajem 19. veka. Prve podatke o ovom velikom spomeni~kom kompleksu sa opisom

vidqivih ru{evina zabeleìo je 1890. godine Austrijanac Rafael Hofman,

koji je tragao za starim rudi{tima. 75 Nekoliko godina kasnije na podru~ju Novog

Brda boravio je i Jovan Cviji} u okviru svojih geografsko-geolo{kih istra-

ìvawa. Tom prilikom Cviji} je zabeleìo zapaàwa i o arheolo{kim tragovima,

kao i istorijskoj toponimiji. Uz tragove rudarskih radova na podru~ju

Novog Brda, opisao je i upe~atqive ru{evine utvr|ewa. Govore}i o vidqivim

ostacima bedema i kula, uo~io je da su postojale dve fortificirane celine –

„zidovi grada i unutra{weg utvr|ewa“. 76 Uz kra}i opis zabeleìo je i podatak

da: „usred unutra{weg grada ima stari bunar; daqe se vide temeqi od ku}a i od

jedne crkvice koja je uz sami gradski zid.“ 77 Dubok utisak na wega su ostavili

i tragovi Podgra|a: „Sa svih strana grada, osim jugozapadne vide se bezbrojni

temeqi ku}a, temeq do temeqa, na stotine, izgleda bez pravilnih ulica. Glavni

deo varo{i je bio oko uzvi{ewa, koje se sada zove bair, i neposredno je pod

gradom na severo-isto~noj strani.“ 78 Za na{a razmatrawa dragocena su i Cviji}eva

zapaàwa o brojnim tragovima starih puteva, koji su se do na{eg vremena

izgubili u novobrdskom reqefu. On je uo~io da se najboqe raspoznaju „putevi

za Vrawe i Pri{tinu, zatim drugi, koji su vezivali ceove i vodili u Krivu

reku, jama~no do topionica. Po livadama i {umi vide se zaseci u strani, zaravwene

duìne, kojima su i{li ti stari putevi… Svi tragovi ~ine utisak kao

da su stari putevi bili ude{eni samo za karavanski saobra}aj.“ 79

U razdobqu izme|u dva svetska rata, 1933. godine, mawa terenska prou~avawa

povr{inskih ostataka u Novom Brdu vr{io je arhitekta \ur|e Bo{kovi}.

Glavnu pa`wu posvetio je ostacima utvr|ewa, ali je tako|e utvrdio da „svuda

ima temeqa starih gra|evina“. U svom izve{taju detaqno je opisao ostatke fortifikacija,

sa prvom skicom utvr|enih prostora. Zakqu~io je da „tvr|avu

75 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 14.

76 Cviji} 1911, 1126.

77 Isto.

78 Isto, 126–27.

79 Isto.

46


He paid most of his attention to the remains of the fortification, but he also established

that “there are foundations of old buildings all over the place.” In his report,

he described the remains of the fortifications in detail with the first sketch of the

fortified areas. He concluded that the “The fortress is created by two clearly distinct

parts,” which he denominated as “The Upper and the Lower Towns.” He also noticed

that in addition to the main medieval construction, which he tried to date, there

were also Ottoman reconstructions conducted at some later dates. 80

80 Bo{kovi} 1939, 162–167.

81 Popovi} 1989a, 142–144.

82 Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955,

251–255.

83 Kora} 1954–1955, 265.

This numeration has been kept later

as well, so it is applicable in the case

of the latest surveying as well.

SURVEYS 1952–1957

The first archaeological surveying in the complex of Novo Brdo, with a very ambitious

programme, was started in 1952 by the Institute of Archaeology of the Serbian Academy

of Sciences. Later, within the scope of this programme, the exploration works

were joined in by the National Museum from Belgrade and the Military Museum of

the JNA (Yugoslav People’s Army). The planned exploration works at the sites within

Novo Brdo complex, with higher and lower intensity, were carried out until 1962

and then they continued in 1969 when they were finally stopped. After a decade of

comprehensive field works with significant results, further archaeological surveys

were “stopped by the will of the district structures of the [communist] Party from

Pri{tina, as politically inappropriate.” 81

During the first three years, the exploration works focused on the remains of

the fortifications that were found covered in huge quantities of collapsed stone and

debris. Within the scope of the preparations for the starting of the field exploration,

geodetic surveying of the entire former urban zone of Novo Brdo was done at the

scale of 1 : 1000 and that of the fortress with its closer surroundings was done at the

scale of 1 : 500. In the first campaign, in 1952, the main works were focused on the

remains of the Castle and the Lower Town. 82 The goal was to dig out the debris and

reveal the sections of the fortifications and the preserved faces of the wall of the

former base of the fortress in order to have a clearer visual understanding. For the

purpose of subsequent considerations, as well as easier monitoring of the course of

the works, all the towers of Novo Brdo’s fortress were marked by numbers. Thus,

the main, east tower of the Castle was marked by number 1, while the next corner

south tower became Tower 2. Three towers within the west rampart of the Castle

were assigned numbers 3–5, while the north corner tower was marked as Tower 6.

In the Lower Town, the tower on the south corner was designated as Tower 7, while

the one on the north corner became Tower 8. As for the ramparts and gates, the

names adopted for them were in line with the points of compass. 83

The works during August 1952 comprised solely the clearing up of the debris

in order to be able to determine with precision the bases of the towers and the thickness

of the ramparts, which consequently enabled experts to determine the accurate

dimensions of the Castle (the Upper Town). The link between the Castle and the

Lower Town was explored and then the remains of the main town’s South Gate were

discovered. On the north side, the route of the Northeast Rampart which went down

from the Castle to the corner Tower 8 was partially cleared up. The thickness of this

rampart was defined and the sally port in the section closer to Tower 8 that had been

toppled with debris was revealed. More detailed works were carried out in the interior

of the Main Tower 1 where remains of a vaulted space and bases for the interfloor

structure were discovered. Works were also conducted in the interior of Tower 6


formiraju dva jasno razli~ita dela“, koja je ozna~io kao „Gorwi i Dowi grad“.

Tako|e je uo~io da, osim glavne sredwovekovne gradwe, koju je poku{ao da datuje,

ima i poznijih turskih obnova. 80

ISTRA@IVAWA 1952–1957. GODINE

Prva arheolo{ka istraìvawa u kompleksu Novog Brda, sa vrlo ambicioznim

programom, zapo~eo je 1952. godine Arheolo{ki institut Srpske akademije

nauka. Kasnije su se istraìva~kim radovima u okviru ovog programa prikqu-

~ili Narodni muzej iz Beograda i Vojni muzej JNA. Planirani istraìva~ki

radovi na lokalitetima u okviru kompleksa Novog Brda obavqani su sa ve}im

ili mawim intenzitetom do 1962. godine, potom nastavqeni 1969. godine, kada

su kona~no prekinuti. Posle jedne decenije obimnih terenskih radova sa

zna~ajnim rezultatima, daqa arheolo{ka istraìvawa su, voqom oblasnih

partijskih struktura iz Pri{tine, obustavqena kao politi~ki nepodobna. 81

U prve tri godine u sredi{tu istraìva~kih radova bili su ostaci utvr-

|ewa, koji su zate~eni zasuti ogromnim koli~inama obru{enog kamena i {uta.

U okviru priprema za zapo~iwawe terenskih istraìvawa izvr{eno je geodetsko

snimawe cele nekada{we urbane zone Novog Brda u razmeri 1 : 1000 i utvr|ewa

sa bliòm okolinom u razmeri 1 : 500. U prvoj kampawi 1952. godine glavni

radovi bili su usmereni na ostatke Zamka i Doweg grada. 82 Ciq je bio da se iskopom

{uta otkriju zasuti delovi fortifikacija i o~uvana lica zidova, zbog

jasnijeg sagledavawa nekada{we osnove utvr|ewa. Radi kasnijih razmatrawa,

kao i lak{eg pra}ewa toka radova, sve kule novobrdskog utvr|ewa su obeleène

rednim brojevima. Tako je glavna, isto~na kula Zamka ozna~ena brojem 1, a

slede}a ugaona ju`na kula postala je Kula 2. Tri kule u okviru zapadnog bedema

Zamka dobile su brojeve 3–5, a severna ugaona kula ozna~ena je kao Kula 6.

U Dowem gradu kula na ju`nom uglu dobila je naziv Kula 7, a ona na severnom

uglu Kula 8. Za bedeme i kapije usvojeni su nazivi prema stranama sveta. 83

Radovi u toku avgusta 1952. godine obuhvatali su iskqu~ivo ~i{}ewe {uta

da bi mogle precizno da se odrede osnove kula i debqine bedema, {to je omogu-

}ilo da se odrede ta~ne dimenzije Zamka (Gorweg grada). Istraìvana je veza

Zamka sa Dowim gradom, gde su otkriveni ostaci glavne gradske, Ju`ne kapije.

Sa severne strane delimi~no je o~i{}ena trasa Severoisto~nog bedema, koji

se od Zamka spu{tao do ugaone Kule 8. Definisana je debqina ovog bedema i

otkrivena poterna na delu bliè Kuli 8, koja je bila zasuta {utom. Ne{to detaqnije

ra|eno je u unutra{wosti glavne kule, Kule 1, gde su otkriveni ostaci

jednog zasvedenog prozora i leì{ta za me|uspratnu konstrukciju. Ra|eno je i

u unutra{wosti Kule 6, gde su tako|e otkrivena leì{ta za me|uspratnu konstrukciju.

U Dowem gradu, uz Zapadni bedem, otkopani su ostaci jedne pravougaone

gra|evine, za koju je zakqu~eno da pripada poznijem turskom periodu. Ispod

wenih zidova na|eni su temeqi starije, verovatno sredwovekovne zgrade. Tom

prilikom je utvr|en nekada{wi nivo terena uz Zapadni bedem, koji je bio niì

za 1,5 do 1,8 m u odnosu na dana{wi. 84

Naredne, 1953. godine nastavqeni su ranije zapo~eti radovi, ali u znatno

ve}em obimu. 85 U celini su istraèni ostaci glavne, Ju`ne kapije Doweg grada,

delimi~no otkriveni prethodne godine. Od slojeva {uta o~i{}ena je relativno

dobro o~uvana kapija Zamka, izme|u Kula 3 i 4, koja je gotovo sasvim bila

80 Bo{kovi} 1939, 162–167.

81 Popovi} 1989a, 142–144.


251–255.

83 Kora} 1954–1955, 265.

Ova numeracija je i kasnije zadràna,

tako da je primewena i kod najnovijih

istraìvawa.


256–257.

85 Za radove bilo je povremeno

angaòvano izme|u 80 i 100 radnika.

48


256–257.

85 For these works, occasionally between 80

and 100 workers were engaged.

86 Kora} 1954–1955, 268.

87 Ibid., fig. 32.

88 Kora} 1954–1955, 270, fig. 35 and 36.

89 Kora} 1954–1955, 270–271, fig. 37.

90 Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955a,

275–282.

91 êr{kov 1958, 338–340.


where bases for the inter-floor structure were also revealed. In the Lower Town,

adjacent to the West Rampart, remains of a rectangular building were excavated and

it was concluded that these belonged to the later, Ottoman period. Under its walls,

the foundations of an older, probably medieval building were found. On this occasion,

the former level of the terrain beside the West Rampart was fortified since it

was 1.50 m to 1.80 m lower in comparison to the level of today. 84

In the following year, 1953, the works that had started earlier continued, but in

a significantly larger scope. 85 The remains of the main South Gate of the Lower Town,

partially revealed the previous year, were fully surveyed now. The relatively well preserved

gate of the Castle, between Towers 3 and 4, that had been almost completely

covered in collapsed stones was cleared up from the layers of debris. 86 Very extensive

works were also carried out on the removal of the debris by the exterior side of

the West Rampart, between Towers 5 and 6. A smaller probe was opened under the

layer of debris beside a corner of Tower 5 and it was noticed here that the tower was

founded directly on a rock. The probe also provided some other important data. At

around 1.5 m before the tower’s front, remains of a massive wall were discovered

and it was later established that it belong to the external West Rampart of the Castle.

With its foundation this wall rested on a layer of black soil with a lot of soot and

rare findings of pottery, which would suggest that it belongs to an older medieval

period that preceded the construction of the Castle. 87

Extensive works were started in the area beside the Northeast Rampart of the

Lower Town, including also the interior of Tower 8, and these works mostly included

the removal of large quantities of toppled stones and debris, almost to the point of

the former terrain’s level. On this occasion, the works also excavated in its entirety

a sally port from which parts of the jambs were preserved above the threshold. 88 In

the Lower Town, there were also preliminary explorations of a building that rested

against the interior face of the West Rampart in the direct proximity of Tower 7.

This was a larger dug-in rectangular structure the interior wall faces of which were

covered by a layer of clay. In the central space there were five circularly walled pits

– wells. After initial uncertainties during the works, in the end an accurate presumption

was reached that this was in fact a large cistern with filter-wells. 89

The route of the South Rampart of the Lower Town was followed through the

layers of debris only along the interior face. There were no conditions for any detailed

surveying, so it remained unknown what the remains of a massive wall structure in

the central section of the rampart’s route represented. The earlier assumptions that

these may have been remains of a tower with an unusual ground plan keep being

insufficiently well-founded. This is a complex problem that experts will be able to

resolve only with future surveys.

In the summer of 1954, extensive works continued within the fortress, 90 but

explorations also started at the site of the Saxon Church not far from the former

urban zone of Novo Brdo. 91 The main works were aimed at the space next to the

Northeast Rampart of the Lower Town, where experts had already worked the year

before. This time around, adjacent to the interior face of the rampart, under the

layers of debris, the experts came to the cultural layer, while also discovering traces

of buildings resting against the ramparts which, however, were not surveyed. The

same case was also with the interior space of Tower 8 where further excavations

were stopped above the flat area where the cultural layer begins. On the exterior



Kula 3 i Kula 4 u toku radova 1953


Tower 3 and Tower 4

during the works in 1953

zasuta obru{enim kamenom. 86 Veoma obimni radovi bili su obavqeni i na

uklawawu {uta uz spoqnu stranu Zapadnog bedema, izme|u Kula 5 i 6. Ispod

sloja {uta uz ugao Kule 5 otvorena je jedna mawa sonda, u kojoj je uo~eno da je

kula bila utemeqena neposredno na steni. U sondi se do{lo i do drugih zna-

~ajnih podataka. Na oko 1,5 m ispred ~ela kule otkriveni su ostaci jednog masivnog

zida, za koji je kasnije utvr|eno da pripada Spoqnom zapadnom bedemu

Zamka. Svojim temeqom ovaj zid je leào na sloju crne zemqe sa dosta gari i

retkim nalazima keramike, {to bi ukazivalo na to da pripada starijem sredwovekovnom

razdobqu, koje je prethodilo gra|ewu Zamka. 87

Na prostoru uz Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada, ukqu~uju}i i unutra-

{wost Kule 8, zapo~eti su obimni radovi, koji su uglavnom obuhvatili uklawawe

velikih koli~ina obru{enog kamena i {uta, gotovo do ravni nekada{weg

nivoa terena. Tom prilikom u celini je otkopana i poterna, od koje su, iznad

praga, bili o~uvani i delovi dovratnika. 88 U Dowem gradu obavqena su i preliminarna

istraìvawa ostatka jednog objekta oslowenog na unutra{we lice

Zapadnog bedema, u neposrednoj blizini Kule 7. U pitawu je bila ve}a ukopana

pravougaona konstrukcija, ~ija su unutra{wa lica zidova bila obloèna slojem

gline. U sredi{wem prostoru nalazilo se pet kru`no obzidanih jama – bunara.

Posle po~etnih nedoumica u toku radova, na kraju je ipak izneta ta~na pretpostavka

da je u pitawu velika cisterna sa filter-bunarima. 89

Trasa Ju`nog bedema Doweg grada pra}ena je kroz slojeve {uta samo du`

unutra{weg lica. Za detaqnija istraìvawa nije bilo uslova, tako da je ostalo

nepoznato {ta predstavqaju ostaci masivne zidane konstrukcije na sredi-

{wem delu trase bedema. Ranije pretpostavke da su to mo`da ostaci neke kule

neuobi~ajene osnove ostaju nedovoqno utemeqene. U pitawu je sloèn problem,

koji }e mo}i da se razre{i tek budu}im istraìvawima.

86 Kora} 1954–1955, 268.

87 Isto, sl. 32.

88 Isto, 270, sl. 35 i 36.

89 Isto, 270–271, sl. 37.

50


Sl. 12. Zamak, Kula 4

sa ostacima Zapadne gra|evine

posle iskopavawa 1954

Fig. 12. Castle, Tower 4

with remains of the West Edifice,

after the excavations in 1954


278, fig. 52.

93 Ibid., 276, fig. 46.

94 Ibid., 278, fig. 53.

95 Zdravkovi} 1958, 342–343.

side of the Northeast Rampart, another rampart route was reached under the debris

and this route remained insufficiently clear to the surveyors. As the more recent

explorations have shown, this used to be a part of the rampart of the antemural –

the protechism. 92 On the opposite end, the excavations continued in the complex

of the Lower Town’s South Gate. It was established that in front of this gate there

used to be a barbican with a separate gate and the experts found a section of its

threshold. 93 During the explorations of the fortifications of the Castle in the area

in front of Towers 2 and 3, traces of the External West Rampart were discovered,

but these were not surveyed in more detail.

According to the original programme of works in Novo Brdo, it was envisaged

that the entire interior of the Castle was to be cleared of the debris. The implementation

of this ambitious intention started in the space on the interior side of the

gate where remains of a building resting against Tower 4 were discovered. 94 This

finding showed that other buildings may also be expected in the interior of the

Castle, but owing to the lack of funds, as well as other factors, further explorations

in this space did not continue.

In the following year, 1955, the explorations were focused on the Lower Town’s

south corner Tower 7. Large quantities of debris were removed from its interior and

exterior sides, but the surveying was not conducted to the level of the former terrain

planes. The experts observed only a complex stratigraphic situation with several

construction phases, among which it was possible to set apart with strong certainty

the basic three – the original tower, then additions in its interior and subsequent

restoration, that is, the enclosure wall on the exterior side. 95

If observed as a whole, these large-scale works carried out in the period from

1952–1955 were, as far as the fortifications of Novo Brdo are concerned, almost

exclusively aimed at the removal of large quantities of rocks and debris in order to

reveal the preserved sections of the ramparts and the towers. This made it possible to


Sl. 13. Zamak, Kula 6

posle delimi~nog otkopavawa 1954

Fig. 13. Castle, Tower 6

after the partial excavation in 1954

U leto 1954. godine nastavqeni su obimni radovi u okviru utvr|ewa, 90 ali

su zapo~eta i istraìvawa na lokalitetu Sa{ka crkva nedaleko od nekada{we

urbane zone Novog Brda. 91 Glavni radovi bili su usmereni na prostor uz Severoisto~ni

bedem Doweg grada, gde je ve} ra|eno prethodne godine. Uz unutra{we

lice bedema, ispod slojeva {uta, tom prilikom se do{lo do nivoa kulturnog

sloja, a otkriveni su tragovi objekata oslowenih na bedem, koji, me|utim, nisu

istraìvani. Isti slu~aj je bio i sa unutra{wim prostorom Kule 8, gde su daqa

iskopavawa zaustavqena iznad ravni u kojoj po~iwe kulturni sloj. Sa spoqne

strane Severoisto~nog bedema, ispod {uta, do{lo se do jo{ jedne bedemske

trase, koja je istraìva~ima ostala nedovoqno jasna. Kako su pokazala novija

istraìvawa, u pitawu je bio deo bedema predzi|a – Protehizme. 92 Na suprotnom

kraju nastavqena su iskopavawa u kompleksu Ju`ne kapije Doweg grada.

Konstatovano je da se ispred ove kapije nalazilo jedno predutvr|ewe sa posebnom

kapijom, od koje je uo~en deo praga. 93 Prilikom istraìvawa fortifikacija

Zamka na prostru ispred Kula 2 i 3, otkriveni su tragovi Spoqnog zapadnog

bedema, koji nisu detaqnije istraìvani.

Prema prvobitnom programu radova u Novom Brdu, bilo je zami{qeno da

se cela unutra{wost Zamka o~isti od {uta. Ostvarivawe ove ambiciozne zamisli

zapo~eto je na prostoru sa unutra{we strane kapije gde su otkriveni

ostaci jedne gra|evine, koja je bila oslowena na Kulu 4. 94 Ovaj nalaz je pokazao

da se u unutra{wosti Zamka mogu o~ekivati i druge gra|evine, ali usled

nedostatka sredstava, kao i drugih ~inilaca, daqa istraìvawa na ovom prostoru

nisu nastavqena.

U narednoj, 1955. godini istraìvawa su bila usmerena samo na dowogradsku

ju`nu ugaonu kulu – Kulu 7. Uklowene su velike koli~ine {uta sa wene unutra{we

i spoqne strane, ali istraìvawa nisu izvedena do nekada{wih ravni

terena. Uo~ena je samo sloèna stratigrafska situacija sa vi{e gra|evinskih


275–282.

91 êr{kov 1958, 338–340.


278, sl. 52.

93 Isto, 276, sl. 46.

94 Isto, 278, sl. 53.

52


Sl. 14. Severoisto~ni bedem

Doweg grada sa Protehizmom

posle otkopavawa 1953

Fig. 14. North-east rampart of

the Lower Town with the Protechism

after the excavations in 1953

96 Kora} 1954–1955, 271, fig. 38;

Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955,

275–276, fig. 47;

Zdravkovi} 1958, 341–342.

97 Zdravkovi} 1958 a, 349–357;

Zdravkovi} 1959, 320–322.

supplement the plan of the fortification and to obtain the exact measures of individual

sections of the fortress. The surveying of the cultural layers under the piled-up

debris was not conducted and therefore there are no archaeological findings or data

on the stratigraphy of the cultural layers. The limited technical capabilities, along

with the lack of funds, prevented the implementation of the ambitious intentions of

the experts. Parallel to the excavation of the ramparts and the towers, their preventative

conservation was also carried out. The damages that could be reached using

low scaffolding were restored, since there were no conditions for any extensive conservation

activities. Somewhat more intensive works were done on Tower 3 of the

Castle, where the wall face up to the height of over 3 m was reconstructed. The lateral

side of Tower 8 in the Lower Town was also restored to a significant degree. 96

The explorations in the complex of Novo Brdo conducted in 1956 and even in

the following several years were carried out through cooperation between the

Institute of Archaeology and the National Museum, and they were limited to the

site with the remains of the Cathedral Church of Saint Nicholas in the Suburb. 97 It

was envisaged that the works on the surveying of the fortifications of Novo Brdo

should be continued through the organisation of the Military Museum of the JNA


faza, od kojih se sasvim sigurno mogu izdvojiti osnovne tri – prvobitna kula,

zatim dogradwe u wenoj unutra{wosti i poznija obnova, odnosno obzi|e sa

spoqne strane. 95

Posmatrani u celini, ovako obimni radovi obavqeni u razdobqu od 1952.

do 1955. godine bili su, kada su u pitawu utvr|ewa Novog Brda, gotovo iskqu-

~ivo usmereni na uklawawe visokih naslaga kamena i {uta radi otkrivawa

o~uvanih delova bedema i kula. To je omogu}ilo da se dopuni plan utvr|ewa i

dobiju ta~ne mere pojedinih delova utvr|ewa. Istraìvawa kulturnih slojeva

ispod nasipa {uta nisu vr{ena, tako da su izostali arheolo{ki nalazi, kao i

podaci o stratigrafiji kulturnih slojeva. Ograni~ene tehni~ke mogu}nosti

uz nedostatak novca sputavale su ostvarivawe ambicioznih zamisli istraìva~a.

Istovremeno sa iskopavawima bedema i kula vr{ena je i wihova preventivna

konzervacija. Obnovqena su o{te}ewa do kojih se moglo do}i uz upotrebu

niske skele, budu}i da za obimnije konzervatorske zahvate nije bilo uslova.

Ne{to ve}i radovi izvedeni su na Kuli 3 Zamka, gde je rekonstruisano lice

zida do visine od preko 3 m. Tako|e je u znatnoj meri obnovqena i bo~na strana

Kule 8 u Dowem gradu. 96

Istraìvawa u kompleksu Novog Brda od 1956. godine, pa i narednih nekoliko

godina, vr{ena su u saradwi Arheolo{kog instituta i Narodnog muzeja

i bila su ograni~ena na lokalitet sa ostacima katedralnog hrama Svetog

Nikole u Podgra|u. 97 Bilo je predvi|eno da radovi na istraìvawu novobrdskih

fortifikacija budu nastavqeni u organizaciji Vojnog muzeja JNA. Trebalo

je za po~etak to da budu prva probna sonda`na arheolo{ka istraìvawa, 98

koja su obavqena u toku avgusta 1957. godine. Tom prilikom otvorene su ~etiri

sonde – tri u Dowem gradu i jedna u Zamku.

Na prostoru sa unutra{we strane glavne, Ju`ne kapije Doweg grada otvorena

je sonda I, dimenzija 10 × 10 m, podeqena na ~etiri bloka. U ovoj sondi konstatovana

su stratigrafski dva osnovna horizonta – stariji, sredwovekovni, i

mla|i, iz poznijeg turskog razdobqa. Starijem horizontu odgovara prvobitna

Sl. 15 i 16. Severoisto~ni bedem

Doweg grada – unutra{wa strana

(u toku iskopavawa 1953)

i ostaci poterne

(posle otkopavawa 1953)

Fig. 15 and 16. North-east rampart

of the Lower Town – interior side

(during the excavations in 1953)

and remains of the sally port

(after the excavations in 1953)

95 Zdravkovi} 1958, 342–343.

96 Kora} 1954–1955, 271, sl. 38;

Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955,

275–276, sl. 47; Zdravkovi} 1958,

341–342.

97 Zdravkovi} 1958a, 349–357;

Zdravkovi} 1959, 320–322.

98 Pribakovi} 1958, 253–254.

54

98 Pribakovi} 1958, 253–254.

99 Ibid., 257–262.

100 Ibid., 262–264.

101 There is no data on probes II and IV in

the published report on the 1957 surveying.

102 Pribakovi} 1958, 258, note 14.

103 Popovi}, Bjeli} 2018, 37.

104 The programme for the exploration,

conservation and partial reconstruction

of the fortifications of Novo Brdo is

implemented through the organisation of

UNESCO, using the funds provided by the

European Union. The implementation

of the works was commissioned through

an international tender to the Company

for construction, restoration and

reconstruction of buildings “KOTO d.o.o.”

from Belgrade. According to the tender

requirements, the contractor was under

obligation to ensure participation of an

archaeologist and an architect with multiyear

experience and certain references

in order to conduct archaeological and

architectural explorations of the

monument. For these works archaeologist

Marko Popovi}, PhD, and Gordana Simi},

M.Sc. in architecture, were engaged.


(Yugoslav People’s Army). To start with, this was to be the first test probe-based

archaeological surveying 98 carried out during August 1957. Four probes were opened

on this occasion – three in the Lower Town and one in the Castle.

In the space on the interior side of the main South Gate of the Lower Town

probe I was opened, it had the dimensions of 10 × 10 m and was divided into four

blocks. Two basic horizons were stratigraphically determined in this probe – an older,

medieval one and a younger from the late Ottoman period. The original configuration

of the terrain, that is, the rocky ground that descends rather steeply towards southwest,

corresponds to the older horizon. Two platforms with traces of an underpinning

were found there, as well as the remains of four steps constructed in a dry stone bond

which led towards the Lower Town. In the north corner of the probe, traces of a path

were discovered. This path led along the foot of the external rampart towards the

Castle’s gate. The younger horizon includes remains of an Ottoman building with a

rectangular ground plan, founded on the cultural layer and an embankment. 99 The

explorations in the space of the large cistern that was discovered near Tower 7 in the

Lower Town in 1953 were continued in probe III. All five filter-wells were defined

in the probe, but only one was surveyed to the level at which water appeared. 100

Parallel to the work in the probes, 101 the exploration of the complex in front of

the South Gate of the Lower Town was also completed. Remains of an external gate

were revealed, as well as a rampart that extended along the edge of the slope and

that closed off the antemural in front of the Lower Town’s South Gate. 102 After these

works, carried out in August 1957, further explorations in the area of the fortifications

of Novo Brdo were stopped. Owing to insufficient funds for field explorations

in the following years, the archaeological surveying was solely limited to the site

with the remains of the Cathedral Church of Saint Nicholas. 103

2015 AND 2016 EXPLORATIONS

After more than six decades, explorations and conservation and restoration works

continued in Novo Brdo and this was done under completely changed circumstances

in comparison to those when the first exploration works started around the

middle of the last century. This time also the programme of the works was limited

solely to the remains of the fortifications with an aim to remove the high deposits

of rocks and debris they were covered with in order to be able to start working on

conservation, partial restoration and the presentation of the former fortified complex

of this medieval town. 104 In order for this extensive and demanding programme to be

implemented, it was necessary to have prior surveying and archaeological excavations,

which were not foreseen originally, but were still carried out simultaneously

during the conservation works. The programme was supposed to be implemented in

stages, so during the first two years the works were focused on the Castle and then

on the northeast rampart of the Lower Town with Tower 8. Unfortunately, this programme

was not implemented in its entirety since the works were stopped in August

2016 and thus the entire West Rampart and the South Rampart with Tower 7 in the

Lower Town remained unsurveyed.

In the first year of the works, the fortifications of the Castle with the remains

of the buildings that were situated within this part of the fortress were surveyed

almost in their entirety. The main goal of these surveys was to reveal the covered

remains of the external fortifications, to obtain the relevant data on the ramparts


konfiguracija terena, odnosno stenovito tlo, koje se dosta strmo spu{ta prema

jugozapadu. Tu su otkriveni ostaci dve platforme sa tragovima podzida i ostaci

~etiri stepenika konstruisana u suhozidanom slogu, koja su vodila prema

Dowem gradu. U severnom uglu sonde otkriveni su tragovi staze, koja je podno`jem

spoqnog bedema vodila prema kapiji Zamka. Mla|em horizontu odgovaraju

ostaci jedne turske gra|evine pravougaone osnove, zasnovane na kulturnom sloju

i nasipu. 99 U sondi III nastavqena su istraìvawa u prostoru velike cisterne,

koja je 1953. godine otkrivena kod Kule 7 u Dowem gradu. U sondi je definisano

svih pet filter-bunara, ali je samo jedan istraèn do nivoa na kome

se pojavila voda. 100

Istovremeno sa radovima u sondama 101 zavr{eno je i istraìvawe kompleksa

ispred Ju`ne kapije Doweg grada. Otkriveni su ostaci spoqne kapije, kao i

bedema koji se pruào du` ruba padine i zatvarao predzi|e ispred dowogradske

Ju`ne kapije. 102 Posle ovih radova, obavqenih u avgustu 1957. godine, daqa

istraìvawa na prostoru novobrdskih utvr|ewa su obustavqena. Usled nedovoqnih

sredstava za terenska istraìvawa, u narednim godinama arheolo{ka

iskopavawa bila su iskqu~ivo ograni~ena na lokalitet sa ostacima katedralnog

hrama Svetog Nikole. 103

ISTRA@IVAWA 2015. I 2016. GODINE

Posle vi{e od {est decenija nastavqena su istraìvawa i konzervatorsko-restauratorski

radovi u Novom Brdu, i to u sasvim izmewenim okolnostima u odnosu

na one kada su zapo~eti prvi istraìva~ki radovi sredinom pro{log veka.

I ovog puta program radova je bio ograni~en iskqu~ivo na ostatke fortifikacija

sa ciqem da se uklone visoke naslage kamena i {uta kojima su bile zasute,

kako bi se moglo pristupiti poslovima na konzervaciji, delimi~noj restauraciji

i prezentaciji nekada{weg utvr|enog kompleksa ovog sredwovekovnog grada.

104 Da bi se ovaj veliki i zahtevan program mogao ostvariti, bila su neophodna

prethodna istraìvawa i arheolo{ka iskopavawa, koja prvobitno nisu

bila predvi|ena, ali su ipak izvo|ena istovremeno sa tokom konzervatorskih

radova. Program je trebalo da se realizuje etapno, tako da su radovi u prve dve

godine bili usmereni na sam Zamak, a potom na Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg

grada sa Kulom 8. Ovaj program, naàlost, nije u celini ostvaren, po{to su radovi

obustavqeni avgusta 2016. godine, te su ostali neistraèni ceo Zapadni

bedem i Ju`ni bedem sa Kulom 7 u Dowem gradu.

U prvoj godini radova gotovo u celini su istraène fortifikacije Zamka

sa ostacima gra|evina koje su se nalazile u unutra{wosti ovoga dela utvr-

|ewa. Glavni ciq ovih istraìvawa bio je da se otkriju zasuti ostaci spoqnih

fortifikacija, dobiju relevantni podaci o bedemima i kulama glavnog obzi-

|a, a zatim da se iskopaju i istraè ostaci gra|evina u unutra{wosti Zamka.

Pored neophodnih saznawa za izvo|ewe radova na konzervaciji i delimi~noj

restauraciji, ciq je bio i dobijawe podataka za budu}e ure|ewe i prezentaciju

ovog spomeni~kog kompleksa. Uz ova saznawa teìlo se i prikupqawu podataka

o nastanku, etapama gra|ewa i ru{ewa Zamka Novog Brda, kao i fortifikaciji

ovog sredwovekovnog grada u celini.

Pre po~etka radova 2015. godine ceo kompleks Zamka zate~en je u velikoj

meri zasut i zatrpan ogromnim koli~inama {uta i obru{enog kamena. U okviru

99 Isto, 257–262.

100 Isto, 262–264.

101 O sondama II i IV nema podataka

u objavqenom izve{taju o istraìvawima

1957. godine.

102 Pribakovi} 1958, 258, nap. 14.

103 Popovi}, Bjeli} 2018, 37.

104 Program istraìvawa, konzervacije

i delimi~ne obnove fortifikacija

Novog Brda izvodi se u organizaciji

Uneska, sredstvima koja je obezbedila

Evropska unija. Izvo|ewe radova na

me|unarodnom tenderu povereno je

Privrednom dru{tvu za izgradwu,

obnovu i rekonstrukciju gra|evinskih

objekata „KOTO d.o.o“ iz Beograda.

Prema uslovima tendera izvo|a~ radova

je bio u obavezi da obezbedi u~e{}e

arheologa i arhitekte sa vi{egodi{wim

iskustvom i odre|enim referencama

kako bi sproveo arheolo{ka i

arhitektonska istraìvawa spomenika.

Za ove radove angaòvani su arheolog

dr Marko Popovi} i arhitekta

mr Gordana Simi}.

56


and the towers of the main enclosure wall, and then to excavate and explore the

remains of the buildings within the Castle. In addition to the necessary findings for

the conducting of the works aimed at conservation and partial restoration, the goal

was also to obtain data for the future development and presentation of this monument

complex. Along with these findings, the specialists tried to collect data on the

founding and the phases related to the construction and demolition of the Castle of

Novo Brdo, as well as of the fortifications of this medieval town as a whole.

Before the beginning of the works in 2015, the entire Castle complex was

found extensively concealed and covered in huge quantities of debris and collapsed

rocks. Within the scope of the preparatory works, in order to approach the Castle,

an access communication was laid down from the east side. Its first section was done

in the sector in front of the Lower Town’s South Gate, where the encountered rock

deposits were moved to and then the first part of the road was laid down by manual

excavation over the length of around 20 m, before the front side of Tower 2. On this

occasion, the visible threshold of the gate was covered in small plaster debris in order

to protect it from any possible damages during the works. Further down the slope,

we followed the route of the former communication that was partially covered with

a fill that was over one meter high and that covered traces of the former cobblestones

and the earlier revealed remains of the External South Gate which, as it appears,

were destroyed and covered to a large degree during the previous decades. Further

towards the foot of the slope where the access to the Castle is, we laid down a temporary

access road which was cut through the rock and mortar debris fills using

machinery. This communication follows approximately the route of the former

access road to the fortress. It has been foreseen that upon the completion of the

conservation and restoration works on the fortifications of the Castle and the Lower

Town this temporary communication should be removed along with the fills made

of debris that have been deposited there in order to present the old medieval access

road that led from the Suburb to the South Gate.

On the interior side of the South Gate we encountered a situation with a large

uncovered archaeological probe from 1957 and large quantities of dug-out earth. In

order for this space to be returned to its original state and to enable its use for the

conducting of the conservation works, the encountered former probe was cleared out

from vegetation, including also the remains of the walls that were located within it.

After taking photos and comparing them to the 1957 documentation, using machinery

the probe was covered with earth. On the same occasion, over the layers of the

fill from the times when the works were carried out in 1952–1954, we laid out a part

of the road leading from this area towards the section in front of the Castle’s gate.

Upon the completion of the preparatory works, we started to remove high piles

of rock and debris that covered the sections around the ramparts, as well as the

whole interior of the Castle. After the excavation of the upper layers of debris and

rock, we started with the archaeological and architectural surveying with the aim

to reveal the covered remains of the external fortifications, to collect relevant data on

the ramparts and the towers of the main enclosure wall, and then to excavate and

survey the remains of the buildings within the Castle.

The remains of the external fortifications of the Castle were revealed and surveyed

from its north, east and south sides, that is, in the area in front of the main

fortress rampart from Tower 6, via Towers 1 and 2, to Tower 3. In most of that area,


pripremnih radova, radi pristupa Zamku, trasirana je prilazna komunikacija

sa isto~ne strane. Wen prvi deo ure|en je u sektoru ispred Ju`ne kapije Doweg

grada, gde su preseqene zate~ene deponije kamena, a potom ru~nim iskopom

trasiran prvi deo puta, u duìni od oko 20 m, ispred ~eone strane Kule 2. Tom

prilikom vidqivi prag kapije zasut je sitnim malternim {utom kako bi se za-

{titio od mogu}ih o{te}ewa u toku radova. Daqe niz padinu pra}ena je trasa

nekada{we komunikacije, koja je delom zasuta nasipom visokim preko jedan

metar, pod kojim su ostali tragovi nekada{we kaldrme i ranije otkriveni

ostaci Spoqne ju`ne kapije, koji su, kako izgleda, u prethodnim decenijama u

dobroj meri poru{eni i zasuti. Idu}i prema podno`ju padine na pristupu

Zamku, trasiran je privremeni prilazni put, koji je uz pomo} mehanizacije

prose~en kroz nasipe kamena i malternog {uta. Ta komunikacija pribli`no

prati trasu nekada{weg prilaznog puta ka utvr|ewu. Predvi|eno je da se po

okon~awu konzervatorsko-restauratorskih radova na fortifikacijama Zamka

i Doweg grada ova privremena komunikacija ukloni, kao i nasipi {uta koji je

Sl. 17. Crkva u Zamku,

etape iskopavawa (1–4)

Fig. 17. Church in the Castle,

excavation stages (1–4)

1 2

3 4

58

105 See the enclosure

Simi}, Radovanovi}, on p. 278–302.

106 The works were stopped on

10 August 2016 by the UNESCO’s office

in charge, with the seat in Sarajevo,

with the justification that the available

funds had been exhausted.


we previously removed very high piles of rock and debris, the height of which between

Towers 6 and 1, in the section along the rampart, was over 5 m and the similar situation

existed in the section between Towers 1 and 2. These were large quantities of

collapsed building material that were created during the toppling of the massive

walls of Tower 1. Underneath this debris, we discovered along the whole length

remains of the external rampart, as well as the subsequently added scarp consolidations

of the lateral sides of the main Tower 1. In the area of the hidden road

between the interior and the external ramparts, we removed the lower layers of the

debris to the level of the cultural layer that was not surveyed, but only partially

probed. A section of the external rampart from the west side of the Castle remained

only partially surveyed, taking into account that before the completion of these

explorations further works were stopped. 105

The interior of the Castle was found covered in layers of rock and debris up to

the height of 5.5 m – 6 m along the faces of the ramparts and up to 2 m – 3 m in

the central section of the Castle, closer to the West Gate. The upper layers of rocks

and debris were removed first until the walls of the buildings that were in the interior

of the Castle started to appear. After that, the excavations continued within the

revealed buildings down to the level of their floors. Towers 1 and 6 were surveyed

completely with the rampart and down to the level of the floors, while in the other

towers the layer of debris and rock was removed down to the level of the fill at the

same plane as the former second storey.

During the first explorations in 1952–1954, which were of a limited scope,

remains of a building were found in the Castle to the left of the entrance, and it was

designated as the West Building. During the 2015 works, the entire interior space

of the Castle was surveyed together with the remains of the buildings that were

located there. In the south corner of the Castle, to the right from the entrance, we revealed

remains of a residential building that was designated as the South Building.

In the opposite corner, there was a spacious North Building connected to Tower 6.

In the middle of the Castle’s courtyard, there are remains of a small single-nave

church with subsequently added narthex. Between the Church and the neighbouring

South Building we discovered remains of a small steam bath. In the interior of

the Castle there were also two cisterns with filter-wells. The smaller cistern had

been dug in between the Church and the South Building, while the bigger one took

up the space along the West Rampart together with Tower 5, between the West and

the North buildings.

In the following year, 2016, final surveying of a smaller scope was carried out

in the interior of the Castle, as follows: in the South and the North Buildings at the

level of the original floors, then along the remains of the south wall of the Church

where in the hollows of the rock we discovered traces of an older cultural layer, as

well as in the space in front of the presumed entrance into the small steam bath. It

was planned to survey the remains of the External West Rampart in their entirety

as well, but the overall uncovering of this section of the Castle’s fortifications failed

to materialise at the order of the Investor. 106 As opposed to the mentioned works

in the Castle, according to the plan that had been adopted earlier, the complex of the

Lower Town’s North Rampart with neighbouring buildings was completely uncovered

and surveyed, and thus it was prepared so that the conservation and restoration

works could start.


tu deponovani, kako bi se prezentovao stari sredwovekovni prilazni put koji

je vodio iz Podgra|a ka Ju`noj kapiji.

Sa unutra{we strane Ju`ne kapije zate~ena je situacija sa velikom nezatrpanom

arheolo{kom sondom iz 1957. godine i velikim gomilama iskopane

zemqe. Da bi se taj prostor vratio u izvorno stawe i da bi se omogu}ilo wegovo

kori{}ewe za izvo|ewe konzervatorskih radova, zate~ena nekada{wa sonda

o~i{}ena je od vegetacije, ukqu~uju}i i ostatke zidova koji su se u woj nalazili.

Nakon fotografisawa i pore|ewa sa dokumentacijom iz 1957. godine sonda

je pomo}u mehanizacije zatrpana. Istom prilikom preko slojeva nasipa iz

vremena radova 1952–1954. godine trasiran je i deo puta sa ovog prostora prema

delu ispred kapije Zamka.

Po okon~awu pripremnih radova zapo~eto je uklawawe visokih nasipa kamena

i {uta kojima su bili zasuti prostori oko bedema, kao i cela unutra{wost

Zamka. Posle iskopa gorwih slojeva {uta i kamena pristupilo se arheolo{ko-

-arhitektonskim istraìvawima sa ciqem da se otkriju zasuti ostaci spoqnih

fortifikacija, dobiju relevantni podaci o bedemima i kulama glavnog obzi-

|a, a zatim da se iskopaju i istraè ostaci gra|evina u unutra{wosti Zamka.


zapadni zid priprate

u toku iskopavawa


west wall of the narthex

during the excavations

60


This part of the fortifications of Novo Brdo includes the North Rampart itself

with Tower 8, then the barbican – the protechism in front of which there used to be

a trench, while on the interior side it includes remains of houses. The preparatory

works included prior removal of large quantities of rocks and debris which the fortifications

were covered with, as well as partial emptying of the moat. There, at the very

edge of the moat, remains of the ramparts of the antemural – the protechism – were

found. In this space, that was defended in the past, along the exterior face of the

main rampart, a relatively thin cultural layer down to the original plane of the terrain

was surveyed under the deposits of debris. On the opposite side, in the interior of the

1

Sl. 19. Zamak, slojevi {uta

i obru{enog kamena

iznad Ju`ne gra|evine (1–2)

Fig. 19. Castle, layers of debris

and the collapsed rock above

the South Edifice (1–2)

2


Ostaci spoqnih fortifikacija Zamka otkriveni su i istraèni sa wegove

severne, isto~ne i ju`ne strane, odnosno na prostoru ispred glavnog tvr|avskog

bedema od Kule 6, preko Kule 1 i 2 do Kule 3. Na ve}em delu toga prostora

prethodno su ukloweni veoma visoki nasipi kamena i {uta, ~ija je visina

izme|u Kula 6 i Kule 1 iznosila, na delu uz bedem, preko 5 m, a sli~no je bilo

i na delu izme|u Kule 1 i Kule 2. U pitawu su velike koli~ine osute gra|e nastale

tokom obru{avawa masivnih zidova Kule 1. Ispod ovog {uta otkriveni

su celom duìnom ostaci spoqnog bedema, kao i poznije prizidana eskarpna

oja~awa bo~nih strana glavne kule – Kule 1. Na prostoru skrivenog puta izme|u

unutra{weg i spoqnog bedema ukloweni su niì slojevi {uta do ravni kulturnog

sloja, koji nije istraìvan, ve} samo mestimi~no sondiran. Deo spoqnog

bedema sa zapadne strane Zamka ostao je samo delimi~no istraèn, budu}i da

su pre okon~awa ovih istraìvawa daqi radovi obustavqeni. 105

Unutra{wost Zamka zate~ena je zasuta slojevima kamena i {uta od visine

5,5–6 m uz lica bedema, do 2–3 m u sredi{wem delu Zamka, bliè Zapadnoj kapiji.

Prvo su ukloweni gorwi slojevi kamena i {uta do pojave zidova gra|evina

koje su se nalazile u unutra{wosti Zamka. Posle toga iskopavawa su nastavqena

u okviru otkrivenih objekata do ravni wihovih podova. U celini sa bedemom su

istraène Kula 1 i Kula 6, i to do ravni podova, dok je u ostalim kulama sloj

{uta i kamena uklowen do nivoa nasipa u ravni nekada{we druge etaè.

Prilikom prvih istraìvawa 1952–1954. godine, koja su bila ograni~enog

obima, u Zamku su otkriveni levo od ulaza ostaci jedne zgrade, koju smo ozna~ili

kao Zapadnu gra|evinu. U toku radova 2015. godine istraèn je ceo unutra-

{wi prostor Zamka sa ostacima gra|evina koje su se tu nalazile. U ju`nom uglu

Zamka, desno od ulaza, otkriveni su ostaci stambenog zdawa, koje smo ozna~ili

kao Ju`nu gra|evinu. U suprotnom uglu nalazila se prostrana Severna gra|evina,

koja je bila povezana sa Kulom 6. U sredi{tu dvori{ta Zamka nalaze se

ostaci male jednobrodne crkve sa naknadno prizidanom pripratom. Izme|u

Crkve i susedne Ju`ne gra|evine otkriveni su ostaci malog parnog kupatila.

U unutra{wosti Zamka nalazile su se i dve cisterne sa filter-bunarima. Mawa

cisterna bila je ukopana izme|u Crkve i Ju`ne gra|evine, a ve}a je zauzimala

prostor uz Zapadni bedem sa Kulom 5, izme|u Zapadne i Severne gra|evine.

Naredne, 2016. godine u unutra{wosti Zamka obavqena su zavr{na istra-

ìvawa maweg obima, i to: u Ju`noj i Severnoj gra|evini u ravni prvobitnih

podova, zatim uz ostatke ju`nog zida Crkve, gde su u udubqewima stene otkriveni

tragovi starijeg kulturnog sloja, kao i na prostoru ispred pretpostavqenog

ulaza u malo parno kupatilo. Bilo je planirano da se u celini istraè i

ostaci Spoqnog zapadnog bedema, ali celovito otkrivawe ovoga dela fortifikacije

Zamka izostalo je po nalogu Investitora. 106 Za razliku od pomenutih

radova u Zamku, prema ranije usvojenom planu, u celini je otkriven i istraèn

kompleks Severnog bedema Doweg grada sa susednim objektima, te tako pripremqen

za pristup konzervatorsko-restauratorskim radovima.

Ovaj deo novobrdskih fortifikacija obuhvata sam Severni bedem sa Kulom

8, zatim predutvr|ewe – Protehizmu, ispred koje se nalazio rov, a sa unutra{we

strane ostatke ku}a. Pripremni radovi su obuhvatali prethodno uklawawe

velikih koli~ina kamena i {uta kojim su fortifikacije bile zasute, kao

i delimi~no pra`wewe rova. Tu su na samom rubu rova otkriveni ostaci bedema

105 V. prilog Simi}, Radovanovi},

na str. 279–303.

106 Radovi su obustavqeni 10. avgusta

2016. godine od strane nadle`ne poslovnice

Uneska sa sedi{tem u Sarajevu, uz

obrazloèwe da su raspoloìva nov~ana

sredstva iscrpena.

62


Lower Town, the space along the face of the rampart was also surveyed down to the

former level of the ground. Remains of three older houses (houses 2–4) and one

younger one (house 1) were found there. They were built above the fill and the cultural

layer and chronologically they correspond to the period of the Ottoman rule.

The project, the implementation of which started in 2015–2016, stipulated that

the fortifications of Novo Brdo should be explored in their entirety, conserved and

partially restored. This ambitious intention, however, has not been carried out and it

is quite uncertain if and when it will. The ramparts of the Lower Town from the west

and the south sides, including also Tower 7, were left unsurveyed and thus our findings

on the fortifications of Novo Brdo remain incomplete. Nevertheless, the results

that have been achieved in the first years of the implementation of this Project provide

new significant findings on the defence of this medieval town which made it

possible to prepare our study. Some of the questions will stay insufficiently resolved

and thus the conclusions that will be provided will remain open to be supplemented

and modified in line with the possible new explorations in the future.


predzi|a – Protehizme. U tom, nekada brawenom prostoru uz spoqno lice glavnog

bedema istraèn je, ispod naslaga {uta, relativno tanak kulturni sloj do

prvobitne ravni terena. Sa suprotne strane, u unutra{wosti Doweg grada, prostor

uz lice bedema istraèn je tako|e do nekada{we ravni tla. Tu su otkriveni

ostaci tri starije ku}e (Ku}e 2–4) i jedne mla|e (Ku}a 1), podignute na nasipu

i kulturnom sloju, koji hronolo{ki odgovara razdobqu turske vladavine.

Projektom ~ija je realizacija zapo~eta 2015–2016. godine bilo je predvi-

|eno da se novobrdske fortifikacije u celini istraè, konzerviraju i delimi~no

obnove. Ta ambiciozna zamisao, naàlost, nije realizovana, a sasvim je

neizvesno da li }e i kada biti ostvarena. Ostali su neistraèni bedemi Doweg

grada sa zapadne i ju`ne strane, ukqu~uju}i i Kulu 7, tako da na{a znawa o

utvr|ewima Novog Brda ostaju nepotpuna. Ipak, rezultati do kojih se do{lo u

prvim godinama realizacije ovog projekta pruàju nova zna~ajna saznawa o odbrani

ovog sredwovekovnog grada, koja su omogu}ila da se pristupi izradi na{e

studije. Neka pitawa }e ostati nedovoqno razre{ena, tako da }e i zakqu~ci

koji }e biti izloèni ostati otvoreni za dopune i promene u skladu se eventualnim

novim istraìvawima u budu}nosti.

64

Stratigraphy of the Cultural Layers

and Archaeological Findings

107 Regarding the project, see the enclosure


ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS IN THE COMPLEX OF NOVO BRDO’S CASTLE

and in the zone along the Northeast Rampart of the Lower Town had the character

of systematic explorations, although this was not originally foreseen as such (fig.

20). 107 In order to achieve this, the works had to be divided into two basic stages.

In the first one, which may be called the preparatory state, the high piles of debris

and toppled rocks were almost completely removed to the level of the cultural layer.

During the next stage, all the surfaces in the interior of the Castle that contained a

cultural layer were surveyed to the level of the rock and the subsoil. In the area of

the hidden road between the exterior and the interior ramparts, the layers of debris

and rock were removed to the level of the former terrain plane, but the cultural

layer was surveyed by probes only on smaller surfaces.

As it has been pointed out earlier, the interior space of the Castle was found

covered in layers of debris and toppled rocks, and these layers were 5.5 m to 6 m high

along the interior face of the rampart and 2 m to 3 m in the central section, closer to

the West Gate where extensive excavations were carried out in 1953 as well. A similar

situation was also encountered in the area of the hidden road where the height

of the debris along the ramparts reached 5 m. Under this fill, as the surveying with

probes showed, the thickness of the cultural layer went between 0.20 m and 0.50 m,

and it may be presumed that in some sections the cultural layer was even thicker.

In the interior of the Castle where more complex cultural layer may be expected,

across a larger surface area we discovered buildings made across flattened rocks.

Under the plane of the Castle’s courtyard and the floors in the buildings, traces of

an older cultural layer had remained preserved only sporadically in the indentations

in the rocks. In the interior of the buildings, the cultural layer, revealed under the

layers of debris and above the former floors, almost by the rule reflects the last decades

of the life in the Castle and the time when these edifices were demolished. The

thickness of the cultural layer there is almost uniformed and goes between 0.20 m

and 0.40 m. A little more comprehensive cultural layer with more numerous findings

65

Stratigrafija kulturnih slojeva

i arheolo[ki nalazi

ARHEOLO[KA ISKOPAVAWA U KOMPLEKSU NOVOBRDSKOG ZAMKA I ZONI

uz Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada imala su karakter sistematskih istraìvawa,

iako ovo prvobitno nije bilo predvi|eno (sl. 20). 107 Da bi se to ostvarilo,

radovi su se morali podeliti u dve osnovne etape. U prvoj – moglo bi se re}i

pripremnoj – etapi gotovo kompletno su ukloweni visoki nasipi {uta i obru-

{enog kamena do ravni kulturnog sloja. U slede}oj etapi u unutra{wosti Zamka

istraène su do ravni stene i zdravice sve povr{ine na kojima je postojao

kulturni sloj. U prostoru skrivenog puta izme|u spoqnog i unutra{weg bedema

ukloweni su slojevi {uta i kamena do nekada{we ravni terena, ali je kulturni

sloj samo na mawim povr{inama sonda`no istraìvan.

Kao {to je ve} ranije istaknuto, unutra{wi prostor Zamka zate~en je zasut

slojevima {uta i obru{enog kamena, visine 5,5–6 m uz unutra{wa lica bedema,

odnosno 2–3 m u sredi{wem delu, bliè Zapadnoj kapiji, gde su obimna iskopavawa

vr{ena i 1953. godine. Sli~na situacija je bila i na prostoru skrivenog

puta, gde je visina {uta uz bedeme dosezala i do 5 m visine. Ispod ovog nasipa,

kako su pokazala istraìvawa u sondama, debqina kulturnog sloja kre}e se izme|u

0,2 i 0,5 m, a moè se pretpostaviti da je na pojedinim deonicama kulturni

sloj bio i debqi. U unutra{wosti Zamka, gde se mogao o~ekivati sloèniji

kulturni sloj, na ve}oj povr{ini su otkriveni objekti podignuti na zaravwenim

stenama. Ispod ravni dvori{ta Zamka i podova u gra|evinama tragovi

starijeg kulturnog sloja ostali su sa~uvani samo mestimi~no u udubqewima

stena. U unutra{wosti gra|evina kulturni sloj, koji je otkriven ispod slojava

{uta, a iznad nekada{wih podova, gotovo po pravilu odslikava posledwe

decenije ìvota u Zamku i vreme ru{ewa ovih zdawa. Tu je debqina kulturnog

sloja gotovo ujedna~ena i kre}e se izme|u 0,2 i 0,4 m. Ne{to obimniji kulturni

sloj sa brojnijim nalazima ulomaka keramike konstatovan je samo iznad cisterni,

ali i tu gotovo svi arheolo{ki nalazi poti~u iz posledweg razdobqa

ìvota u Zamku.

107 O projektu v. u prilogu

Simi}, Radovanovi}, na str. 279–303.

66

108 Kora} 1954–1955, 268, fig. 32.


of pottery fragments was determined only above the cisterns, but even there almost

all of the archaeological finds come from the last period of life in the Castle.

Modest remains of the cultural layer, which were surveyed in their entirety, still

provide sufficient elements for observing the basic archaeological stratigraphy in

the Castle’s complex. At the site of this central fortification of Novo Brdo, it was

established that there were three basic cultural strata. The oldest one, which preceded

the construction of the Castle’s fortifications, is documented only in the traces

that have remained preserved in the indentations of the rocks. This is a homogenous

layer of markedly black soil with a lot of soot. Its traces were discovered in the

probe in front of Tower 5, 108 then under the foundations of the south wall of the

Church, as well as on the bottom of a smaller probe in front of the former entrance

into the Steam Bath. In this layer, we found only few small fragments of older medieval

pottery which could be approximately dated back to the 11 th –12 th century,

although somewhat younger dating could not be excluded either.

The next, main cultural horizon includes the layers created during an entire

century, from the first half of the 14 th century, through the middle of the next one,

that is, those from the period when there was life in the Castle. In terms of stratigraphy,

this is a compact layer of dark soil with little soot and some stone, where it

was not possible to separate reliably older from the younger deposits. Outside the

buildings, this layer was also encountered in the space above both cisterns. By its

structure, only the upper surface of the layer, which we marked as the level of destruction,

stands out. This is understandable if we take into account that up until the

fourth decade of the 15 th century and the first Ottoman siege there were no major

destructions of the buildings in the Castle and that they were used, maintained and

cleaned, so there were no conditions to form a chronologically more pronounced

cultural layer. This was particularly impacted by the rocky character of the ground

where it was not possible to dig in waste pits.

The final level of this horizon, which could be approximately dated back to

around the middle of the 15 th century, corresponds to the times when individual

buildings got demolished during the Ottoman sieges. The material from these layers

is quite uniformed and does not show any important variants that could have chronological

significance in comparison to the somewhat older layering. This refers

especially to the layer of the destruction of the edifices in the Castle that took place

during the Ottoman sieges in 1441 and 1455.

Above this destruction layer, there is no new layering nor have we discovered

any traces that would suggest the existence of an Ottoman cultural layer. Among the

pottery material, there are exceptionally few fragments of vessels of the Ottoman

origin and they mostly appear in the lower layers of the debris. Also, it was not possible

to separate stratigraphically a distinct layer that could correspond to the use

of granary, the only Ottoman structure in the destroyed Castle that we will deal

with a little later. The youngest stratigraphic ensemble, which ought to be viewed

within the scope of the Ottoman horizon, consists of the findings from the layers of

debris solely in the area above Cistern 2 which in line with the fragments of Ottoman

pipes and “ethno” pottery we dated back to the late 18 th century or the first

half of the 19 th one.

In the free surfaces in the Castle’s courtyard, the cultural layer was encountered

solely above both cisterns, while there was none in the rocky ground of the


Sl. 20. Novo Brdo, Zamak sa Severoisto~nim bedemom Doweg grada – deo utvr|ewa istraèn 2015–2016

Fig. 20. Novo Brdo, Castle with the north-east rampart of the Lower Town – a part of the fortification studied in 2015–2016

68


communication line that led from the West Gate to the North Building. A rather

powerful cultural layer, with the thickness that went even up to 0.40 m, was formed

above Cistern 1. In the major part of this surface area this was a layer of brown loose

soil with numerous fragments of glazed pottery where the dominant shape was a

pot with two handles, with exterior side painted white and glazed in pale yellow. As

for the remaining vessels, we found several fragments of glazed bowls with “dispersed

ornament.” There was very little rough hearth pottery – few fragments of the crepulja

(bread-baking pans) and fragments of a large pot. In the northeast corner of the area

above the cisterns, between the ramparts and the wall of the North Building, a waste

dump site with abundance of fragments of pottery vessels was found. As for the

forms, there were glazed pots with one or two handles and jugs with a handle and

a spout (fig. 21/4–5). Several fragments of lids were also observed, while there were

almost no bread-baking pans.

Sl. 21. Nalazi kerami~kih posuda: 1, 7 i 8) parno kupatilo, sloj destrukcije; 4 i 5) iz sloja iznad Cisterne 1;

6 i 9) sloj iznad Cisterne 2; 2) sloj nad zdravicom; 3) sloj ispred Zapadne kapije; 10) sloj destrukcije u Crkvi

Fig. 21. Pottery findings: 1, 7 and 8) steam bath, destruction layer; 4 and 5) from the layer above Cistern 1;

6 and 9) layer above Cistern 2; 2) layer above the subsoil; 3) layer in front of the West Gate; 10) destruction layerin the Church


Skromni ostaci kulturnog sloja, koji su u celini istraèni, ipak daju dovoqno

elemenata da se u kompleksu Zamka sagleda osnovna arheolo{ka stratigrafija.

Na lokaciji ovog sredi{weg novobrdskog utvr|ewa konstatovano je postojawe

tri osnovna kulturna stratuma. Najstariji, koji je prethodio izgradwi

fortifikacija Zamka, dokumentovan je samo u tragovima koji su ostali sa~uvani

u udubqewima stena. U pitawu je homogen sloj izrazito crne zemqe sa dosta

gari. Tragovi su mu otkriveni u sondi ispred Kule 5, 108 zatim ispod temeqa

ju`nog zida Crkve, kao i na dnu mawe sonde ispred nekada{weg ulaza u parno

kupatilo. U ovom sloju otkriveno je svega nekoliko sitnih ulomaka starije sredwovekovne

keramike, koji bi se okvirno mogli vremenski odrediti u 11–12. vek,

mada i ne{to mla|e datovawe se ne bi moglo iskqu~iti.

Slede}em, glavnom kulturnom horizontu pripadali bi slojevi obrazovani

tokom ~itavog jednog stole}a, od prve polovine 14. veka zakqu~no sa sredinom

narednog stole}a, odnosno iz razdobqa ìvota u Zamku. U stratigrafskom smislu,

ovo je kompaktan sloj mrke zemqe sa malo gari i kamena, gde nije bilo mogu-

}e pouzdano izdvojiti starije od mla|eg naslojavawa. Izvan gra|evina ovaj sloj

je konstatovan i na prostoru iznad obe cisterne. Po svojoj strukturi jedino se

izdvaja gorwa povr{ina sloja, koju smo ozna~ili kao nivo destrukcije. To je razumqivo

ako se ima u vidu da sve do ~etvrte decenije 15. veka i prve turske opsade

nije bilo ve}ih ru{ewa zdawa u Zamku, kao i da su ona kori{}ena, odràvana

i ~i{}ena, tako da nije ni bilo uslova da se obrazuje hronolo{ki izraèniji

kulturni sloj. Na to je posebno uticao i stenoviti karakter tla, gde nije bilo

mogu}e ukopavawe otpadnih jama.

Zavr{ni nivo ovog horizonta, koji bi se okvirno mogao datovati oko sredine

15. veka, odgovara vremenu kada pojedine gra|evine stradaju tokom turskih

opsada. Materijal iz ovih slojeva je sasvim ujedna~en i ne pokazuje bitnije varijante,

koje bi mogle imati hronolo{ko zna~ewe, u odnosu na ne{to starije

naslojavawe. To se posebno odnosi na sloj destrukcija gra|evina u Zamku do kojih

dolazi u vreme turskih opsada 1441. i 1455. godine.

Nad ovim slojem ru{ewa nema novog naslojavawa, niti su otkriveni tragovi

koji bi ukazivali na postojawe turskog kulturnog sloja. Me|u kerami~kim

materijalom ima izuzetno malo ulomaka posuda turskog porekla i oni se naj-

~e{}e javqaju u niìm slojevima {uta. Tako|e nije bilo mogu}e stratigrafski

izdvojiti ni poseban sloj koji bi mogao odgovarati kori{}ewu ambara za ìto,

jedine turske gra|evine u poru{enom Zamku, o kojoj }e kasnije biti re~i.

Najmla|u stratigrafsku celinu, koju treba posmatrati u okviru turskog horizonta,

predstavqaju nalazi iskqu~ivo na prostoru iznad Cisterne 2 iz slojeva

{uta koje smo prema ulomcima turskih lula i etno-keramike datovali u pozni

18. ili prvu polovinu 19. veka.

Na slobodnim povr{inama u dvori{tu Zamka kulturni sloj je konstatovan

iskqu~ivo iznad obe cisterne, dok ga nema na stenovitom tlu komunikacije koja

je vodila od Zapadne kapije ka Severnoj gra|evini. Dosta mo}an kulturni sloj,

debqine i do 0,4 m, bio je obrazovan iznad Cisterne 1. Na ve}em delu povr{ine

to je sloj mrke rastresite zemqe sa brojnim fragmentima gle|osane keramike,

gde se kao dominantan oblik pojavquje lonac sa dve dr{ke, spoqne povr{ine belo

oslikane i bledoùto gle|osane. Od ostalih posuda na|eno je nekoliko fragmenata

gle|osanih zdela sa „razlivenim ornamentom“. Grube ogwi{ne keramike 108 Kora} 1954–1955, 268, sl. 32.

70

109 Popovi} 2012, 213–214



The same structure was found in the cultural layer above Cistern 2, in the area

between the West and the North Buildings. It consisted of brown soil which was in

the lower level mixed with a lot of sand. Several hundred of small fragments came

from this layer and these were almost exclusively pieces of glazed pottery where the

most frequent forms were pots of the same type and ornaments, and with two handles,

then a little rarer jug fragments, while bowl fragments appeared only sporadically

(fig. 21/6 and 9). If observed as a whole, they do not differ from the findings

from the other sections within the Castle, which typologically mostly correspond to

the first half of the 15 th century.

A cultural layer similar in its contents also exists in both buildings – the North

and the South ones. The cultural stratigraphy is somewhat more complex there if we

take into account the floors and their reconstructions, which we will go back to later

when we conduct an analysis of these buildings as a whole. This fact, however, could

not be noticed in the structure of the cultural layer. Numerous pottery fragments

from both buildings do not differ from the earlier mentioned finds encountered in

the layer above the cisterns. These are mostly fragments of glazed pots that appear

in two sizes, as well as rare specimens of white and green painted and glazed bowls

(fig. 22). In the South Building in the fill of the added substructure for the corner

fireplace on the upper floor, we found a fragmented glazed pot with white painted

decoration in two zones that could, thanks to the place where it was found, be rather

reliably dated back to the end of the 14 th century or the first years of the 15 th century

(fig. 22/3). Namely, according to the results we have obtained, the said structure

corresponds to the reconstruction of this building that was carried out during the

period between these two centuries.

As opposed to the Castle, the stratigraphic situation in the surveyed areas along

the Northeast Rampart and in Tower 8 of the Lower Town is somewhat more complex.

No cultural layer was found in most of the protechism’s area. A somewhat different

situation was encountered in the north section of this area, between the younger

protechism gate and the sally port in the main rampart. We discovered a cultural

layer of an even thickness, between 0.20 m and 0.30 m which, however, is not stratigraphically

homogenous since there are also finds from the later Ottoman materials.

Relatively numerous finds of pottery vessels’ fragments come from this layer

and they are predominantly of the medieval origin which accounts for around 85%,

but there are also mixtures with Ottoman pottery. One of the specificities of this

layer lies in the finds of a dozen shoe-plates that did not exist in the other surveyed

areas (fig. 28/15–17). Shoe-plates, analogous to these from Novo Brdo, constitute a

relatively frequent find in medieval sites and they are approximately dated back to

the period from 14 th –16 th century. 109 Among the medieval pottery, there are mostly

fragments of glazed pots and jugs, while fragments of bowls and lids are rare. In the

younger pottery of the Ottoman origin, which could not be stratigraphically separated

from the older finds, there is predominant presence of fragments of deep

bowls with dark-green glaze.

On the interior side of the rampart, the medieval cultural layer is linked to the

houses that were built (houses 2, 3 and 4) along this fortification route and therefore

it must be viewed within the scope of these ensembles. In the area between the

sally port and House 2 above the rock and the subsoil, we discovered traces of an

older level of the cultural layer that had been formed along the newly-built rampart.


ima veoma malo – nekoliko fragmenata crepuqa i ulomci jednog lonca. U severoisto~nom

uglu povr{ine nad cisternom, izme|u bedema i zida Severne gra-

|evine, otkriven je otpadni prostor sa obiqem ulomaka kerami~kih posuda.

Od oblika zastupqeni su gle|osani lonci sa jednom ili dve dr{ke i kr~azi sa

dr{kom i izlivnikom (sl. 21/4–5). Uo~eno je i nekoliko fragmenata poklopaca,

dok crepuqa gotovo i da nema.

Istu strukturu imao je i kulturni sloj iznad Cisterne 2, na prostoru izme|u

Zapadne i Severne gra|evine. Sastojao se od mrke zemqe, koja je u nièm

nivou bila pome{ana sa dosta peska. Iz sloja poti~e vi{e stotina sitnih

fragmenata, gotovo iskqu~ivo gle|osane keramike, gde su od oblika naj~e{}i

Sl. 22. Nalazi kerami~kih posuda: 1–2 i 4) Ju`na gra|evina, sloj iznad mla|eg poda; 3) stariji sloj iznad prvobitnog poda

(ispod gari i {uta); 5–9) Severna gra|evina, sloj destrukcije iznad prvobitnog poda, sloj u ravni prvobitnog poda

Fig. 22. Pottery findings: 1–2 and 4) South Edifice, layer abovethe younger floor; 3) olderlayer abovethe original floor (under the

soot and debris); 5–9) North Edifice, destruction layer above the original floor, layer at the level of the original floor

72


This layer had, unfortunately, been partially destroyed by the earlier excavations, so

it was difficult to get insight into its former contents. This was a layer of brown soil

with little debris and small pottery fragments that did not significantly differ from

the finds encountered in the clearly defined younger medieval layers. A fragmented

jug with a spout, with a sgraffito decoration and glazed, comes from this older layer

Sl. 23. Nalazi kerami~kih posuda: 1) sloj nad zdravicom uz Ku}u 2; 2–3) sloj izme|u Ku}e 2 i poterne;

4–7) Ku}a 2, nivo poda

Fig. 23. Pottery findings: 1) layer above the subsoil next to House 2; 2–3) layer between House 2 and Sally Port;

4–7) House 2, floor level


lonci istog tipa i ornamentike sa dve dr{ke, zatim ne{to re|i ulomci kr~aga,

dok se fragmenti zdela pojavquju samo sporadi~no (sl. 21/6 i 9). Posmatrani

u celini, ne razlikuju se od nalaza sa drugih prostora u Zamku, koji tipolo{ki

ve}inom odgovaraju prvoj polovini 15. veka.

Sli~an kulturni sloj po svom sadràju postoji i u obe gra|evine – Severnoj

i Ju`noj. Tu je kulturna stratigrafija ne{to sloènija ako se imaju u vidu podovi

i wihove obnove, na {ta }emo se vratiti kasnije prilikom analize ovih

objekata u celini. Ova ~iwenica, me|utim, nije se mogla uo~iti u strukturi

kulturnog sloja. Brojni ulomci keramike iz obe gra|evine ne razlikuju se od

ranije pomenutih nalaza iz sloja nad cisternama. U pitawu su uglavnom ulomci

gle|osanih lonaca, koji se javqaju u dve veli~ine, kao i retki primerci belo

i zeleno slikanih i gle|osanih zdela (sl. 22). U Ju`noj gra|evini u nasipu

dogra|ene supstrukcije za ugaoni kamin na spratu otkriven je fragmentovani

gle|osani lonac sa belo slikanim ukrasom u dve zone. Zahvaquju}i mestu nalaza,

lonac bi se mogao dosta pouzdano datovati u kraj 14. ili prve godine 15. veka

(sl. 22/3). Naime, pomenuta struktura, prema rezultatima do kojih smo do{li,

odgovara obnovi ovoga zdawa, koja je izvedena u prelaznom razdobqu izme|u pomenuta

dva stole}a.

Za razliku od Zamka, stratigrafska situacija na istraènim povr{inama

du` Severoisto~nog bedema i u Kuli 8 Doweg grada ne{to je sloènija. Na

ve}em delu prostora Protehizme nije konstatovano postojawe kulturnog sloja.

Nad stenovitim prvobitnim tlom leàli su samo slojevi {uta i obru{enog

kamena. Unekoliko razli~ita situacija konstatovana je u severnom delu ovoga

prostora, izme|u mla|e kapije Protehizme i poterne u glavnom bedemu. Tu je

otkriven kulturni sloj ujedna~ene debqine, izme|u 0,2 i 0,3 m, koji, me|utim,

stratigrafski nije homogen, budu}i da ima i nalaza poznijeg turskog materijala.

Iz sloja poti~u relativno brojni nalazi ulomaka kerami~kih posuda,

prete`no sredwovekovnog porekla, koji su zastupqeni sa oko 85%, ali ima me-

{awa i sa turskom keramikom. Jednu od osobenosti ovog sloja predstavqaju nalazi

desetak potkova za obu}u, kojih na drugim istraìvanim povr{inama nije

bilo (sl. 28/15–17). Potkovi analogni sa ovim novobrdskim predstavqaju

relativno ~est nalaz na sredwovekovnim lokalitetima i okvirno se datuju u

razdobqe 14–16. veka. 109 Me|u sredwovekovnom keramikom uglavnom se nalaze

ulomci gle|osanih lonaca i kr~aga, dok su fragmenti zdela i poklopaca retki.

U mla|oj keramici turskog porekla, koja se stratigrafski nije mogla izdvojiti

od starijih nalaza, prete`no su zastupqeni ulomci dubokih tamnozeleno

gle|osanih zdela.

Sa unutra{we strane bedema sredwovekovni kulturni sloj povezan je sa ku-

}ama koje su podizane (Ku}e 2, 3 i 4) uz ovu fortifikacionu trasu, te se mora

posmatrati u okviru tih celina. Na prostoru izme|u poterne i Ku}e 2 nad stenom

i zdravicom otkriveni su tragovi starijeg nivoa kulturnog sloja koji se

obrazovao uz novopodignuti bedem. Ranijim iskopavawima, naàlost, ovaj sloj je

delom uni{ten, tako da je te{ko ste}i uvid u wegov nekada{wi sadràj. U pitawu

je bio sloj mrke zemqe sa malo {uta i sitnim ulomcima keramike, koja se

nije bitno razlikovala od nalaza iz jasno definisanih mla|ih sredwovekovnih

slojeva. Iz ovog starijeg sloja poti~e i jedan fragmentovani kr~ag sa izlivnikom,

gle|osan i sa zgrafito-ukrasom (sl. 23/1). Zna~ajni nalazi keramike

109 Popovi} 2012, 213–214


74


(fig. 23/1). Significant pottery finds come from a fault in a rock (probe IV) near the

corner where the Northeast Rampart of the Lower Town joins the external rampart

of the Castle. This was obviously a waste dump area from which come numerous

pottery fragments, that is, fragmented glazed pots and bowls, and also smaller parts

of jugs and lids (fig. 27).

As opposed to the south section of this area, the sector between the sally port

and Tower 8 also contained a well-preserved Ottoman cultural layer with remains of

House 1. A significantly more complex stratigraphy with more extensive layering

was observed in the interior of Tower 8 where, above the level of the floor, we came

across a powerful cultural layer of uneven thickness, between 1.60 m and 1.90 m,

which filled the ground floor of the tower almost to the middle of its height. The

cultural layer in the tower mostly originates back to the period before the Ottoman

conquest of the town in 1455 and it may be followed from the floor’s plane at the

level of -1.80 m (measured in relation to the threshold of the sally port) to the level

of -0.20 m, and occasionally up to +10 m. Above this surface, there is a relatively thin

layer created during the period of the Ottoman rule the thickness of which mostly

does not exceed 0.30 m. It was not possible to separate reliably in terms of stratigraphy

the upper level of this layer, taking into account that there were finds of the

Ottoman pottery also in the lowest layers of the debris.

The medieval cultural layer in Tower 8 seemed rather homogenous, without

any clearer traces of layering. It consisted of brown loose soil mixed with smaller,

and sporadically somewhat larger, pebbles, then rare fragments of thin clay tiles

and traces of charred wood. In places we also noticed stone interbeds with mortar

Sl. 24. Nalazi kerami~kih posuda: 1–6) Ku}a 3, sloj iznad poda

Fig. 24. Pottery findings: 1–6) from House 3, from the layer above the floor

Sl. 25. Nalazi kerami~kih posuda: 1–14) Kula 8

Fig. 25. Pottery findings: 1–14) Tower 8


76


debris in which there were no archaeological finds. Numerous fragments of pottery

vessels, then several iron wedges, rare other metal finds and a lot of animal bones

come from the layers of brown soil.

The lower layers of brown soil above the floor of the tower, between the levels of

-0.80 m and -1.10 m, are characterised by rather homogenous medieval material,

predominantly fragments of glazed and painted pots with one or two handles, then

lids, as well as several glazed bowls on a foot (fig. 25). What is clearly noticeable is that

unglazed pots are significantly less present and there are only few fragments of breadbaking

pans, sufficiently big to establish their dimensions, with the height of around

1 cm and the diameter between 18 cm and 22 cm. We could also separate fragments

of a larger pot, most likely a jar used for storing food. In the younger layers, between

Sl. 26. Nalazi kerami~kih posuda: 4–5) sonda I; 1–6) otkopni sloj

Fig. 26. Pottery findings: 4–5) probe I; 1–6) excavation layer


poti~u iz raseline u steni (sonda IV) kraj ugla gde se Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg

grada spaja sa spoqnim bedemom Zamka. U pitawu je o~igledno otpadni prostor,

iz koga poti~u brojni ulomci keramike, odnosno fragmentovani gle|osani

lonci i zdele, zatim mawi delovi kr~aga i poklopaca (sl. 27).

Za razliku od ju`nog dela ovog prostora, sektor izme|u poterne i Kule 8 ima

i dobro o~uvan turski kulturni sloj sa ostacima Ku}e 1. Znatno sloènija

stratigrafija, sa obimnijim naslojavawem, uo~ena je u unutra{wosti Kule 8,

gde je iznad ravni poda otkriven mo}an kulturni sloj, neujedna~ene debqine,

izme|u 1,6 i 1,9 m, kojim je gotovo do polovine visine bila zasuta prizemna

etaà kule. Kulturni sloj u kuli najve}im delom poti~e iz razdobqa pre turskog

osvajawa grada 1455. godine i prati se od ravni poda na koti -1,8 (mereno

u odnosu na prag poterene), pa do nivoa -0,2, a mestimi~no do +10 m. Iznad te

povr{ine je konstatovan relativno tanak sloj obrazovan u razdobqu turske vladavine,

a wegova debqina uglavnom ne prelazi 0,3 m. Gorwi nivo ovog sloja nije

bilo mogu}e stratigrafski sasvim pouzdano izdvojiti, budu}i da je nalaza

osmanske keramike bilo i u najniìm slojevima {uta.

Sredwovekovni kulturni sloj u Kuli 8 delovao je dosta homogeno, bez jasnijih

tragova naslojavawa. Sastojao se od mrke rastresite zemqe pome{ane sa sitnim,

a mestimi~no i krupnijim kamenom, zatim retkim ulomcima tankih opeka

i tragovima ugqenisanog drveta. Mestimi~no su uo~eni i proslojci kamena

sa malternim {utom, u kojima nije bilo arheolo{kih nalaza. Iz slojeva mrke

zemqe poti~u brojni ulomci kerami~kih posuda, zatim vi{e gvozdenih klinova,

retki drugi metalni nalazi i dosta ìvotiwskih kostiju.

Niè slojeve mrke zemqe iznad poda kule, izme|u kota -0,8 i -1,1 m, odlikuje

dosta homogen sredwovekovni materijal, prete`no ulomci gle|osanih i

slikanih lonaca sa jednom ili dve dr{ke, zatim poklopaca, kao i nekoliko

gle|osanih zdela na stopi (sl. 25). Uo~qivo je da su znatno mawe zastupqeni negle|osani

lonci, a ima i svega nekoliko fragmenata crepuqa, dovoqno velikih

da su odre|ene wihove dimenzije, visine oko 5 cm, pre~nika izme|u 18 i 22 cm.

Mogli su se izdvojiti tako|e i fragmenti jednog ve}eg lonca, po svoj prilici

}upa za skladi{tewe namirnica. U mla|im slojevima, izme|u kota -1,1 i -0,35 m

(otkopni slojevi 2 i 3), nalazi keramike se ne razlikuju bitno, ali ih je mawe.

Isti materijal se javqa i u najmla|em sredwovekovnom sloju, gde je uo~qivo

me{awe sa osmanskom keramikom. I u sloju ispod {uta, koji bi odgovarao turskom

razdobqu, pored retkih ulomaka osmanske keramike, javqaju se i fragmenti

sredwovekovnih posuda.

U severozapadnom uglu unutra{wosti kule otkriveni su ostaci ostave, koja

je bila pohrawena u jednom ve}em loncu, vertikalno ukopanom u sredwovekovni

sloj. U trenutku otkrivawa bila je ve}im delom ispuwena zemqom. U ovoj ispuni

je prona|en kru`ni medaqon sa predstavom evharistije i apliciranom figurom

jelena, kao i mawi predmet sa srebrnom dr{kom. U sloju zemqe pored ove

posude, pribli`no u ravni sa obodom, otkrivena je srebrna dr{ka drugog sli~nog

predmeta. Obe ove luksuzne dr{ke prepoznate su kao deo luksuznog pribora

za pisawe. U pitawu su ostaci dragocenosti, koji su tu preostali kada je ostava

ispra`wena. Kako su pokazala dosada{wa istraìvawa, ostava je verovatno

bila ukopana krajem ~etvrte decenije 15. veka, a najverovatnije ispra`wena

pre turskog osvajawa grada 1455. godine. 110

110 Popovi}, Biki} 2017, 387–407.

78


levels -1.10 m and -0.35 m (excavated layers 2 and 3), the pottery finds do not differ

significantly, but there are fewer of them. The same material also appears in the

youngest medieval layer, where mixing up with the Ottoman pottery is noticeable.

In the layer under the debris, which would correspond to the Ottoman period, in

addition to the rare fragments of the Ottoman pottery, there are also fragments of

medieval vessels.

In the northeast corner, within the tower, we discovered remains of a storage

that was placed within a larger pot, vertically dug into the medieval layer. At the time

when this was discovered, it was mostly filled with soil. In this fill, we discovered a

circular medallion with a depiction of the Eucharist and an applied figure of a stag,

as well as a smaller object with a silver handle. In the layer of the soil beside this

vessel, approximately at the same level with the rim, we discovered a silver handle

of another similar object. Both of these luxury handles were recognised as a part of

a luxury writing kit. These are remains of the valuables that remained here when

Sl. 27. Nalazi kerami~kih posuda: 1–10) sonda IV, otpadni prostor u raselini stene

Fig. 27. Pottery findings: 1–10) probe IV, excess space in the rock’s throw


Jo{ jedna stratigrafski jasno izdvojena celina otkrivena je u sondi I u

uglu izme|u Kule 8 i Zapadnog bedema. U niìm slojevima nad zdravicom, uz

uobi~ajene ulomke gle|osanih lonaca i kr~aga, otkrivena su i dva ve}a fragmentovana

lonca – }upa, debelih zidova, ukra{enih sa spoqne strane vodoravnim

apliciranim trakama (sl. 26/1 i 3).

ARHEOLO[KI NALAZI

Posmatrani u celini, arheolo{ki nalazi iz sredwovekovnih slojeva, kako iz

Zamka, tako i istraènog prostora uz Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada, relativno

su skromni. Me|u wima, kao {to je to i uobi~ajeno, najbrojniji su ulomci

kerami~kih posuda. 111 U pitawu su prevashodno fragmenti gle|osane keramike,

dok su komadi grubqe ogwi{ne keramike znatno re|i i prema grubim procenama

ne prelaze 10% ukupne koli~ine nalaza kerami~kog materijala.

Me|u gle|osanim posudama, koje su sve bile i belo oslikane, kao dominantni

oblik javqa se lonac u razli~itim varijantama. Pored posuda bez dr{ki,

javqaju se lonci sa jednom ili dve naspramne dr{ke. Pojedini primerci imaju

pomerene dr{ke ka jednoj strani radi lak{eg kori{}ewa lonca pri ispijawu

te~nosti. Svi lonci su gotovo po pravilu bili belo oslikani na mrkom poza|u

i svetloùto ili ùtozelenkasto gle|osani. Ovim loncima odgovaraju i sli~no

ukra{eni poklopci, koji svi pripadaju istom kupastom tipu sa jednom dr-

{kom. U znatno mawem broju zastupqeni su bokali i kr~azi sa izlivnikom, od

kojih su samo pojedini primerci bili ukra{eni zgrafito-ornamentom. Redak

oblik predstavqaju i duboke zdele na niskoj prstenastoj stopi, koje su iznutra

bile oslikane i gle|osane. U materijalu je uo~eno svega nekoliko negle|osanih

lonaca za kuvawe jela, kao i velikih }upova za skladi{tewe namirnica. U

ve}ini celina ima i crepuqa, od kojih su sa~uvani relativno mali delovi.

Ulomci pehara i kerami~kih sve}waka u slojevima sredwovekovnog horizonta

nisu uo~eni.

Za razliku od ulomaka gle|osanih posuda, u mawem broju je bilo negle|osanih

fragmenata dobre fakture, za koje se nije moglo pouzdano utvrditi da li

pripadaju loncima, bokalima ili kr~azima. Sli~ne fakture je bilo i nekoliko

ve}ih fragmentovanih lonaca – }upova, koji uglavnom svi poti~u iz sredwovekovnog

sloja uz Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada. Ogwi{na keramika grube

fakture zastupqena je iskqu~ivo sa nekoliko ulomaka crepuqa istog tipa. Iz

slojeva u Zamku ulomaka grube ogwi{ne keramike gotovo i da nema. U Dowem

gradu jedini nalazi te vrste posuda, odnosno crepuqa poti~u iz sredwovekovnih

slojeva u Kuli 8.

Nalazi predmeta ra|enih od kosti veoma su retki i svi poti~u iz najni-

èg sloja {uta, iznad nivoa destrukcije, tako da bi se te{ko mogli pouzdano

stratigrafski odrediti. U pitawu su uglavnom delovi oplata rezanih od kosti

ili roga. Me|u ko{tanim nalazima izdvajaju se tri mawe plo~aste alatke, koje

su mogle sluìti kao pisaqke (sl. 28/1–3), kao i deo mawe svirale ra|en od

pti~je kosti (sl. 28/4). Zanimqiv nalaz predstavqaju i dve fino rezane tanke

ko{tane aplikacije, za koje je, usled fragmentarne o~uvanosti, te{ko zamisliti

celinu kojoj su pripadale (sl. 29/5–6).

Redak primerak nakita predstavqa prsten rezan od opala, koji je otkriven

u sloju nad podom u Ku}i 2 kraj Severoisto~nog bedema Doweg grada. U pitawu

111 Detaqna analiza nalaza kerami~kih

posuda izloèna je u prilogu V. Biki}

na str. 305–341.

80


the storage was emptied. As the surveying conducted so far has shown, the storage

was most probably dug in at the end of the fourth decade of the 15 th century and

most likely it was emptied before the Turkish conquest of the town in 1455. 110

Another stratigraphically clearly separated ensemble was revealed in probe 1 in

the corner between Tower 8 and the West Rampart. In the lower layers above the

subsoil, along with the usual fragments of glazed pots and jugs, we also discovered

two larger fragmented pots – jars, with thick walls and decorated on the outside

with horizontally applied bands (fig. 26/1 and 3).

110 Popovi}, Biki} 2017, 387–407.

111 Detailed analysis of the pottery vessels

finds is presented in the enclosure

by V. Biki} on page 304–340.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDINGS

If observed as a whole, the archaeological finds from the medieval layers, both from

the Castle and from the explored area along the Northeast Rampart of the Lower

Town, are relatively modest. Among them, as is usual, the most numerous are pottery

fragments. 111 These are predominantly fragments of glazed pottery, while pieces of

rougher fired pottery are significantly rarer and according to some rough estimates

they do not exceed 10% of the total quantity of the pottery material.

Among the glazed vessels, which were all painted in white, the predominant

form is a pot in its different variants. In addition to the vessels without handles, there

were also pots with one or two opposite handles. Some pieces had handles moved to

one side in order to use the pot more easily when pouring the liquid. All the pots

were almost by the rule painted in white against dark background and then glazed

in light yellow or yellow-green. All these pots have corresponding and similarly decorated

lids, which all belong to the same conical type with one handle. Jugs and

pitchers with a spout were present in a significantly smaller number and only some

of these were decorated with sgraffito ornament. A rare shape to be found are deep

bowls on a low ring foot and they were painted and glazed on the inside. Only several

unglazed cooking pots, as well as large jars for the storing of food were noticed in the

material. In most of the ensembles there were bread-baking pans as well and only

their relatively small pieces had been preserved. Fragments of cups and pottery

lamps were not noticed in the layers of the medieval horizon.

As opposed to the fragments of glazed vessels, there were also unglazed fragments

of good facture in small numbers, but for them it was not possible to establish

reliably whether they belonged to pots, jugs or pitchers. Several larger fragmented

pots – jars also had similar facture and they all came from the medieval layer along

the Northeast Rampart of the Lower Town. The fired pottery of rough facture was

represented solely with several fragments of the bread-baking pans of the same type.

There were almost no fragments of rough fired pottery coming from the layers in

the Castle. In the Lower Town, the only finds of this type of vessels, that is, of breadbaking

pans came from the medieval layers in Tower 8.

The findings of the objects made of bone are very rare and they all come from

the lowest layer of the debris, above the level of destruction, so that it would be

difficult to designate them reliably in terms of stratigraphy. These are mostly pieces

of formworks cut out of bone or horn. Among the bone finds, three smaller slab-like

tools stand out and these may have been used as writing implements (fig. 28/1–3),

as well as a part of a smaller flute made of bird bone (fig. 28/4). An interesting find

are two finely cut thin bone applications for which, on account of their fragmented

preservation, it is difficult to imagine the whole they used to belong to (fig. 29/5–6).


Sl. 28. Sitni predmeti od kosti i metala: 1–3) ko{tane pisaqke?; 4) ko{tana svirala; 5–8) no` i se~iva britve;

9) fragmenti plo~astog oklopa; 10–11) baglame; 12) bronzana dekorativna rozeta; 13) bronzana krsnica ma~a;

14) fragment bronzanog sve}waka iz ukopa u Crkvi; 15–17) potkovi za obu}u

Fig. 28. Small objects made of bone and metal: 1–3) bone writing implement?; 4) bone flute; 5–8) knife and razor blades;

9) fragments of a plate armour; 10–11) hinges; 12) bronze decorative rosette; 13) bronze hilt of a sword;

14) fragment of a bronze candle-holder from an interment in the Church; 15–17) shoe-plates

82

112 Ze~evi} 2006, kat. br. 72, 196–197.

113 Radojkovi} 1969, 42–43.

114 Sijari} 2014, 30–37.

115 Popovi} 2012, 177–188, kat. br. 155



A rare piece of jewellery is a ring cut out of opal that was found in the layer

above the floor in House 2 beside the Northeast Rampart of the Lower Town. This

is a ring with a pulled out ellipsoid-shaped head, the upper surface of which is not

decorated (fig. 29/7). Typologically, the closest analogy to this ring may be found in

an almost identical specimen, cut out of carnelian, which comes from one of the

disturbed tombs in Novo Brdo’s Cathedral of Saint Nicholas where it was dated

back to the end of the 14 th century. 112 This dating would fully correspond to our

specimen from the layer above the floor in House 2 for which it may be presumed

that it was formed during the second half of the 14 th century. Other than this ring,

only one other piece of jewellery was found. From the medieval layer in front of

Tower 8 comes a find of a bronze round broche, an ornament worn on the chest

(fig. 29/2). In the inventories of the deposits of the Serbian nobility in Dubrovnik,

this type of gold jewellery – which appears under the names of brocheta/brochetta,

bogheta/boghetta – has decorations made of gems, rubies, sapphires, diamonds and

pearls. 113 By its appearance, primarily by its decoration with a hint of floral ornamentation

made in rupturing technique and a tiny rosette in the middle, the piece

found in front of Tower 8 most certainly constitutes a cheap version of the abovementioned

valuable ornaments.

Among the most common metal finds, the most numerous are iron wedges of

different sizes, very much damaged by the action of the corrosion, and along with

them a pair of hinges was also found. All of these pieces mostly come from the

destruction layers above the floors in the North and the South Buildings. These are,

unquestionably, remaining pieces that used to be located within the wooden structures

of the upper floors.

It is important to point out that in the surveyed layers, both in the Castle and

along the Northeast Rampart of the Lower Town, three were no tools. An exception

are only two stonecutting chisels discovered in the layer above Cistern 2.

Along with the above-mentioned metal finds, there were also rare specimens

that may be marked as items of personal kits. In addition to the significant find

from the storage in Tower 8, which has already been talked about, what needs to be

mentioned is a knife with traces of bone formwork on the handle and blades of three

razors from the lower layers of the debris in the Castle, which may perhaps correspond

to the Ottoman horizon (fig. 28/5–8). Findings of weaponry and military equipment

were also rare. We found a blade of a sword in the debris layer which could

not be determined typologically and stratigraphically in any more detail. Several

pyramidal tips of quarrels with a thorn also came from the debris. The finding of a

hilt of a sword (fig. 28/13) is significantly more reliable in terms of the stratigraphy

and it comes from the layer above the floor in the South Building which according

to its typological features could not be older than the middle of the 15 th century. 114

At the level of the floor of the church’s narthex we found several dozen slabs of a

plate armour, while individual finds of these slabs were also encountered in other

ensembles within the Castle (fig. 28/9). On most of these slabs, there are remains of

bronze rivets that were used to fasten them to the leather base. This type of armour

was used in the period from the 13 th to the 15 th century, which has been testified

to by the findings at several sites in Serbia. 115

Particularly important finds that were discovered during the surveying of Novo

Brdo’s Castle are cannonballs and lead round shots for rifles of the kuka~a type.


Sl. 29. Sitni predmeti od metala, kosti i kamena: 1) pojasna kop~a; 2) kru`na bronzana fibula; 3–4) gvozdene pre|ice;

5–6) tanke ko{tane aklikacije; 7) prsten od àda iz Ku}e 2; 8) dekorativni klin

Fig. 29. Small objects made ofmetal, bone and stone: 1) belt buckle; 2) round bronze fibula; 3–4) iron clasps;

5–6) thin bone applications; 7) jade ring from House 2; 8) decorative wedge 8

je prsten sa izvu~enom elipsoidno oblikovanom glavom, ~ija je gorwa povr{ina

neukra{ena (sl. 29/7). Tipolo{ki najbliù analogiju sa ovim prstenom

predstavqa nalaz gotovo identi~nog primerka prstena rezanog od karneola,

koji poti~e iz jednog od rasturenih grobova u novobrdskoj katedrali Svetog

Nikole i datovan je u kraj 14. veka. 112 Ovo datovawe u potpunosti bi odgovaralo

i na{em primerku iz sloja nad podom u Ku}i 2, za koji se moè pretpostaviti

da je obrazovan tokom druge polovine 14. veka. Osim ovog prstena, otkriven

je samo jo{ jedan primerak nakita. Iz sredwovekovnog sloja ispred Kule 8

poti~e nalaz bronzanog okruglog bro{a, ukrasa koji je no{en na grudima (sl.

29/2). U popisima depozita srpske vlastele u Dubrovniku ova vrsta zlatnog nakita

– koja se javqa pod nazivima brocheta/brochetta, bogheta/boghetta – ima ukrase

od dragog kamewa, rubina, safira, dijamanta i bisera. 113 Po svom izgledu, pre

svega ukrasu sa nagove{tajem floralnog ukrasa izvedenog tehnikom prolamawa

i sitnom rozetom u sredi{tu, primerak na|en ispred Kule 8 sasvim sigurno

predstavqa jeftinu verziju pomenutih skupocenih ukrasa.

Od uobi~ajenih metalnih nalaza najbrojniji su gvozdeni klinovi razli~itih

veli~ina, veoma o{te}eni dejstvom korozije, uz koje je na|eno i nekoliko

112 Ze~evi} 2006, 196–197, kat. br. 72.

113 Radojkovi} 1969, 42–43.

84

116 Petrovi} 1966, 162–180.

117 Popovi} 2006, 146.

118 14 cm-diameter balls, 7 pieces,

15 cm-diameter balls, 14 pieces and

16 cm-diameter balls, 6 pieces.

Another slightly smaller cluster with

the diameter of 18 cm, 8 pieces and

with the diameter of 19 cm, 5 pieces.


Among the relatively numerous finds of cannonballs, there were three basic types

– large stone balls for siege cannons, then smaller stone balls and small cannonballs

made of lead. During the surveying conducted so far, eight large stone projectiles

for siege cannons were found. These are balls chiselled out of the same type of hard

stone similar to granite, with the diameter between 50 cm and 56 cm. They were

found in three main sites, under the debris in the area next to Tower 5 (two balls

50–51 cm, one 47 cm), then next to Tower 6 (2 balls 50–52 cm) and in front of Tower

2 in the area of the South Gate of the Lower Town (2 balls 55–56 cm, one 52 cm).

These are all finds from relatively small surveyed areas, so it may be presumed that

there are significantly more of these biggest cannon projectiles to be found at the

site. By their size these balls correspond to large siege cannons which were, as a new

type of weapon, used in the Ottoman sieges of towns during the sixth decade and

even later up until the end of the 15 th century. 116 It is known that these cannons

were first used on a massive scale during the Ottoman siege and conquest of Constantinople

in 1453 and later during the siege of Belgrade in 1456. 117 Observed in

this context, the finds of the large stone balls from the Castle may quite reliably be

dated back to 1455. This is a significant testimony to the Ottoman siege of Novo

Brdo which was personally commanded by Sultan Mehmed II Fatih.

Another significantly large cluster consists of smaller stone balls, over fifty of

which were discovered in the Castle. They are all of similar sizes, with the diameter

between 10 cm and 26 cm. The most predominant type, with 27 pieces, includes

balls with the diameter between 14 cm and 16 cm. 118 In terms of stratigraphy, they

all come from the youngest medieval stratum that was closed off by a layer at the

level of the demolition of the Castle. The biggest number of balls comes from a

grouped find above Cistern 1, that is, from the corner between the rampart and the

wall of the North Building, where 41 balls of different sizes, with the diameter between

10 and 26 cm, were found. An interesting find includes two balls (14 cm and 18 cm)

that were discovered in the wall mass of the rampart where they may have been put

most likely during some subsequent reconstruction of this wall curtain. Another

ball with a diameter of 15 cm and discovered in the fill of the substructure of the

corner hearth also needs to be mentioned since it probably originates back to the

first decades of the 15 th century which will be dealt with a little later. If observed

as a whole, the finds of smaller stone cannonballs that have been mentioned above

should certainly be dated back to the period before the Ottoman conquest of Novo

Brdo. This would be corroborated by the fact that almost all of them come from the

youngest medieval layer that was closed off by the collapsed material of the first

destruction of the Castle. On the other hand, such conclusion would also be supported

by the fact that there are no traces to suggest that the Ottomans ever used the

Castle as a part of their fortification.

All of the small lead cannonballs, which certainly constitute a particular feature,

come from a group find that was revealed in the floor of the lowest level in Tower 6,

which was linked with the room on the ground floor of the North Building. A total

of 22 balls were found and they were as follows: 11 balls with the diameter of 7 cm,

then 9 balls with the diameter of 5.5 cm and two somewhat smaller balls with the

diameter of 4.2 cm.

Within the scope of this same group find, we also discovered around 470 lead

round shots for rifles of the kuka~a type. Most of them have the diameter of less


baglama. Svi ovi primerci uglavnom poti~u iz slojeva destrukcije nad podovima

u Severnoj i Ju`noj gra|evini. U pitawu su, bez sumwe, preostali delovi

koji su se nalazili u okviru drvenih konstrukcija gorwih etaà.

Va`no je ista}i da u istraènim slojevima, kako u Zamku, tako i uz Severoisto~ni

bedem Doweg grada, nije bilo alatki. Izuzetak jedino predstavqaju dva

kamenoreza~ka dleta, otkrivena u sloju iznad Cisterne 2.

Gorepomenutim metalnim nalazima mogu se pridruìti i retki primerci

koji bi se mogli ozna~iti kao primerci li~nog pribora. Osim zna~ajnog nalaza

iz ostave u Kuli 8, o kome je ve} bilo re~i, treba jo{ pomenuti jedan no` sa

tragovima ko{tane oplate na dr{ci i se~iva tri britve iz niìh slojeva {uta

u Zamku, koji mo`da odgovaraju turskom horizontu (sl. 28/5–8). Retki su tako-

|e i nalazi oru`ja i ratne opreme. Na|eno je u sloju {uta se~ivo jednog ma~a,

koje se tipolo{ki i stratigrafski nije moglo bliè odrediti. Iz {uta tako|e

poti~e i nekoliko piramidalnih vrhova strelica sa trnom. U stratigrafskom

smislu znatno pouzdaniji je nalaz nakrsnice ma~a (sl. 28/13) iz sloja nad podom

u Ju`noj gra|evini, a prema svojim tipolo{kim odlikama ne bi mogao biti

stariji od sredine 15. veka. 114 U nivou poda priprate Crkve na|eno je vi{e

desetina plo~ica lamelnog oklopa, a pojedina~nih nalaza ovih plo~ica bilo

je i u drugim celinama u Zamku (sl. 28/9). Na ve}ini plo~ica o~uvani su i ostaci

bronzanih zakivaka kojima su bile vezane za ko`nu podlogu. Ovaj tip oklopa

bio je u upotrebi u razdobqu 13–15. veka, {to je posvedo~eno nalazima na

vi{e lokaliteta u Srbiji. 115

Posebno zna~ajne nalaze do kojih se do{lo u toku istraìvawa novobrdskog

Zamka predstavqaju topovske kugle i olovna zrna za pu{ke kuka~e. Me|u relativno

brojnim nalazima topovskih kugli mogu se izdvojiti tri osnovne vrste

– velike kamene kugle za opsadne topove, zatim mawe kamene kugle i male topovske

kugle livene od olova.

U toku dosada{wih istraìvawa otkriveno je osam velikih kamenih projektila

za opsadne topove. U pitawu su kugle klesane od iste vrste tvrdog kamena

sli~nog granitu, pre~nika izme|u 50 i 56 cm. Nalaène su na tri glavne lokacije,

i to ispod {uta u prostoru uz Kulu 5 (dve kugle 50–51 cm, jedna 47 cm),

zatim uz Kulu 6 (dve kugle 50–52 cm) i ispred Kule 2 u prostoru Ju`ne kapije

Doweg grada (dve kugle 55–56 cm, jedna 52 cm). U pitawu su nalazi sa relativno

malih istraènih povr{ina, tako da se moè pretpostaviti da na lokalitetu

postoji znatno vi{e ovih najve}ih topovskih projektila. Po svojoj veli~ini,

ove kugle odgovaraju velikim opsadnim topovima, koji su kao novo oru`je kori{}eni

u osmanskim opsadama gradova tokom {este decenije, pa i kasnije,

sve do kraja 15. veka. 116 Poznato je da su ovi topovi prvi put masovno dejstvovali

prilikom turske opsade i osvajawa Konstantinopoqa 1453. godine i kasnije

prilikom opsade Beograda 1456. godine. 117 Posmatrani u tom kontekstu, nalazi

velikih kamenih kugli iz Zamka sasvim se pouzdano mogu datovati u 1455. godinu.

U pitawu je zna~ajno svedo~anstvo o turskoj opsadi Novog Brda, kojom je

komandovao li~no sultan Mehmed II Fatih.

Drugu, znatno ve}u skupinu predstavqaju mawe kamene kugle, kojih je otkriveno

preko pedeset u Zamku. Razli~itih su veli~ina, pre~nika izme|u 10 i

26 cm. Kao najbrojniji tip, zastupqen sa 27 primeraka, izdvajaju se kugle pre~nika

izme|u 14 i 16 cm. 118 U stratigrafskom smislu sve poti~u iz najmla|eg

114 Sijari} 2014, 30–37.

115 Popovi} 2012, 177–188, kat. br. 155


116 Petrovi} 1966, 162–180.

117 Popovi} 2006, 146.

118 Kugle pre~nika 14 cm – 7 komada,

pre~nika 15 cm – 14 komada

i pre~nika 16 cm – 6 komada. Druga,

ne{to mawa skupina, pre~nika 18 cm –

8 komada i pre~nika 19 cm – 5 komada.

86


than 2 cm, then there are 67 round shots with the diameter between 2 cm and 3 cm,

while 46 round shots are somewhat larger, with the diameter of 3.3 cm. According

to the place where it was found, as well as the stratigraphic data including also the

traces of casting, this group find of lead cannonballs and rifle round shots may

quite reliably be dated back to the time of the Ottoman siege, which we will talk

about more below.

Quite a specific find from this stratigraphic ensemble, which will require special

attention and surveying, is a well preserved part of a waterskin, most likely made of

bovine hide. The waterskin was filled with coniferous tar, most probably made of

pine, which had wide application in the Middle Ages. This type of resin may have

served for the impregnation of wood and lubrication of wood axes, as well as of bowstrings

of bows and crossbows. Since it burns slowly, it was used for lighting as well,

that is, for the production of torches. In the traditional medicine it was applied when

treating wounds. 119 Along with other finds in the North Building, this waterskin

also testifies to the last days of the defence of Novo Brdo back in 1455.

119 The authors express gratitude to their

colleague, Nemanja Markovi}, PhD,

who organized and helped conduct

all the required analyses. The analysis of

the contents of the waterskin was carried

out at the Laboratory for the testing

of materials in cultural heritage of

the Civil Engineering Faculty in Novi Sad.


sredwovekovnog stratuma, koji je bio zatvoren slojem u ravni ru{ewa Zamka.

Najve}i broj kugli poti~e iz skupnog nalaza iznad Cisterne 1, odnosno iz ugla

izme|u bedema i zida Severne gra|evine, a broj otkrivenih kugli razli~itih

veli~ina, pre~nika izme|u 10 i 26 cm, iznosi 41. Zanimqiv nalaz predstavqaju

dve kugle (14 i 18 cm) koje su otkrivene u zidnoj masi bedema, gde su mogle

dospeti najverovatnije prilikom neke poznije obnove ovog zidnog platna. Treba

pomenuti i jednu kuglu pre~nika 15 cm, otkrivenu u ispuni supstrukcije ugaonog

ogwi{ta, koja verovatno poti~e iz prvih decenija 15. veka, o ~emu }e daqe

biti vi{e re~i. Posmatrane u celini, nalaze malih kamenih topovskih kugli

o kojima je napred govoreno svakako bi trebalo datovati u razdobqe pre osmanskog

osvajawa Novog Brda. Na to bi ukazivala ~iwenica da gotovo sve poti~u iz

najmla|eg sredwovekovnog sloja, koji je zatvoren uru{enim materijalom prve

destrukcije Zamka. S druge strane, na ovakav zakqu~ak bi ukazivala i ~iwenica

da nema tragova da su Turci Zamak uop{te koristili kao deo utvr|ewa.

Male olovne topovske kugle, koje sigurno predstavqaju osobenu pojavu, sve

poti~u iz skupnog nalaza koji je otkriven na podu najniè etaè u Kuli 6, koja

je bila povezana sa prostorijom u prizemqu Severne gra|evine. Na|ene su ukupno

22 kugle, i to 11 kugli pre~nika 7 cm, zatim 9 kugli pre~nika 5,5 cm, i dve

ne{to mawe kugle pre~nika 4,2 cm.

U okviru ovog skupnog nalaza prona|eno je i oko 470 olovnih zrna za pu-

{ke kuka~e. Ve}ina ih je pre~nika ispod 2 cm, zatim 67 zrna ima pre~nik izme|u

2 i 3 cm, dok su 46 zrna ne{to ve}a – pre~nika 3,3 cm. Prema mestu gde je

otkriven, kao i stratigrafskim podacima, ukqu~uju}i i tragove livewa, ovaj

skupni nalaz olovnih topovskih i pu{~anih zrna moè se sasvim pouzdano datovati

u vreme turske opsade, o ~emu }e daqe biti vi{e re~i.

Sasvim osoben nalaz iz ove stratigrafske celine, koji }e zahtevati posebnu

obradu, predstavqa dobro o~uvan deo me{ine, najverovatnije ra|en od gove-

|e koè. Me{ina je bila ispuwena ~etinarskim katranom, po svoj prilici od

bora, koji je u sredwem veku imao {iroku primenu. Ova vrsta smole mogla je

sluìti za impregnaciju drveta, podmazivawa drvenih osovina, kao i tetiva

lukova i samostrela. Budu}i da sporo sagoreva, kori{}ena je i za osvetqavawe,

odnosno pravqewe bakqi. U narodnoj medicini imala je primenu u le~ewu rana.

119 Uz ostale nalaze u Severnoj gra|evini, i ova me{ina svedo~i o posledwim

danima odbrane Novog Brda 1455. godine.

119 Autori duguju zahvalnost kolegi

dr Nemawi Markovi}u, koji je organizovao

da se izvr{e potrebne analize.

Analiza sadràja me{ine obavqena je

u Laboratoriji za ispitivawe materijala

u kulturnom nasle|u Gra|evinskog

fakulteta Univerziteta u Novom Sadu.

88

Castle of the Town of Novo Brdo

(the Upper Town)

120 Bo{kovi} 1939, 162.

121 Popovi} 2006a, 192

(with listed literature).

122 Concerning these papers, see enclosure

of Simi}, Radovanovi} on page 278–302.

IN THE MIDDLE OF THE URBAN AREA OF NOVO BRDO, THERE IS A CENTRAL

fortress – the Upper Town as this part of the fortifications used to be called by the

earlier authors. 120 Before moving on to the rest of the presentation, we believe that it

is necessary to explain the new terminological designation precisely of this part of

Novo Brdo’s fortress. So far it has been believed that the Upper Town was a citadel

that only had a military function and therefore as a particularly strong fortress it

constituted the centre of the last line of defence. After the latest explorations, it was

clearly noticed that this was a significantly more complex fortification structure

with buildings, which suggests a castle as the primary function. On the territory of

the Serbian lands, the work on the typological classification of the remains of medieval

fortresses has only started so that with the definition of a castle we had to rely

on the European experiences. In the late periods of the Middle Ages, i.e., during the

13 th and the 14 th centuries, a castle got increasingly more complex structures, as

well as new military and strategic functions. In addition to the keep, which lost its

central position, but remained the last stronghold of the defence, other high solid

ramparts with several towers were also built and then the exterior defence lines were

created in front of them. The main interior functional change was the appearance

of residential buildings which leaning against the ramparts surrounded the central

courtyard. There, next to the “palace” with rooms intended for residing, a “large hall”

stood out as the most important room and the public life of a medieval court took

place there. 121 As the results of our surveying have shown, which will be discussed

later on, all of these features were present in the former central fortress of Novo

Brdo called the Upper Town.

The first explorations in this area started during the sixth decade of the 20 th

century, but even with the excavation of a significant quantity of collapsed rocks and

debris, there were not any more significant results. After an interruption of several

decades, the remains of the Castle of Novo Brdo were explored almost in their entirety

in 2015 and 2016. 122 The layers of debris and collapsed rocks, in some spots as

89

Zamak grada Novog Brda

(Goryi grad)

U SREDI[TU URBANOG AREALA NOVOG BRDA NALAZI SE CENTRALNO

utvr|ewe – Gorwi grad, kako su ovaj deo fortifikacija nazivali stariji autori.

120 Pre prelaska na daqa izlagawa smatramo da je potrebno objasniti novo

terminolo{ko odre|ewe upravo ovog dela novobrdskog utvr|ewa. Do sada se

smatralo da je Gorwi grad citadela, koja je imala iskqu~ivo vojnu funkciju, te

je kao posebno jako utvr|ewe predstavqala upori{te posledwe odbrane. Posle

najnovijih istraìvawa jasno je uo~eno da je u pitawu znatno sloènija fortificirana

struktura sa objektima koji ukazuju na zamak kao primarnu funkciju.

Na podru~ju srpskih zemaqa rad na tipolo{kom razvrstavawu ostataka

sredwovekovnih utvr|ewa tek je zapo~et, tako da bi se kod definicije zamka

moralo osloniti na evropska iskustva. U poznim razdobqima sredweg veka, odnosno

tokom 13. i 14. stole}a zamak dobija sve sloènije strukture, ali i nove

vojno-strate{ke funkcije. Pored donòna, koji gubi centralnu poziciju ali

ostaje posledwe upori{te odbrane, grade se visoki solidni bedemi sa vi{e

kula, ispred kojih se obrazuju i spoqne linije odbrane. Glavnu unutra{wu funkcionalnu

promenu predstavqa pojava rezidencijalnih zdawa, koja oslowena na

bedeme, okruùju sredi{we dvori{te. Tu se, uz „palatu“ sa odajama namewenim

stanovawu, kao najzna~ajniji prostor izdvaja „velika dvorana“, u kojoj se odvijao

javni ìvot sredwovekovnog dvora. 121 Kako su pokazali rezultati na{ih

istraìvawa, o ~emu }e daqe biti re~i, sve ove odlike imalo je nekada{we novobrdsko

sredi{we utvr|ewe ozna~avano kao Gorwi grad.

Prva istraìvawa na ovom prostoru zapo~eta su tokom {este decenije 20.

veka, ali i pored iskopa znatne koli~ine obru{enog kamena i {uta nije se do-

{lo do nekih zna~ajnijih rezultata. Posle prekida od vi{e decenija ostaci

Zamka Novog Brda gotovo su u celosti istraèni 2015. i 2016. godine. 122 Iz

unutra{wosti Zamka uklowene su kompletno naslage {uta i obru{enog kamena,

visoke mestimi~no i do 6 m, da bi ispod ovih slojeva destrukcije, kao {to

je ve} napred istaknuto, bio istraèn i celokupan kulturni sloj sa ostacima

120 Bo{kovi} 1939, 162.

121 Popovi} 2006 a, 192

(sa navedenom literaturom).

122 O ovim radovima v. prilog


90


much as six metres high, were completely removed from the interior of the Castle in

order to explore under these layers of destruction, as it has already been pointed

out, the entire cultural layer with the remains of the built structures. On the same

occasion, all of the exterior space was also explored, so that the remains of the Castle

were revealed in their entirety. After the removal of several thousand cubic metres

of toppled materials, a possibility was created to survey in detail the former appearance

and the function of this central part of the fortifications of Novo Brdo.

Novo Brdo’s Castle was built on a rocky height at the altitude between 1096.5 m

and 1098.5 m. It included the flattened top of the said height, with the size of around

50 m × 58 m, that is, with the surface area of around 30 ares. With its longer axe it

had the north-south orientation, with a slight deviation towards the west. The interior

space was enclosed with ramparts and towers, that is, the Castle’s courtyard,

with the length of around 32 m and the width of around 20 m, covered the surface

area of around 640 m².

The ground plan of the Castle has a relatively regular elliptical shape and is

adjusted to the shape of the plateau. Within the scope of the ramparts’ barrier of

the Castle there are six towers arranged at regular distances and depending on the

specific place where they were built these towers are mutually similar. Towards the

east and the most accessible side, that is, towards the area of the Suburb there is the

protruding Main Tower (the Keep/Donjon) or Tower 1. The north and the south corners

of the Citadel were defended by Towers 6 and 2, with mutually similar shape

of the ground plan and the size. On the west side, towards the fortification of the

Lower Town, there were protruding Towers 3, 4 and 5 which differed very little

from the previous ones (fig. 30)

By its size the main defence tower – the Keep, which was the last stronghold of

the Castle’s defence, stands out. As opposed to this tower, which was closed from

all sides, all other ones were closed towards the interior of the Castle at the lever of

the two lowest floors, while in the upper zones they were open, as will be seen from

the rest of the presentation. They were of the same structural assembly and certainly

ended in a platform surrounded by a crenellated parapet, as was usual. The towers

and the ramparts that connected them were built in parallel. The ramparts had the

similar widths (around 3.5 m) and heights, and in the past they ended in a crenellated

wall walk.

In front of the main rampart, as the front line of the defence, there used to be

a lower external defence wall, at the distance of around 2–2.5 m, which followed the

route of the towers and the ramparts of the main defence. This rampart certainly

ended in a crenellated wall walk. Such defence solution with a two-degree defence

of the Castle was applied for the first time in Novo Brdo. It will be later repeated in

some other Serbian medieval fortresses, which will be dealt with later on.

According to the encountered state of the fortifications of Novo Brdo, it could

be observed that the wall fronts were significantly more poorly preserved in comparison

to the fill, which suggests a specific building technology that is yet to be surveyed

in more detail. One of the reasons for this may also be the taking away of the

already chiselled stone from the Castle’s ruins, especially the breccia ashlars.

Sl. 30. Novo Brdo – osnova Zamka

Fig. 30. Novo Brdo – ground plan of the Castle


92


256–258.


FORTIFICATIONS OF THE CASTLE – TOWERS AND RAMPARTS

Tower 1

The biggest and the most massive tower was the Main one, Tower 1. It was surveyed

in the period 1952–1954 and on that occasion its entire interior space was excavated.

Unfortunately, on account of the collapsing of the faces of the walls the entire interior

space was again found covered in debris. Tower 1 was the only one in the Castle

that was completely closed along its entire height (fig. 31–32). Its ground plan is

approximately square, with the size of its exterior sides being 12.5 m × 13.2 m. It

protrudes from the plane of the rampart by around 10 m. The width of its external

walls is 3.4 m – 3.5 m, while the wall towards the interior of the fortress is somewhat

narrower and its width is 3.2 m. The interior space of the tower also has the square

shape, with the size of around 5.62 m × 5.68 m, that is, around 32 m². The floor of

the lowest storey was paved with thin stone slabs the traces of which have been only

partially saved in the remains of the plaster base. The level of the floor of this storey

at the highest point is 1098.60 m which is only 20 cm higher in comparison to the

level of the terrain in the courtyard of the Castle.

When conducting the surveys around the middle of the previous century, in

the lateral walls of this tower, the north and the south ones, slots for wood beams

were found with the dimensions of 14 cm × 14 cm, and they were placed in the face

of the wall at the height of 4.0 m above the former floor. Transverse beams of interfloor

structure above the floor certainly rested in these slots. Unfortunately, these

remains had not been preserved until the surveys we conducted. 123

The same goes with the formerly well preserved window on the next storey,

facing the interior of the Castle, only traces of which have been discovered. The earlier

explorers recorded that it was located very low, that it was 0.56 m wide, that it

was vaulted towards the interior of the tower and that its height was 0.75 m. It narrowed

towards the facade facing the Castle in the shape of a loophole.

The main Tower 1 was founded on a rock and it was built using broken stone,

just like the rest of the fortifications of the Castle. Its corners were finished using

ashlars made of dark red local breccia. It probably had five storeys which means

that towards the courtyard of the Castle it was 17 m high, while its east-front facade

had the height of 22 m. Out of this structure, only the lowest storey and the interfloor

structure above it have been preserved. Today we do not know what its upper

storeys used to look like. We may presume that the entrance into the tower was,

most likely, on the third floor, from where it was possible to go down to the lower

floors and go up to the final platforms. The fourth and the fifth floors certainly had

small openings such as loopholes that enabled minimal lighting and ventilation. We

cannot exclude a possibility that there were defence balconies on the fifth storey –

the machicolations, possibly two on each facade. This presumption remains in the

domain of a hypothesis, since no remains of stone consoles were found during the

excavations, either in the Castle or in the area of the hidden road. An exception is

the find of a profiled console made of sandstone, used secondarily, which may have

been a part of the structure of a machicolation, but which also, more likely, belonged

to the access platform for the entrance into the tower.

The wooden structure that rested against its west exterior face was undoubtedly

used for the access to the entrance into Tower 1, which was around 7 m above the terrain

in the Castle. The structure made of stone and mud mortar, with the dimensions


zidanih objekata. Istom prilikom istraèn je i ceo spoqni prostor, tako da

su ostaci Zamka u celini otkriveni. Posle uklawawa vi{e hiqada kubika obru-

{enog materijala ostvarena je mogu}nost da se detaqno razmotri nekada{wi izgled

i funkcija ovog sredi{weg dela novobrdskih fortifikacija.

Novobrdski zamak podignut je na stenovitom visu na nadmorskoj visini

izme|u 1096,5 do 1098,5 m. Obuhvatao je zaravweni vrh pomenutog visa, veli-

~ine oko 50 × 58 m, odnosno povr{ine od oko 30 ari, a svojom duòm osovinom

orijentisan je u pravcu sever–jug, uz izvesno odstupawe ka zapadu. Unutra{wi

prostor, ome|an bedemima i kulama, odnosno dvori{te Zamka, duìne oko 32 m

i {irine oko 20 m, obuhvatao je povr{inu od oko 640 m².

Osnova Zamka je relativno pravilnog elipsastog oblika i prilago|ena je

obliku platoa. U okviru bedemske ograde Zamka nalazi se na pravilnim rastojawima

{est kula, koje su, u zavisnosti od mesta na kome se nalaze, me|usobno

sli~ne. Prema istoku i najpristupa~nijoj strani, odnosno prema prostoru

Podgra|a isturena je Glavna (Donòn) kula ili Kula 1. Severni i ju`ni ugao

citadele branile su Kula 6 i Kula 2, me|usobno sli~nih oblika osnove i veli-

~ine. Sa zapadne strane, prema utvr|ewu Doweg grada, bile su isturene Kule 3,

4 i 5, koje su se od prethodnih veoma malo razlikovale (sl. 30).

Po veli~ini se izdvaja Glavna kula odbrane – Donòn, koja je bila posledwe

upori{te odbrane Zamka. Za razliku od we, koja je zatvorena sa svih strana,

sve ostale su u nivou dve najniè etaè zatvorene prema unutra{wosti Zamka,

dok su u gorwim zonama bile otvorene, kao {to }e se videti iz daqeg izlagawa.

Istog su konstruktivnog sklopa i svakako su se zavr{avale platformom oivi-

~enom parapetom sa zupcima, kao {to je uobi~ajeno. Kule i bedemi koji ih povezuju

gra|eni su istovremeno. Bedemi su sli~nih {irina (oko 3,5 m) i visina

i oni su se nekada zavr{avali ozup~anom {etnom stazom.

Ispred glavnog bedema kao predwa linija odbrane nalazio se niì spoqni

odbrambeni zid, na udaqenosti od oko 2–2,5 m, koji je pratio trasu kula i bedema

glavne odbrane. I ovaj bedem se svakako zavr{avao {etnom stazom oivi~enom

zupcima. Ovakvo odbrambeno re{ewe sa dvostepenom odbranom Zamka prvi put

je primeweno u Novom Brdu. Ono }e kasnije biti ponovqeno i u nekim drugim

srpskim sredwovekovnim utvr|ewima, o ~emu }e kasnije biti re~i.

Prema zate~enom stawu novobrdskih fortifikacija moglo se uo~iti da su

lica zidova znatno slabije sa~uvana u odnosu na ispunu, {to ukazuje na specifi~nu

tehnologiju zidawa, koju tek treba daqe istraìvati. Jedan od razloga je mo`da

bio i razno{ewe obra|enog kamena sa ru{evina Zamka, posebno tesanika bre~e.

FORTIFIKACIJE ZAMKA – KULE I BEDEMI

Kula 1

Najve}a i najmasivnija bila je Glavna – Kula 1. Istraìvana je u periodu

1952–1954. godine, kada joj je bio otkopan ceo unutra{wi prostor. Naàlost,

usled zaru{avawa lica zidova ceo unutra{wi prostor kule zate~en je ponovo

zasut {utom. Kula 1 je bila jedina u Zamku potpuno zatvorena celom visinom

(sl. 31–32). Pribli`no je kvadratne osnove, a veli~ina wenih spoqnih strana

iznosi 12,5 × 13,2 m. Isturena je iz ravni bedema za oko 10 m. [irina spoqnih

zidova je 3,4–3,5 m, dok je onaj prema unutra{wosti utvr|ewa ne{to uì i

wegova {irina je 3,2 m. Unutra{wi prostor kule je tako|e kvadratnog oblika,

94


Sl. 31. Kula 1 – osnova i presek (R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 31. Tower 1 – ground plan and the cross-section (R = 1 : 200)


Sl. 32. Kula 1 – osnova, presek i izgledi sa pretpostavqenom prvobitnom konstrukcijom (R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 32. Tower 1 – ground plan, the cross-section and appearances with the presumed original structure (R = 1 : 200)

96


of 2.30 m × 2.60 m, discovered between the wall of the Tower and Cistern 1, was

recognised as the substructure for this wooden staircase.

The main tower was originally built without any lower reinforcements and it

was surrounded by the route of the lower external rampart. In a subsequent period,

the ground floor of the tower acquired added reinforcements in the shape of a

slanting stone scarp. The scarp reinforcements were built in the section of the older

hidden road and partially over the remains of the external rampart, but only against

the lateral, the north and the south sides of the tower. The scarp reinforcement was

not built before the front of the tower.

Sl. 33. Kula 2 – osnova i presek

(R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 33. Tower 2 – ground plan

and the cross-section (R = 1 : 200)


veli~ine oko 5,62 × 5,68 m, odnosno oko 32 m². Pod najniè etaè bio je poplo-

~an tankim kamenim plo~ama, ~iji tragovi su samo delimi~no sa~uvani u ostacima

malterne podloge. Nivo poda ove etaè je na najvi{oj koti 1098,6, {to je

samo 20 cm vi{e u odnosu na ravan terena u dvori{tu Zamka.

Prilikom istraìvawa sredinom pro{log veka, u bo~nim zidovima ove

kule, severnom i ju`nom, na|ena su leì{ta greda, dimenzija 14 × 14 cm, postavqenih

u lice zida, i to na visini od 4 m iznad nekada{weg poda. Na wih

su se svakako oslawale popre~ne grede me|uspratne konstrukcije. Ovi ostaci,

naàlost, nisu ostali sa~uvani do na{ih istraìvawa. 123

Isti je slu~aj i sa nekada dobro o~uvanim prozorom na slede}oj etaì,

prema unutra{wosti Zamka, od koga su otkriveni samo tragovi. Raniji istra-

ìva~i su zabeleìli da se nalazio veoma nisko, da je bio {irok 0,56 m i da

je prema unutra{wosti kule bio zasveden, te da mu je visina iznosila 0,75 m.

Prema fasadi ka Zamku se suàvao u vidu strelnice.

Glavna – Kula 1 zasnovana je na steni i gra|ena je lomqenim kamenom, kao

i ostale fortifikacije Zamka. Uglovi su joj bili obra|eni tesanicima tamnocrvene

lokalne bre~e. Imala je verovatno pet etaà, {to zna~i da je prema

dvori{tu Zamka bila visoka 17 m, dok joj je isto~na – ~eona fasada imala visinu

22 m. Od ove konstrukcije sa~uvana je samo najnià etaà i me|uspratna

konstrukcija nad wom. Kako su izgledale gorwi spratovi, danas ne znamo. Mo-

èmo pretpostaviti da se ulaz u kulu, po svoj prilici, nalazio na tre}oj eta-

ì, odakle se silazilo na niè spratove i pelo do zavr{ne platforme. êtvrta

i peta etaà su svakako imale male otvore poput strelnica, koji su omogu}avali

minimalni osvetqaj i vetrewe. Ne moè se iskqu~iti ni mogu}nost da su na

petoj etaì postojali odbrambeni balkoni – ma{ikule, mogu}e po dva na svakoj

fasadi. Ova pretpostavka ostaje u domenu hipoteze, budu}i da tokom iskopavawa

nisu na|eni ostaci kamenih konzola, kako u Zamku, tako ni u prostoru skrivenog

puta. Izuzetak je nalaz jedne profilisane konzole od pe{~ara, sekundarno

upotrebqene, koja je mogla biti deo konstrukcije ma{ikule, ali koja je tako|e,

{to je verovatnije, pripadala pristupnoj platformi za ulaz u kulu.

Za prilaz ulazu u Kulu 1, koji je bio oko 7 m iznad terena u Zamku, bez sumwe

sluìla je drvena konstrukcija, prislowena uz weno zapadno spoqno lice.

Kao supstrukcija za ovo drveno stepeni{te, prepoznata je konstrukcija gra|ena

kamenom sa blatnim vezivom, dimenzija 2,3 × 2,6 m, otkrivena izme|u zida

Kule 1 i Cisterne 1. Glavna kula je prvobitno sagra|ena bez niìh oja~awa i

opasana trasom nièg spoqnog bedema. U jednom kasnijem razdobqu prizemni

deo kule dobio je prizidana oja~awa u vidu kose kamene eskarpe. Eskarpna oja-

~awa podignuta su u prostoru starijeg skrivenog puta i delom preko ostataka

spoqnog bedema, ali samo uz bo~ne – severnu i ju`nu stranu kule. Ispred fronta

kule eskarpno oja~awe nije gra|eno.

Kula 2

Podignuta je na ju`nom kraju bedemske ograde Zamka. Zate~ena je sa gotovo u celini

obru{enim licem na ~eonoj fasadi, {to je omogu}ilo da se u toku istraìva~kih

radova detaqno uo~e etape wenog gra|ewa. Zasnovana je kao zdawe gotovo

kvadratne osnove, veli~ine 8,26 × 8,5 m, i to bez eskarpnih pro{irewa u dowem

delu (sl. 33). Nakon {to je bila ozidana do visine ne{to vi{e od 1 m, do{lo je


256–258.

98


Tower 2

It was built at the south end of the rampart enclosure of the Castle. It was found

with the face on the front facade almost entirely collapsed, which made it possible to

observe the stages of its construction during our exploratory works. It was founded

as a structure of an almost square ground plan, with the size of 8.26 m × 8.50 m,

without any scarp extensions in the lower segment (fig. 33). After it was built up to

the height of a little over one metre, there were changes in the construction. On the

north lateral side, as well as on the front side, scarp extensions were added later and

further construction continued with these extensions. In this way the tower was

reinforced at its base with 1.30 m and 1.10 m, respectively, from the lateral sides.

The oblique scarp extension may be followed to the height of around 4 m, where it

continues into a vertical face. All the corners of the tower, including the scarp, were

finished with alternately positioned breccia ashlars. In the lower zone, the tower was

closed up to the height of 5 m, including also towards the courtyard of the Castle.

The widths of the walls differed up to a point, so that on the lateral sides they were

3.20 m, while the front wall was somewhat more massive, with the width of 3.5 m.

The weakest wall was the mentioned one facing the Castle’s courtyard, which had

the width of only 1.30 m. Above this wall, the opened interior upper section of the

tower also had corners finished with breccia ashlars. The lower section in the interior

of the tower, up until the level of the above-mentioned wall, was filled with a fill

of pure soil and for this reason it was not surveyed. The upper open storeys were small,

with the size of 2.0 m × 4.6 m, that is, they covered the area of around 9.2 m², and

were obviously used only for vertical communication. At the level of the upper surface

of the wall which closed the tower towards the Castle’s courtyard, we discovered

traces of inter-floor structure’s beams. In the face of the lateral walls of the tower,

there used to be longitudinal beams on which at shorter distance transversal beams

a


do izmena u gra|ewu. Sa severne bo~ne strane, kao i sa predwe, naknadno su zasnovana

eskarpna pro{irewa, nad kojima je daqe nastavqeno kontinuirano zidawe.

Time je kula u osnovi oja~ana za 1,3, odnosno 1,1 m sa bo~ne strane. Koso

eskarpno pro{irewe prati se do visine oko 4 m, gde prelazi u vertikalno lice.

Svi uglovi kule, ukqu~uju}i eskarpu, bili su obra|eni naizmeni~no postavqenim

tesanicima bre~e. U dowoj zoni kula je bila zatvorena do visine od 5 m i

prema dvori{tu Zamka. [irine zidova joj se unekoliko razlikuju, tako da su sa

bo~nih strana iznosile 3,2 m, dok je ~eoni bio ne{to masivniji, {irine 3,5 m.

Najslabiji je bio pomenuti zid prema dvori{tu Zamka, koji je imao {irinu od

samo 1,3 m. Nad ovim zidom otvoreni unutra{wi gorwi deo kule imao je tako|e

uglove obra|ene tesanicima bre~e. Dowi deo u unutra{wosti kule, sve do visine

pomenutog zida, ispuwen je nasipom ~iste zemqe, te stoga nije istraìvan.

Gorwe otvorene etaè bile su male, veli~ine 2 × 4,6 m, odnosno povr{ine oko

9,2 m², i o~igledno su sluìle samo za vertikalnu komunikaciju. U nivou gorwe

povr{ine zida koji je zatvarao kulu prema dvori{tu Zamka otkriveni su tragovi

greda me|uspratne konstrukcije. U licu bo~nih zidova kule postavqene su

bile podu`ne grede, na koje su se, po kra}em rasponu, oslawale popre~ne grede

konstrukcije. Zahvaquju}i sa~uvanim otiscima samo dve grede u masi zida, imamo

pouzdan pokazateq toga da je spratna visina prve otvorene etaè iznosila

2,65 m. Pretpostavqamo da je ukupno bilo tri etaè, te da se sa tre}e, kroz zasvedene

prolaze, stupalo na okolne bedeme. Kula se svakako zavr{avala platformom

oivi~enom parapetom sa zupcima. Ukoliko bi ova pretpostavka bila ta~na,

ukupna nekada{wa visina kule iznosila je oko 15 m iz prostora citadele, dok

je wena ~eona fasada bila preko 18 m.

O tome kako je bio re{en ulaz u kulu, nema jasnih podataka, ali se, po svoj

prilici, u wu stupalo iz Ju`ne gra|evine, i to sa wene tre}e etaè.

b

Sl. 34. Zamak:

a) ju`ni deo sa Kulom 2,

Kulom 3 i Kulom 4;

b) severni izgled sa Kulom 5

i Kulom 6 (foto 2016)

Fig. 34. Castle:

a) south part with Tower 2,

Tower 3 and Tower 4;

b) northern appearance with Tower 5

and Tower 6 (photo from 2016)

100


of the structure rested. Thanks to the preserved impressions, only two beams in the

wall mass were a sufficient indicator that the height of the first open storey used to

be 2.65 m. We presumed that there had been three in total and that the third storey

had been used to reach the surrounding ramparts going through vaulted passages.

The tower certainly ended in a platform surrounded by a crenellated parapet. If this

assumption were true, the total former height of the tower would be around 15 m

from within the Citadel, while its front facade would be over 18 m.

There is no clear data showing how the entrance into the tower was provided,

but most likely it was entered from the South Building and more specifically from

its 3 rd storey.

Sl. 35. Kula 3 – osnova i presek (R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 35. Tower 3 – ground plan and the cross-section (R = 1 : 200)


Kule 3, 4, i 5

Ove tri kule u okviru Zapadnog bedema istih su osnova i sli~nih dimenzija,

pa su u tom smislu gotovo jednake Kuli 2, ukoliko se zanemari weno eskarpno

oja~awe (sl. 34). One su skoro pravilnih kvadratnih osnova, veli~ine oko 8,2 ×

8,4 m, i sve su isturene iz ravni bedema za oko 5 m. [irine wihovih spoqnih

zidova su oko 3,2 m, izuzev onog prema unutra{wosti citadele, ~ija se {irina

kre}e od 1 do 1,3 m. Arhitektonski korpus Kule 3 bio je u najlo{ijem stawu

(sl. 35), dok su Kula 4 i Kula 5 bile boqe o~uvane, ukqu~uju}i i wihova spoqna

fasadna platna. Tako je na ~eonoj fasadi Kule 4 sa~uvan lepo modelovan

Sl. 36. Kula 4 – osnova, presek i izgledi (R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 36. Tower 4 – ground plan, the cross-section and the appearances (R = 1 : 200)

102

Sl. 37. Kula 4, detaq krsta

od blokova bre~e u licu kule

Fig. 37. Tower 4, a detail of

a cross made of breccia blocks

in the front of the tower

Sl. 38. Zamak, Kula 3 i Kula 4

(foto 2016)

Fig. 38. Castle, Tower 3 and Tower 4

(photo from 2016)


Towers 3, 4 and 5

These three towers within the West Rampart have the same ground plans and similar

dimensions, and in those terms they are almost equal to Tower 2 if the latter’s

scarp reinforcement is put aside (fig. 34). They have almost regular square ground

plans, with the size of around 8.2 m × 8.4 m and they all protrude from the plane

of the rampart by around 5 m. The widths of their external walls are around 3.2 m,

except the one facing the interior of the Citadel the width of which goes from 1.0 m

to 1.3 m. The architectural corpus of Tower 3 was in the poorest state (fig. 35),

while Towers 4 and 5 were better preserved, including also their external facade

curtains. Thus, on the front facade of Tower 4, there is a preserved “Golgotha Cross”

nicely modelled with breccia blocks and the cross letters NI KA, done in bricks

(fig. 36–38).

In the lower zone all three towers were closed towards the Castle’s courtyard:

Tower 3 up to the height of 5.4 m, Tower 4 up to the height of 4.7 m and Tower 5

up to 2.8 m. They were filled, similar to Tower 2, with pure soil fill and therefore

their interior was not surveyed. A significant find in connection with these filled

areas was made when surveying Tower 5 (fig. 39). After the removal of the layers

of debris coming from the collapsed walls in the interior of the tower, at the level

directly under the structure which was at the level of the wall that closed the tower

towards the interior of the Castle, we came across a cultural layer with pottery finds

coming from the first half of the 15 th century. This layer that was 10 cm – 20 cm

thick was used to close the fill in the interior of the tower, which leads to a conclusion

that the lower floors within the tower were filled before it was formed, that is,

during the functioning of the Castle and most probably at the time when the fortifications

were first built.


blokovima bre~e „Krst na Golgoti“ i krsna slova NI KA, izvedena opekama

(sl. 36–38).

U dowoj zoni sve tri kule bile su zatvorene prema dvori{tu Zamka, i to

Kula 3 do visine od 5,4 m, Kula 4 do visine 4,7 m, a Kula 5 do 2,8 m. Ispuwene

su, sli~no Kuli 2, ~istim zemqanim nasipom, pa stoga wihova unutra{wost nije

istraìvana. Do zna~ajnog nalaza u vezi sa ovim zasutim povr{inama do{lo

se prilikom istraìvawa Kule 5 (sl. 39). U unutra{wosti kule posle uklawawa

slojeva {uta od obru{enih zidova, u ravni neposredno ispod konstrukcije

koja je bila u nivou zida kojim je zatvorena kula prema unutra{wosti Zamka,

otkriven je kulturni sloj sa nalazima keramike prve polovine 15. veka. Ovim

slojem, debqine 10–20 cm, zatvoren je nasip u unutra{wosti kule, {to navodi


(R = 1 : 200)



104


In the upper section, all three towers were open towards the courtyard of the

Castle. Their interior space was similar; in the case of Towers 3 and 4 it covers the

surface area of around 8.50 m², while in Tower 5 it is somewhat bigger, 9.40 m². In

the open section of these towers, we found remains of slots for inter-floor wood

structures. In the case of all three towers, we noticed in the face of all these extensive

walls slots for the beams on which the transversal ones were placed at a smaller

distance, as opposed to Tower 2 where beams – the bearers were located only in the

lateral walls. Clear traces of higher storeys in these towers were not observed, either

in the faces of the walls or in the mass of the walls. For this reason we may only presume

that they also had three open storeys each and that the storeys’ heights were

similar to those in Tower 2. In that case the height of Towers 3 and 4 would be

around 15 m in relation to the plane of the Castle’s courtyard, while Tower 5 was

almost 13 m tall above Cistern 2.

Tower 6

According to the manner in which it was constructed and according to the general

concept, the North Tower or Tower 6 is very similar to the other towers that were

partly open towards the interior of the Citadel. The tower was surveyed in its entirety,

taking into account that in a younger phase its interior space used to be connected

with the neighbouring North Building (fig. 40). It was completely founded on a

rock, in such a way that the entire space of the future tower was levelled out by an

effluent wall mass on which the walls were based. This wall mass with occasional

rock surfaces constitutes the floor in the tower. By its ground plan it is bigger than

the other towers in the Castle and its exterior measures are 10.85 m × 10.0 m. It

protrudes from the plane of the rampart by 7–9 m, the width of its lateral walls is

3.2 m, while the front wall is as much as 4.2 m wide, which is not so even in the

case of the Main Defence Tower – the Keep.

Thanks to the fact that the wall masses of Tower 6 remained well preserved in

the sections where the face had collapsed, we succeeded in getting some findings on

the construction details concerning its structure, which, judging by all, were the

same in the case of the other towers of the Castle. Namely, in the northwest corner

of the Tower, which was significantly damaged, we noticed remains of the wooden

beams grillages in the wall mass. The beams, most frequently with the dimension of

18 cm × 18 cm, were laid parallel to the face of the wall, withdrawn from it by some

50 cm to 70 cm and at the mutual distance of 63 cm to 70 cm. Judging by the width

of the walls, it could be concluded that there were three of them in the west wall,

while in the north one there were probably four and they were all at the same level.

It is valuable that two rows of the grillage were noticed in this place at the height

distance of 63 cm, which is a little unusual. The application of grillages positioned

so densely, when the purpose of the grillages is to ensure even settlement of large

wall masses, probably came from the significant widths of the walls. The other towers

of the Castle were built in a similar way, as it has been already presumed, and it may

also be supposed that the same building technique was applied in the construction

of the ramparts.

The micro-location of Tower 6 within the scope of the Castle’s fortifications

clearly shows that its role was to monitor and defend the main access communication

from the most accessible east side (fig. 41). Like the other, similar towers, this


na zakqu~ak da su dowe etaè u unutra{wosti kule zasute pre wegovog obrazovawa,

odnosno u vreme funkcionisawa Zamka, a najverovatnije jo{ u vreme gra|ewa

fortifikacija.

U gorwem delu sve tri kule bile su otvorene prema dvori{tu Zamka. Wihov

unutra{wi prostor je bio sli~an, kod Kule 3 i 4 obuhvata povr{inu od oko

8,5 m², dok je u Kuli 5 ne{to ve}i – 9,4 m². U otvorenom delu ovih kula na|eni

su ostaci leì{ta za me|uspratne drvene konstrukcije. U licu svih obimnih

zidova, kod sve tri kule, uo~ena su leì{ta greda na koje su nalegale one popre~ne,

postavqene po mawem rasponu, za razliku od Kule 2, gde su samo u bo~nim

zidovima bile grede – oslonci. Jasni tragovi vi{ih etaà u ovim kulama

nisu konstatovani, kako u licima zidova, tako ni u masi zidova. Stoga moèmo

samo da pretpostavimo da su i one imale po tri otvorene etaè, a da su spratne

visine bile sli~ne onima kao i u Kuli 2. U tom slu~aju bi visina Kule 3 i 4

iznosila oko 15 m u odnosu na ravan dvori{ta Zamka, dok je Kula 5 bila visoka

skoro 13 m iznad Cisterne 2.


(R = 1 : 200)



Kula 6

Severna ili Kula 6 prema na~inu gra|ewa i op{toj koncepciji veoma je sli~na

ostalim kulama koje su delom bile otvorene prema unutra{wosti citadele.

Kula je u celosti istraèna, budu}i da je wen unutra{wi prostor u jednoj mla-

|oj fazi bio povezan sa susednom Severnom gra|evinom (sl. 40). U celosti je

bila zasnovana na steni, tako {to je ceo prostor budu}e kule bio izravnat izlivenom

zidnom masom nad kojom su zasnovani zidovi. Ova zidna masa sa mestimi~nim

povr{inama stene ~ini pod u kuli. U osnovi je ve}a od ostalih kula

u Zamku i wene spoqne mere iznose 10,85 × 10 m. Iz ravni bedema je isturena

7–9 m, a {irina wenih bo~nih zidova je 3,2 m, dok je ~eoni zid {irok ~ak 4,2 m,

{to nije slu~aj ni kod glavne kule odbrane – Donòna.

106


tower was also closed towards the courtyard of the Castle, that is, towards the North

Building, with a 1.20 m thick wall. At the level with its upper surface, there are preserved

corner ashlars made of breccia that were used to finish the upper, open section

of the tower. The interior space of the tower, with the size of around 3.5 m ×

4.6 m in the ground floor section, had the surface of around 16 m². With another

subsequent intervention this space was linked with the ground floor of the North

Building. A driven passage, the lateral sides of which were only partially finished,

had modest dimensions with the width of 0.70 m – 0.80 m and the height that did

not exceed 1.50 m (fig. 42).

In the interior of the tower we discovered remains of two levels of wooden

inter-floor structures. Above the ground floor of the tower, at the height of 3.0 m

there are bearings of seven beams with the dimensions of 15 × 16 cm, placed at a

shorter distance and resting on the beams in the external walls. Above the ground

floor, judging by all, the open section of the tower used to have another three

storeys, somewhat more spacious than the lowest one, with the respective surface

areas of around 21 m². On the basis of the preserved slots for five beams in the face

and the mass of the wall, it may be concluded that the height of the second floor was

3.05 m, while the others had a similar height, which would mean that the former

height of this tower as well was almost 15 m in relation to the Castle’s courtyard.

Sl. 41. Kula 6 – severni izgled sa spoqnim bedemom

i presecima Severoisto~nog bedema Doweg grada i Protehizme (R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 41. Tower 6 – north appearance with the exterior rampart

and the cross-sections of the North-East Rampart of the Lower Town and Protechism (R = 1 : 200)


Sl. 42. Kula 6, ulaz u kulu

iz Severne gra|evine

(foto 2016)

Fig. 42. Tower 6, entrance into

the tower from the North Edifice

(photo from 2016)

Zahvaquju}i ~iwenici da su ostale dobro o~uvane zidne mase Kule 6 na delovima

gde je obru{eno lice, do{lo se do nekih saznawa o konstruktivnim detaqima

u wenoj strukturi, koji su, po svemu sude}i, bili isti i kod ostalih kula

Zamka. Naime, u severozapadnom uglu kule, koji je bio znatno o{te}en, uo~eni

su ostaci ro{tiqa drvenih greda u masi zida. Grede, naj~e{}e dimenzija 18 ×

18 cm, bile su postavqene paralelno sa licem zida, povu~ene od wega za 50 do

70 cm, a na me|usobnom rastojawu od 63 do 70 cm. Sude}i prema {irini zidova,

moglo se zakqu~iti da ih je u zapadnom zidu bilo tri, dok ih je u severnom bilo

verovatno ~etiri i sve su bile u istoj ravni. Dragoceno je da su na ovom mestu

uo~ena dva reda ro{tiqa na visinskom razmaku od 63 cm, {to je neuobi~ajeno

malo. Primena ovako gusto postavqenih ro{tiqa, ~ija je ina~e namena da obezbede

ravnomerno slegawe velikih zidnih masa, verovatno je proistekla upravo

iz znatnih {irina zidova. Na sli~an na~in, kao {to je ve} pretpostavqeno, gra-

|ene su i ostale kule Zamka, a moè se pretpostaviti da je ista tehnika gradwe

bila primewena i kod bedema.

Mikrolokacija Kule 6 u okviru fortifikacija Zamka jasno ukazuje na to

da je wena uloga bila da nadzire i brani glavnu prilaznu komunikaciju sa najpristupa~nije,

isto~ne strane (sl. 41). Prema dvori{tu Zamka, odnosno Severnoj

gra|evini, kula je bila, kao i druge sli~ne, zatvorena zidom, debqine 1,2 m.

U ravni sa wegovom gorwom povr{inom o~uvani su ugaoni tesanici bre~a, kojima

je bio obra|en gorwi otvoreni deo kule. Unutra{wi prostor kule, veli~ine

oko 3,5 × 4,6 m u prizemnom delu, imao je povr{inu od oko 16 m². Jednom naknadnom

intervencijom ovaj prostor je povezan sa prizemnom etaòm Severne gra-

|evine. Probijeni prolaz, ~ije su bo~ne strane samo delimi~no bile obra|ene,

bio je skromnih dimenzija, {irine 0,7–0,8 m, a visine ne ve}e od 1,5 m (sl. 42).

U unutra{wosti kule otkriveni su ostaci dva nivoa drvenih me|uspratnih

konstrukcija. Nad prizemqem kule, na visini od 3 m, o~uvana su leì{ta

108


a

On the walls of the tower, that is, on its basic structure, two subsequent interventions

were also noticed. In a younger phase, as it has been already said, a door

was driven towards the North Building, which will be dealt with in more detail later

on. Another intervention constituted, in fact, a restoration of the tower after the

collapse of its northeast corner. On that occasion, a new wall, around 1.5 m thick,

was built in front of the larger part of the front side and partially on the east lateral

side, and this wall was used to enclose the damaged section of the tower. Judging by

the preserved impressions of beams, this added wall was within the structure of the

wall mass strengthened with wooden reinforcement, that is, with frames. Among

the stone fill of this enclosure wall, we found several fragments of stone plastics with

remains of wattle decoration of the Morava-style, which represents spolia originating

from some destroyed church.

Ramparts (fig. 43)

All the ramparts of the Castle were built simultaneously with the towers. They are

of the almost same widths and go from 3.15 m to 3.30 m, while their lengths are

different. The shortest is the rampart in the west section in which there is the gate,

which is only 5.95 m long. The lengths of the other ramparts go between 7.00 m and

9.00 m, while the longest one is between the Main Tower 1 and Tower 2 the length

of which is around 10 m.

After the removal of the debris and the collapsed stone, the remains of the ramparts

were found in a very poor constructional state. Their interior, as well as the


b

sedam greda, dimenzija 15 × 16 cm, postavqenih po kra}em rasponu i oslowenih

na grede u obimnim zidovima. Iznad prizemqa otvoreni deo kule imao je,

po svemu sude}i, jo{ tri etaè, ne{to prostranije od one najniè, povr{ine

od oko 21 m². Na osnovu o~uvanih mesta pet greda u licu i masi zida, moè se

zakqu~iti da je visina druge etaè iznosila 3,05 m, a sli~ne su bile i ostale,

{to bi zna~ilo da je nekada{wa visina i ove kule iznosila skoro 15 m u odnosu

na dvori{te Zamka

Na zidovima kule, odnosno wenoj osnovnoj konstrukciji uo~ene su i dve

poznije intervencije. U jednoj mla|oj fazi, kao {to je ve} re~eno, probijena su

vrata prema Severnoj gra|evini, o ~emu }e i kasnije biti re~i. Druga intervencija

predstavqala je, zapravo, obnovu kule posle ru{ewa wenog severoisto~nog

ugla. Tom prilikom ispred ve}eg dela predwe i delom isto~ne bo~ne strane

podignut je novi zid, debqine oko 1,5 m, kojim je obzidan o{te}eni deo kule.

Sude}i prema o~uvanim otiscima greda, ovaj dozidani je bio u strukturi zidne

mase oja~an drvenom armaturom, odnosno santra~ima. Me|u kamenom ispunom

ovog obzi|a otkriveno je nekoliko fragmenata kamene plastike sa ostacima

pleternog ukrasa moravskog stila, koji predstavqaju spolije poreklom sa

neke poru{ene crkve.

Sl. 43. Zamak:

a) bedem izme|u Kule 3 i Kule 4,

za Zapadnom kapijom;

b) bedem izme|u Kule 4 i Kule 5

(R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 43. Castle:

a) rampart between Tower 3

and Tower 4, with the West Gate;

b) rampart between Tower 4

and Tower 5 (R = 1 : 200)

Bedemi (sl. 43)

Svi bedemi Zamka gra|eni su istovremeno sa kulama. Oni su skoro istih {irina

i kre}u se od 3,15 m do 3,3 m, dok su im duìne razli~ite. Najkra}i je bedem

110


Sl. 44. Zamak, Zapadna kapija –

osnova, izgled i presek

Fig. 44. Castle, West Gate –

ground plan, appearance

and the cross-section

exterior faces were significantly toppled in the upper zones and not even on one

single rampart did we find any remains that would suggest the width of the crenellated

parapet or any material data on the level of wall walks on them. Along the

ramparts we did not find any remains of built staircases or any traces of possible

wooden structures, which suggests that they were reached solely through the towers.

On the ramparts, as was common, there used to be a wall walk which included

crenellated parapet. It was built in such a way that, including the passages through

the tower, it enabled the defenders to have continuous movement along the entire

rampart barrier. Undoubtedly, only the Main Tower was excluded from this system

of defence.

Taking into account the structural and defence construction of the towers from

the last storey of which the ramparts were reached, it may be concluded that their

height to the wall walk, in relation to the Castle’s courtyard, was almost uniformed

and it was around 10.50 m. Only the ramparts between towers 6 and 1 and towers

4 and 5, if observed like that, were somewhat lower, around 8.0 m to 8.50 m.

According to the reconstruction of the former heights of the towers and the exits

onto the ramparts, it may be concluded that the levels of the wall walks were almost

even and that they went approximately from the elevation level of 1106.90 in the

east sector to the level of 1107.35 in the west sector. On the rampart between towers

4 and 5, adjacent to Tower 5, we noticed a massive piece of breccia with the width

of 0.35 m and the length of 0.6 m. It had been position parallel to the exterior face

of the rampart, at the distance of 0.55 m and 0.9 m, and its upper surface is at the

elevation level of 1106.45. It is logical to presume that it belonged to the parapet

that used to be crenellated. Nowadays it is not known what the former structure of

the wall walks on the ramparts used to be like on account of the poor level of their

preservation. Also, we do not have any material data on the height of the parapet

and the distribution of merlons or the fences on the ramparts.


u zapadnom sektoru, u kome se nalazi kapija, a wegova duìna je samo 5,95 m.

Duìne ostalih bedema iznose izme|u 7 i 9 m, a najduì je onaj izme|u Glavne

kule – Kule 1 i Kule 2, ~ija duìna iznosi oko 10 m.

Nakon uklawawa {uta i obru{enog kamena, ostaci bedema zate~eni su u veoma

lo{em gra|evinskom stawu. Wihova unutra{wa, ali i spoqna lica bila su

u gorwim zonama znatno obru{ena, te ni na jednom bedemu nisu na|eni ostaci

koji bi ukazivali na {irinu parapeta sa zupcima, niti materijalni podaci o

nivou {etnih staza na wima. Uz bedeme nisu otkriveni ostaci zidanih stepeni{ta

niti tragovi mogu}ih drvenih konstrukcija, {to ukazuje na to da se na

wih izlazilo iskqu~ivo kroz kule. Na bedemima, kao {to je to i uobi~ajeno,

postojala je {etna staza, u okviru koje se nalazio parapet sa zupcima. Bila je

gra|ena tako da je, ukqu~uju}i prolaze kroz kule, braniocima omogu}avala kontinualno

kretawe du` cele bedemske ograde. Iz ovakvog sistema odbrane bila

je iskqu~ena, bez sumwe, samo Glavna kula.

Imaju}i u vidu konstruktivni i odbrambeni sklop kula iz kojih se sa posledwe

etaè izlazilo na bedeme, moè se zakqu~iti da je wihova visina do

{etne staze, u odnosu na dvori{te Zamka, bila gotovo ujedna~ena i da je iznosila

oko 10,5 m. Jedino su bedemi izme|u Kule 6 i 1 i Kule 4 i 5, tako posmatrano,

bili ne{to niì – oko 8 do 8,5 m. Prema rekonstrukciji nekada{wih visina

kula i izlaza na bedeme moè se zakqu~iti da su nivoi {etnih staza bili

gotovo ujedna~eni i da se kre}u okvirno od kote 1106,90 u isto~nom sektoru, do

kote 1107,35 u zapadnom sektoru. Na bedemu izme|u Kule 4 i 5, sasvim uz Kulu

5, uo~ena je jedna masivna bre~a, {irine 0,35 i m duìne 0,6 m. Postavqena je

paralelno sa spoqnim licem bedema, na udaqenosti od 0,55 m, odnosno 0,9 m,

a wena gorwa povr{ina je na koti 1106,45. Logi~no je pretpostaviti da pripada

parapetu, nad kojim su nekada bili zupci. Kakva je bila nekada{wa konstrukcija

{etnih staza na bedemima, danas nije poznato zbog wihove slabe o~uvanosti.

Tako|e se ne raspolaè ni materijalnim podacima o visini parapeta i

rasporedu zubaca, kao i ogradama na bedemima.

Zapadna kapija Zamka (sl. 44 i 45)

Jedini ulaz u Zamak bio je kroz kapiju sme{tenu izme|u Kula 3 i 4. Zate~ena

je gotovo zasuta {utom, a tokom istraìva~kih radova 2015. godine u celosti

je iskopana i istraèna. Tom prilikom se pokazalo da je wen spoqni portal u

celosti sa~uvan, ukqu~uju}i prag, dovratnike i luk, koji su isklesani od pravilnih

blokova bre~a. Konstatovano je da {irina portala iznosi 1,26 m, a da je

wegova visina do temena blago prelomqenog luka 2,21 m. Prolaz kroz bedem je

{irine oko 1,82 do 1,88 m i bio je presveden poluobli~astim svodom od sige.

O wemu svedo~i ostatak samo jednog bloka na visini od 2,45 m iznad praga u

severnom zidu prolaza. Rekonstrukcijom ovih parametara utvr|eno je da je visina

prolaza u unutra{wosti citadele iznosila 3,5 m.

U ju`nom uglu praga otkriveno je kru`no uklesano leì{te za vertikalnu

osovinu jednokrilnih vratnica. U wemu je na|en in situ gvozdeni poluloptasti

okov, u kome se nalazila kru`na drvena osovina vratnica. U bo~nim zidovima

prolaza, odmah iza portala, postoje o~uvana leì{ta grede – mandala – koja je

zatvarala vratnice kapije, i to na udaqenosti od 20 do 28 cm iza portala, {to

ukazuje na mogu}u debqinu nekada{we drvene kapije.

112


West Gate of the Castle (fig. 44 and 45)

The only entrance into the Castle was through a gate placed between Towers 3 and

4. It was found almost entirely covered in debris and during the 2015 exploration

works it was excavated and surveyed in its entirety. On that occasion it turned out

that its external portal had been preserved as a whole, including the threshold, jambs

and arch, which were all carved out of regular blocks of breccia. It was established

that the width of the portal was 1.26 m, while its height to the crown of the mildly

broken arch was 2.21 m. The passage through the rampart was around 1.82 m to

1.88 m wide and it was covered by a semi-spherical vault made of tufa. This is testified

to by the remains of only one block at the height of 2.45 m above the threshold

in the north wall of the passage. The reconstruction of these parameters showed that

the height of the passage in the interior of the Citadel was 3.50 m.

In the south corner of the threshold we discovered a spherical carved bearing

for a vertical axis of a single-leaf door. There in situ we found an iron semi-spherical

hinge, which contained a circular wooden axis of the door. In the lateral walls

of the passage, right after the portal, there were preserved bearings of a beamwooden

bar which closed the door of the gate and this was placed at the distance of

20 to 28 cm behind the portal, which suggests the possible thickness of the former

wooden gate.

In the area in front of the gate, between Towers 3 and 4, a little lower than the

level of the threshold, under the fill of the debris, we came across a cultural layer

that was surveyed only in a smaller section down to the depth of around 20 cm. The

layer contained a lot of fragments, predominantly of glazed pottery, which could

preliminarily be dated back to the first half or the middle of the 15 th century, that

is, to the period before the Ottomans conquered the town.

Sl. 45. Zamak, Zapadna kapija,

posle arheolo{kih iskopavawa 2015

Fig. 45. Castle, West Gate,

after the archaeological excavations

in 2015


Na prostoru ispred kapije, izme|u Kula 3 i 4, ne{to niè od ravni praga,

ispod nasipa {uta, otkriven je kulturni sloj, koji je samo na jednoj mawoj povr-

{ini istraèn do dubine od oko 20 cm. U sloju je bilo dosta ulomaka, prete`no

gle|osane keramike, koja bi se preliminarno mogla datovati u prvu polovinu

ili sredinu 15. veka, odnosno razdobqe pre osmanskog osvajawa grada.

Spoqni bedem Zamka (sl. 46)

Kao {to je ve} napred izneto, spoqni bedem je samo jednim delom istraèn. U

celosti je otkriven ispred Kule 6, odakle se kontinuirano prati oko Glavne,

Kule 1, sve do bo~ne strane Kule 2, gde se naslawa na weno eskarpno pro{irewe.

Daqe ispred ~eone strane ove kule, gde se nalazi prilaz Ju`noj kapiji Doweg

grada, spoqnog bedema nije bilo. Wegova trasa se nastavqa daqe iza kapije, gde

se naslawa na zapadnu bo~nu stranu Kule 2, i daqe se prati oko Kule 3, gde su

istraìvawa spoqnog bedema bila privremeno okon~ana. Ne{to daqe, od Kule

4, pa do Kule 6, trasa spoqnog bedema je samo delimi~no otkrivena. Me|utim,

ispred kapije Zamka, usled naglog prekida radova, ostao je neistraèn deo sa kapijom

spoqnog bedema. 124 Na istraènom delu ove spoqne odbrambene linije do-

{lo se do glavnih podataka o konstrukciji spoqnog bedema, kao i odnosa, kako

hronolo{kog, tako i funkcionalnog, prema fortifikacijama Zamka u celini.

Na svim istraènim delovima jasno je uo~eno da je spoqni bedem bio zasnovan

na steni, i to na zate~enoj konfiguraciji, bez posebnog zasecawa za utemeqewe.

To je o~igledno predstavqalo konstruktivnu slabost, koja je dovela do

wegovih delimi~nih uru{avawa. Gra|en je sa kosom kamenom eskarpom, u nièm

nivou, nad kojom je bio relativno nizak vertikalni deo bedema sa ozup~anim

kruni{tem. Samo jedan mawi deo spoqnog bedema, koji se naslawa na zapadnu

bo~nu stranu Kule 2, kod Ju`ne kapije Doweg grada, bio je gra|en kao vertikalno

zidno platno. Na tom delu wegova debqina iznosi oko 1,5 m, a o~uvana visina

oko 4,2 m. Visina spoqnog bedema, posmatranog u celini, bila je neujedna~ena

i zavisila je od konfiguracije zate~enog stenovitog tla. Gra|en je, kao

i ostale fortifikacije Zamka, lomqenim kamenom, dok su uglovi eskarpnog

dela bili obra|eni koso klesanim tesanicima bre~e. U zidnim masama spoqnog

bedema, koje su relativno slabo o~uvane, nisu otkriveni tragovi drvenih

armatura.

Izme|u glavnog, unutra{weg i spoqnog bedema nalazio se skriveni put,

~ija {irina nije bila konstantna. Kretala se uglavnom izme|u 1,5 i 2,5 m, mada

je na pojedinim mestima bila i ve}a. Ispred ~eone strane Glavne kule {irina

skrivenog puta iznosila je svega 1,1 do 1,4 m, {to je verovatno bilo uslovqeno

poloàjem ovog dela fortifikacija na padini, uz koje se pruàla i

trasa prilaznog puta ka Ju`noj kapiji. Na istraìvanom delu spoqnog bedema

prostor skrivenog puta je iskopavan do ravni kulturnog sloja. Wegov prvobitni

nivo istraèn je samo sonda`no, i to uz Kule 2 i 6, kao i uz deo bedema izme-

|u Kula 1 i 2. Dno, odnosno nivo gazi{ta, ~inio mu je, izgleda, zastor od kompaktnog

maltera. Nad ovom ravni obrazovao se sloj zemqe sa malo {uta i osutog

maltera, sa retkim ulomcima keramike i ìvotiwskim kostima. Debqina

sloja je neujedna~ena i iznosi izme|u 0,5 i 1 m. Nivo skrivenog puta pratio je

verovatno konfiguraciju terena i bio je usagla{en sa visinom spoqnog bedema.

Prema razultatima dobijenim u pomenutim sondama moglo se zakqu~iti da je

124 Istraìva~ki i konzervatorski

radovi obustavqeni su po~etkom

avgusta 2016. godine. V. prilog


114


124 The surveying and conservation works

were stopped at the beginning of August

2016. See in the enclosure the paper by


External rampart of the Castle (fig. 46)

As it has already been pointed out above, the external rampart was surveyed only

in part. It was revealed in its entirety in front of Tower 6 from where it was continuously

followed around Main Tower 1, all the way to the lateral side of Tower 2 where

it rests against the latter’s scarp extension. Further on, in front of the front side of

this Tower, where there is an access to the South Gate of the Lower Town, there was

no external rampart. Its route continues further behind the gate, where it rests against

the west lateral side of Tower 2 and it can be followed on again around Tower 3, where

the surveying of the external rampart was temporarily finished. A little farther on,

from Tower 4 all the way to Tower 6, the route of the external rampart was only partially

revealed. However, owing to the abrupt stopping of the works, a section with

a gate belonging to the external rampart in front of the Castle’s gate remained

unsurveyed. 124 In the surveyed section of this exterior defence line, we came to the

main data on the structure of the external rampart, as well as its relation, both chronological

and functional, to the fortifications of the Castle as a whole.

In all of the explored sections, we clearly observed that the external rampart

was founded on the rock, specifically on the already existing configuration, without

any particular cutting for the purpose of the foundation. This obviously constituted

a structural weakness that led to its partial collapsing. At the lower level it was built

with an oblique stone scarp, above which there was a relatively low vertical section

of the rampart with crenellated top. Only one smaller section of the external rampart,

which leaned against the west lateral side of Tower 2, by the South Gate of the

Lower Town, was built as a vertical wall curtain. In that section, its thickness is

around 1.50 m, while its preserved height is 4.20 m. The height of the external rampart,

observed as a whole, was uneven and it depended on the configuration of the

rocky ground that was found in the respective place. It was built in the same way


Sl. 46. Zamak, Spoqni bedem

– preseci (R = 1 : 100)

Fig. 46. Castle, Exterior rampart

– cross-sections (R = 1 : 100)

sa zapadne strane, na prostoru od Kule 2 (kota 1095,67) do Kule 6 (kota 1095,54)

nivo skrivenog puta bio relativno ravan sa blagim usponom prema prostoru

ispred kapije Zamka (kota 1096,20). Ovo su samo delimi~ni rezultati, budu}i

da }e se pouzdaniji zakqu~ci o nekada{woj celini spoqnog bedema mo}i doneti

tek po{to se otkriju wegovi ostaci du` cele zapadne strane.

I pored skromno sa~uvanih materijalnih podataka, utvr|eno je, bar u istra-

ènoj zoni, da spoqni bedem prati trasu glavnih kula i odbrambenih zidova.

Merewem je konstatovano da kosina eskarpnog pro{irewa iznosi od 10° do 17°,

u zavisnosti od konfiguracije terena, te je i wegova visina razli~ita. Na osnovu

ovih parametara i podataka o nivou skrivenog puta, moè se sa sigurno{}u

pretpostaviti wegova geometrija i rekonstruisati nekada{wi oblik i izgled.

Tako je utvr|eno da je najmawa visina eskarpe u delu izme|u Kule 2 i Kule 3,

gde iznosi samo 2,5 m, a da je najve}a kod Kule 6, gde iznosi ~ak oko 5 m. Nad

ovim zako{enim delom uzdizao se vertikalni zid, {irine oko 1,8 m, koji se

zavr{avao {etnom stazom sa zupcima. Wegova {etnica bila je izdignuta iznad

nivoa skrivenog puta za oko 1,5 m, tako da je wegova ukupna visina sa zupcima

mogla iznositi od 5 do 10 m.

Prema dosada{wim rezultatima istraìvawa moè se zakqu~iti da je prvobitna

zamisao spoqnog bedema, u funkcionalnom smislu, u jednom poznijem

razdobqu zanemarena i da je, bar kada je u pitawu bila isto~na strana Zamka,

spoqni bedem bio zaru{en, a skriveni put delom zasut. Takvo stawe je prethodilo

dogradwi eskarpnih oja~awa bo~nih strana Glavne kule, koja su utemeqena

u prostoru skrivenog puta, a delom i preko zidne mase spoqnog bedema. Isti

slu~aj je bio i sa obzi|em pri obnovi Kule 6, koje je utemeqeno u prostoru nekada{weg

skrivenog puta.

116


as the rest of the fortification of the Castle using broken stone, while the corners of

the scarp section were finished with breccia ashlars chiselled obliquely. In the wall

masses of the external rampart, which are relatively poorly preserved, no traces of

any wooden fittings were found.

Between the main, interior and the external ramparts, there used to be a hidden

road the width of which was not constant. It went mostly between 1.50 m and 2.50 m,

although in some places it was even more than that. In front of the front side of the

of the Main Tower, the width of the hidden road was only 1.10 m to 1.40 m, which

was probably caused by the position of this part of the fortifications on a slope along

which there was also the route of the access road to the South Gate. In the surveyed

section of the external rampart, the area of the hidden road was excavated down to

the level of the cultural layer. Its original level was surveyed only with probes, next to

Towers 2 and 6, as well as along the section of the rampart between Towers 1 and 2.

It appears that the bottom, that is, the level of the tread consisted of surfacing made

of compact plaster. Above this plane, a layer of soil with some debris and crumbled

plaster was formed, with rare fragments of pottery and animal bones. Its thickness

is uneven and goes between 0.50 m and 1.00 m. The level of the hidden road probably

followed the configuration of the terrain and was aligned with the height of the

external rampart. According to the results obtained in the above-mentioned probes,

it could be concluded that from the west side, in the area from Tower 2 (elevation

level 1095.67) to Tower 6 (elevation level 1095.54) the level of the hidden road was

relatively flat with mild ascent towards the area in front of the gate of the Castle (elevation

level 1096.20). These are only partial results since it will be possible to come

up with more reliable conclusions on the former entirety of the external rampart

only after its remains along the entire length of the west side have been revealed.

Even with the modestly preserved material data, it has been established, at least

in the surveyed zone, that the external rampart follows the route of the main towers

and the defence walls. Through measuring we established that the inclination

of the scarp extension went from 10° to 17°, depending on the configuration of the

terrain, and that its height was consequently different. On the basis of these parameters

and data concerning the level of the hidden road, its geometry may be presumed

with certainty and its former shape and appearance may be reconstructed. Thus

it was established that the lowest height of the scarp was in the section between

Tower 2 and Tower 3, where it was only 2.5 m, while it was highest at Tower 6 where

it was as much as around 5.0 m. Above this inclined section, there used to be a vertical

wall with the width of around 1.8 m which ended in a wall walk with merlons.

Its walkway was elevated above the level of the hidden road by around 1.5 m, so that

its overall height with merlons may have been from 5.0 m to 10 m.

According to the results of the surveying attained so far, it may be concluded

that the original intention of the external rampart, in terms of functionality, was

neglected in some subsequent period and that, at least when it comes to the east

side of the Castle, the external rampart collapsed somewhat and the hidden road was

partially filled. Such a state preceded the additional building of the scarp reinforcements

of the lateral sides of the Main Tower that were founded in the area of the

hidden road and partially also over the wall mass of the external rampart. The same

thing happened also to the enclosure wall during the reconstruction of Tower 6,

which was founded in the area of the former hidden road.


Isto~na platforma (sl. 47)

Na prostoru isto~no od bedema koji je povezivao Kulu 6 sa Glavnom kulom, daqe

prema glavnoj pristupnoj komunikaciji, u toku istraìvawa zate~eni su veoma

visoki slojevi obru{enog kamena i {uta, visine 5 do 7 m iznad najmla|eg

sredwovekovnog relativno ravnog nivoa terena, koji se prema severu naglo zavr-

{avao. U nastavku istraìvawa, upravo na tom prostoru, u produètku pravca

severne strane spoqnog bedema ispred Kule 6 i daqe prema istoku otkriveni

su ostaci jednog podzida zasnovanog neposredno nad okomitim stenama, na rubu

rova pred Severoisto~nim bedemom Doweg grada. Na tom mestu podzid naglo

skre}e prema istoku i wime se zavr{ava ju`ni krak rova. Trasa podzida mogla

se preko stena pratiti u duìni od oko 10 m. Sa zapadne strane podzid se oslawao

na ugao kose eskarpe spoqnog bedema, dok mu sa isto~ne strane tragovi nestaju

na trasi sada{we pristupne komunikacije Ju`noj kapiji. Podzid je bio

Sl. 47. Zamak, dogra|ena Isto~na

platforma za topove – osnova

Fig. 47. Castle, added East platform

for cannons – ground plan

118


East Platform (fig. 47)

During the exploration, we found in the area east of the rampart that used to connect

Tower 6 with the Main Tower, further towards the main access communication,

very high layers of toppled rocks and debris, with the height of 5 m to 7 m above

the youngest medieval relatively flat level of the terrain, which ended abruptly

towards the north. When the explorations went on, precisely in this area, in the

continuation of the direction of the north side of the External rampart in front of

Tower 6 and further to the east, we discovered remains of an underpinning based

directly above steep rocks, on the edge of the moat in front of the Northeast Rampart

of the Lower Town that in this place turns abruptly to the east, which will be

dealt with in more detail later on, and by which the south end of the moat ends. The

underpinning, the route of which could be followed across the rocks over the length

of around 10 metres, rested on the west side against the corner of the oblique scarp

of the external rampart, while on the east side its traces disappear at the route of

the current access communication to the South Gate. The underpinning was 0.80 m

wide and had only one face towards the north, that is, towards the moat. Its former

height of 3.00 m to 3.50 m may only be presumed. The space on the south side of

the underpinning, where the rock descends, was filled with black relatively clean

soil, with no traces of debris. This fill which along the route of the underpinning had

the thickness of even over 2 metres also partially filled the scarp on the east lateral

side of the External rampart in front of Tower 6. The above-mentioned black soil

fill mostly contained medieval pottery. These are predominantly fragments of

glazed pots with painted spirals and oblique ribbons, as well as corresponding lids,

and jars, while there are also unglazed pots with simple carved-in decoration.

Observed as a whole, most of these fragments could chronologically correspond to

the 14 th century and possibly the beginning of the 15 th century. These finds lead to

a supposition that the black soil fill came from the cultural layers from some area

in the Suburb, from where, like from a borrow pit, they were transported in order

to fill out the East Platform.

In connection with this platform, which was obviously created during a later

phase, and judging by all, a subsequently built passage through the East Rampart

was driven between Towers 1 and 6. This is a tunnel roughly excavated through the

wall mass of the rampart with the height of around 1.60 m, with the width that did

not exceed 1.40 m and whose sides were not subsequently finished. This passage led

to a ground floor room in the North Building. On account of a large altitude difference

of over 3 m, along the interior face of the rampart there was a dug-in pit of an

irregular shape and with unfinished sides through which, judging by all, it was possible

to use wooden ladders and go down to the exterior plane of the hidden road.

Along the direction of this tunnel, the external rampart was also cut through.

Following the excavation, the lateral sides of this passage got two lateral faces made

of mud mortar.

The breaking through the rampart fencing and the building of the platform

above the underpinning’s fill was undoubtedly done at the same time. It was

through this tunnel driven through the rampart that the newly-created East

Platform was connected by the shortest route with the courtyard of the Castle

which was directly linked with its purpose that will be dealt with in more detail

later on.


{irine 0,8 m i imao je samo jedno lice prema severu, odnosno rovu. Wegova nekada{wa

visina od 3 do 3,5 m moè se samo pretpostaviti. Prostor sa ju`ne

strane podzida, gde je stena u padu, bio je zasut nasipom crne relativno ~iste zemqe,

bez tragova {uta. Ovim nasipom, koji je uz trasu podzida imao debqinu i preko

2 m, bila je delimi~no zasuta i eskarpa na isto~noj bo~noj strani spoqnog

bedema ispred Kule 6. U pomenutom nasipu crne zemqe uglavnom je zastupqena

sredwovekovna keramika. To su prete`no ulomci gle|osanih lonaca sa slikanim

spiralama i kosim trakama, kao i odgovaraju}ih poklopaca, zatim kr~aga,

a ima i negle|osanih lonaca sa jednostavnim urezani ukrasom. Posmatrana

u celini, ve}ina ovih ulomaka bi u hronolo{kom smislu mogla odgovarati 14.

i eventualno po~etku 15. veka. Ovi nalazi navode na pretpostavku o tome da nasip

crne zemqe poti~e od kulturnih slojeva sa nekog prostora u Podgra|u, odakle

su, kao sa pozajmi{ta, transportovani radi nasipawa Isto~ne platforme.

U vezi sa ovom platformom, koja je o~igledno nastala u jednoj poznijoj fazi,

po svemu sude}i, bio je naknadno probijen i prolaz kroz Isto~ni bedem, izme|u

Kula 1 i 6. U pitawu je grubo prokopan tunel kroz zidnu masu bedema. Visina

prolaza bila je oko 1,6 m, dok {irina nije prelazila 1,4 m, a strane nisu

bile naknadno obra|ivane. Taj prolaz je izlazio u prizemnu prostoriju Severne

gra|evine. Usled visinske razlike od preko 3 m, uz unutra{we lice bedema

bila je ukopana jama nepravilnog oblika i neobra|enih strana, kroz koju se, po

svemu sude}i, drvenim lestvama silazilo do spoqne ravni skrivenog puta. Na

pravcu ovog tunela bio je prose~en i spoqni bedem. Bo~ne strane ovog prolaza

nakon probijawa dobile su bo~na lica u blatnom vezivu.

Probijawe bedemske ograde i obrazovawe platforme iznad podzidanog nasipa,

bez sumwe, bilo je ra|eno istovremeno. Kroz probijeni tunel u bedemu

novoformirana Isto~na platforma bila je najkra}im putem povezana sa dvori{tem

Zamka, {to je bilo u neposrednoj vezi sa wenom namenom, o ~emu }e daqe

biti vi{e re~i.

GRA\EVINE U ZAMKU

Ceo prostor u unutra{wosti Zamka bio je ispuwen gra|evinama koje su odgovarale

osnovnoj nameni ovog sredi{weg dela novobrdskih fortifikacija. U sredi{tu

ovog kompleksa nalazila se Crkva sa dogra|enom pripratom. Uz Zapadni

bedem, sa bo~nih strana ulaza, otkriveni su ostaci dva stambena zdawa – ve}e,

ozna~eno kao Ju`na gra|evina, i mawe, ~iji su ostaci otkriveni prilikom prvih

arheolo{kih istraìvawa 1952–1954. godine, koje je obeleèno kao Zapadna

gra|evina. Tre}e veliko zdawe, koje je popuwavalo prostor prema Isto~nom bedemu

i Kuli 6, u toku istraìvawa dobilo je naziv Severna gra|evina. U nevelikom

prostoru izme|u Crkve i Ju`ne gra|evine otkriveni su ostaci malog

parnog kupatila. Preostali deo dvori{ta Zamka zauzimali su objekti vodosnabdevawa,

odnosno dve cisterne – mawa, Cisterna 1, i ve}a, Cisterna 2, kao

i komunikacija od kapije prema Severnoj gra|evini i Glavnoj kuli.

Crkva

Ostaci ovog zdawa, koje se nalazilo u sredi{wem delu Zamka, otkriveni su ispod

slojeva kamena i {uta, visine izme|u 2,5 i 4,5 m. Tokom istraìvawa konstatovano

je da se radi o sloènom objektu, sa dve hronolo{ki i funkcionalno

120


BUILDINGS IN THE CASTLE

The entire space within the Castle was filled with buildings that corresponded to the

basic purpose of this central section of the fortifications of Novo Brdo. In the middle

of this complex there used to be a church with an added narthex. Along the West

Rampart, on the lateral sides of the entrance, remains of two residential buildings

have been discovered – the bigger one that was designated as the South Building and

the smaller one, the remains of which were revealed during the first archaeological

surveying in 1952–1954, that was designated as the West Building. During the explorations,

a third large building, which filled up the space towards the East Rampart

and Tower 6, was named North Building. In the not too large space between the

Church and the South Building we discovered remains of a small steam bath. The

remaining part of the Castle’s courtyard was taken up by water supply structures,

that is, by two cisterns – smaller Cistern 1 and bigger Cistern 2, as well as by the

communication towards the North Building and the Main Tower.

Church

The remains of this edifice that was located in the central section of the Castle were

revealed under the layers of the stone and debris that had the height between 2.50 m

and 4.50 m. During the explorations, it was established that this used to be a complex

building with two chronologically and functionally different phases, the first

one of which corresponded to the older building, the church, while the other corresponded

to a younger building, constructed above its ruins, that served as a granary

(fig. 48).

The church was built on a flattened rock in the central section of the Castle’s

courtyard and it used to be surrounded with other buildings from this fortified

ensemble. It had a single-nave ground plan with an apse in the east that was semicircular

on the inside and three-sided on the outside. The interior space, with the

length of 6.00 m and the width of 3.60 m, was divided with two pairs of pilasters into

three bays. In the altar space, a well preserved prothesis in the shape of a semi-circular

niche was found and its lower side was finished with a massive stone profiled

slab. Its upper surface was at the height of around 0.80 m in relation to the former

level of the floor. Lower than this slab, in the east wall, there is also a square niche

shaped with larger thin bricks arranged as a soldier course (fig. 49). The walls of the

church, 0.60 m – 0.70 m thick, were built using broken hewn stone laid irregularly.

They have been preserved unevenly and thus the north wall has survived up to the

height of around two metres, while only the two lowest rows of the stone of the

south wall have been kept (fig. 50). The best preserved are remains of the east wall and

they go all the way to the parts of calottes above the altar apse and the prothesis. As

opposed to the other walls of the church, these calottes were built using tufa ashlars

and judging by all, the vault, of which no remains have been preserved, was built in

the same way. The portal of the church within the west wall that was walled-in during

the younger phase was finished using larger blocks of soft sandstone. In the middle

of the altar apse there is a preserved former window, 40 cm wide and 76 cm high,

which like the portal was walled-in during the younger phase. In the other walls of

the church there are no preserved traces of any windows. The floor of the church

used to lie on the flattened rock and it consisted of a mortar layer, preserved in

places, above which there used to be stone slabs that were revealed in traces only.


I–I

III–III

II–II

Sl. 48. Crkva u Zamku – osnova i preseci otkrivenih ostataka (R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 48. Church in the Castle – ground plan and cross-sectionsof the discovered remains (R = 1 : 200)

122


Sl. 49. Crkva u Zamku –

oltarska apsida sa proskomidijom

i ostacima freske u soklu

(foto 2015)

Fig. 49. Church in the Castle –

altar apse with prothesis

and remains of a fresco in a socle

(photo from 2015)

125 @ivkovi} 1989, section VIII and IX.

126 Todi} 1999, 72–74.

127 The copies were handed over to

the fresco gallery of the National Museum

in Belgrade.

128 The frescoes were taken off

and processed by a team of painter-expert

advisor Stojanka Samardìja, after which

they were handed over to the Museum

of Kosovo in Pri{tina.

129 During the conservation works, the

north wall of the added narthex was taken

apart and built again. In the section where

it rested against the corner of the church

we found small remains of the original wall

paintings from the west facade. That fresco

plaster was then taken off and conserved.

In the altar section of the church, in this floor, there is a preserved polygonal lower

section of a polygonal pillar of the table of oblation carved out of breccia. The upper

section of this pillar was discovered in the walled-in section of the west portal from

the times of the Ottoman alteration during the younger phase.

The interior surfaces of the church’s walls used to be covered in fresco paintings.

Remains of frescos have been preserved only in the lowest section of the walls

in the prothesis and the altar apse (fig. 51). It is possible to recognise an ornament

in the shape of spirally twisted branches, painted in red and dark brown colours. A

similar and perhaps it may be said an identical ornament in the socle is located in

the lateral altar spaces of the church of Gra~anica Monastery. 125 These are the wall

paintings that have been reliably dated back to 1320/21, that is, to the last year of

the reign of King Stefan Uro{ II. 126 These small last remains of the wall paintings at

the church in the Castle were copied after the cleaning and conservation. 127 After

that they were taken off the wall and processed for permanent safekeeping under

museum conditions. 128

There are no reliable data as to how the facade sections of the church’s walls used

to be finished. For the lateral walls it may be presumed that they used to be only

broadly flattened and probably whitewashed. The west facade of the original church,

however, used to be covered in wall paintings the traces of which have been preserved

in the northwest corner, behind the attached wall of the subsequent additional

construction. 129

In a later phase, a narthex was added along the west wall with the length of

around 3.50 m. It used to have a trapezoid ground plan and with its lateral walls it

included the west corners of the church. It was built on a flattened rock above which

there are preserved remains of the walls the height of which does not exceed 1.50 m.

They were built in the same manner as the walls of the church with which they


Sl. 50. Crkva u Zamku

– ostaci ju`nog zida

i zid poznije turske pregradwe

(foto 2015)

Fig. 50. Church in the Castle –

remains of the south wall and a wall

of subsequent Ottoman partitioning

(photo from 2015)

razli~ite faze, od kojih prva odgovara starijem zdawu, odnosno Crkvi, a druga

mla|oj gra|evini, podignutoj nad wenim ru{evinama, koja je sluìla kao

ambar za ìto (sl. 48).

Crkva je podignuta na zaravwenoj steni u sredi{wem delu dvori{ta Zamka

i bila je okruèna drugim zdawima ove utvr|ene celine. Jednobrodne je osnove,

sa apsidom na istoku, koja je iznutra polukru`na, a sa spoqne strane trostrana.

Unutra{wi prostor, duìne 6 m i {irine 3,6 m, bio je sa dva para pilastara

podeqen na tri traveja. U oltarskom prostoru otkrivena je dobro o~uvana proskomidija

u vidu polukru`ne ni{e, ~ija je dowa strana zavr{ena masivnom kamenom

profilisanom plo~om. Gorwa povr{ina joj je bila na visini od oko 0,8 m

u odnosu na nekada{wu ravan poda. Niè ove plo~e, u isto~nom zidu, nalazi se

i jedna ~etvrtasta ni{a, oblikovana nasati~no postavqenim ve}im tankim

opekama (sl. 49). Zidovi Crkve, debqine 0,6–0,7 m, bili su gra|eni lomqenim

pritesanim kamenom u nepravilnom slogu. Nejednako su o~uvani, tako da je severni

zid preostao do visine od oko 2 m, dok su od ju`nog zida sa~uvana samo

dva najnià reda kamena (sl. 50). Najboqe su o~uvani ostaci isto~nog zida, i

to sve do delova kalota nad oltarskom apsidom i proskomidijom. Ove kalote,

za razliku od ostalih zidova Crkve, gra|ene su tesanicima sige, a, po svemu sude}i,

iste gra|e je bio i svod, od koga nema o~uvanih ostataka. Portal Crkve u

okviru zapadnog zida, a koji je zazidan u mla|oj fazi, bio je obra|en ve}im

blokovima mekog pe{~ara. U sredi{tu oltarske apside o~uvan je nekada{wi

prozor, {irine 40 cm, a visine 76 cm, koji je, kao i portal, u mla|oj fazi tako|e

bio zazidan. Na ostalim zidovima Crkve nisu o~uvani tragovi prozora.

Pod Crkve leào je na zaravwenoj steni i sastojao se od malternog sloja, mestimi~no

sa~uvanog, nad kojim su bile kamene plo~e, koje su otkrivene samo u tragovima.

U oltarskom delu Crkve, u ovom podu, o~uvan je poligonalni dowi deo

124

Sl. 51. Crkva u Zamku, ostaci

fresko-sokla u proskomidiji

Fig. 51. Church in the Castle, remains

of the fresco-socle in the prothesis


coincide in dimensions, too. The interior faces of the walls of the narthex, as in the

case of the church, used to be covered in frescoes the small traces of which were

revealed in the lowest zone, above the level of the floor. As opposed to the south and

the west walls of the added narthex, which were founded on the rock, the north wall

was placed on three larger blocks of breccia that partly lay over the edge of Cistern

1. This was the reason why this wall, found in a rather crumbly state, subsided and

tilted. Within its scope there are preserved remains of two windows with window

frames made of tufa. The remains of the destroyed portal of the narthex were discovered

dislocated in the debris. These were massive blocks of dressed breccia among

which it was possible to recognise sections of the threshold, then remains of the

jambs, as well as a fragment of the lintel. No remains of the floor covering that used

to lie above the rock were found in the added narthex. After the additional construction

of the narthex and its wall painting, two corner pilasters were additionally built

in the east corners and they partially covered the frescoes on the west, originally

facade wall of the church. This intervention could be linked to the problems of the

static nature which, in the case of the north wall, were noticed probably very early.

During the exploration, we obtained sparse and, mostly, indirect data concerning

the demolishing of the church and the time when this took place. In the church itself,

the destruction layer had been partially preserved and only in the indentations of

the rocks, under the level of the floor. There, along with some debris, there was some

soot as well. It is obvious that in this process of destruction the floor stone slabs

were dismantled and removed first, followed by the dismantling of the south wall

of the church almost in its entirety. It is not possible to follow the further process of


poligonalnog stuba ~asne trpeze klesanog od bre~e. Gorwi deo ovoga stuba otkriven

je u zazidi zapadnog portala iz vremena turske pregradwe u mla|oj fazi.

Unutra{we povr{ine zidova Crkve bile su prekrivene ìvopisom. Ostaci

fresaka ostali su o~uvani samo u najnièm delu zidova u proskomidiji i

oltarskoj apsidi (sl. 51). Prepoznaje se ornament u vidu spiralno izvijenih

grana, slikanih crvenom i tamnomrkom bojom. Sli~an, a moè se re}i, i identi~an

ornament u soklu nalazi se u bo~nim oltarskim prostorima crkve manastira

Gra~anice. 125 U pitawu je ìvopis koji se pouzdano datuje u 1320/21.

godinu, odnosno posledwu godinu vladavine kraqa Stefana Uro{a II. 126 Ovi

mali, posledwi ostaci ìvopisa Crkve u Zamku iskopirani su posle ~i{}ewa

i konzervacije. 127 Nakon toga, skinuti su sa zida i obra|eni za trajno ~uvawe

u muzejskim uslovima. 128

Nema pouzdanih podataka o tome kako su bili obra|eni fasadni delovi

zidova Crkve. Za bo~ne zidove moè se pretpostaviti da su bili samo {iroko

dersovani i, verovatno, okre~eni. Zapadna fasada prvobitne crkve bila je, me-

|utim, prekrivena ìvopisom, ~iji su tragovi ostali sa~uvani u severozapadnom

uglu, iza prislowenog zida kasnije dogradwe. 129

U jednoj poznijoj fazi uz zapadni zid Crkve dogra|ena je priprata, duìne

oko 3,5 m. Bila je trapezaste osnove i svojim bo~nim zidovima obuhvatala

je zapadne uglove Crkve. Zidana je na zaravwenoj steni, iznad koje su o~uvani

ostaci zidova, ~ija visina ne prelazi 1,5 m. Gra|eni su na isti na~in kao i zidovi

Crkve, sa kojima su podudarni i u dimenzijama. Unutra{wa lica zidova

priprate, kao i kod Crkve, bili su prekriveni freskama, ~iji su mali tragovi

otkriveni u najniòj zoni, iznad ravni poda. Za razliku od ju`nog i zapadnog

zida dogra|ene priprate, koji su utemeqeni na steni, severni zid je bio postavqen

na tri ve}a bloka bre~e, koji su delom leàli preko ruba Cisterne 1.

To je bio razlog slegawa i nagiwawa ovog zida, koji je otkriven u dosta tro{nom

stawu. U wegovom okviru ostali su o~uvani ostaci dva prozora sa doprozornicima

od sige. Ostaci razru{enog portala priprate otkriveni su dislocirani

u {utu. U pitawu su masivni blokovi obra|ene bre~e, me|u kojima je bilo mogu}e

prepoznati delove praga, zatim ostatke dovratnika, kao i fragment nadvratnika.

U dogra|enoj priprati nisu otkriveni ostaci podnog zastora koji je

leào nad stenom. Posle dogradwe priprate i wenog ìvopisawa, u isto~nim

uglovima su dozidana dva ugaona pilastra, koji su delom zaklonili freske na

zapadnom, prvobitno fasadnom zidu Crkve. Ova intervencija bi se mogla povezati

sa problemima stati~ke prirode, koji su, u slu~aju severnog zida, verovatno,

uo~eni vrlo rano.

O ru{ewu Crkve i vremenu kada se to dogodilo, u toku istraìvawa dobijeni

su oskudni, i to, uglavnom, posredni podaci. U samoj crkvi sloj destrukcije

je delimi~no sa~uvan, i to samo u udubqewima stena, ispod ravni poda. Tu,

uz ne{to malo {uta, ima i gari. O~igledno su u tom procesu destrukcije prvo

razgra|ene i uklowene kamene podne plo~e, a zatim je gotovo u celini razgra|en

ju`ni zid Crkve. Daqi proces ru{ewa nije mogu}e pratiti, budu}i da je situacija

promewena podizawem objekta iz mla|e faze. U priprati, gde nije bilo

tragova poda, ispod slojeva {uta otkriven je relativno tanak kulturni sloj, u

kome je, osim klinova, na|eno i vi{e desetina pravougaonih gvozdenih plo~ica

od lamelnog oklopa. Ima se utisak da se ovaj sloj formirao posle devastirawa

125 @ivkovi} 1989, odeqak VIII i IX.

126 Todi} 1999, 72–74.

127 Kopije su predate Galeriji fresaka

Narodnog Muzeja u Beogradu.

128 Freske je skinula i obradila

ekipa slikara – stru~nog savetnika

Stojanke Samarxije, nakon ~ega su

predate Muzeju Kosova u Pri{tini.

129 Prilikom konzervatorskih radova

razgra|en je i prezidan severni zid

dogra|ene priprate. Na delu gde se

oslawao na ugao Crkve otkriveni su

mali ostaci prvobitnog ìvopisa sa

zapadne fasade. Taj fresko-malter je

posle toga skinut i konzerviran.

126


destruction, taking into consideration that the situation changed with the construction

of a structure from the younger phase. In the narthex, where there were no traces

of the floor, under the layers of debris, we found a relatively thin cultural layer in

which in addition to wedges we also encountered several dozen rectangular iron

plates coming from a plated armour. We got an impression that this layer formed

after the devastation of the church and before its final demolishing. A layer of the

debris from the demolishing of the church was revealed only on the exterior side of

its north wall where, in addition to tufa blocks, there was also some lead casting

from the melting of the roof plates. The pillaging and then the partial demolition of

the walls of the church may quite certainly be dated back to the time directly after

the Ottoman conquest of Novo Brdo in the spring of 1455. Our impression was that

the south wall of the church was dismantled in order to get the building material

for the renewal of the fortifications that were damaged during the siege.

Granary – Within the scope of the younger phase, in the early period of the

Ottoman rule, a new structure was built above the ruins of the church and it had

an irregular rectangular ground plan with the surface area of around 24 m². On the

north side, the encountered remains of the older, partially demolished wall of the

church were built upon. The additionally built segment had a wooden tie-beam at

the level with the faces of the walls and it was constructed using mixed handy material

– stones, pieces of tufa and smaller brick fragments. As opposed to this one, a

brand new wall was built on the south side and it was founded along the exterior

face of the dismantled wall of the church and lay further over the ruins of the

neighbouring small Steam Bath (fig. 50). It was constructed similar to the addition

to the north wall done in the mixed bond using the handy building material. This

new wall has been preserved at the heights between two and three metres. In the

encountered remains of the west wall, which were also built upon, the former portal

of the church was walled in. As it has already been pointed out, the upper part of a

pillar of the table of oblation was built into this addition, as well as the former lintel

from this portal. On the east side, the section with the apse, which was better preserved,

was built upon, while the section towards the south corner was built anew.

All the interior surfaces were covered in their entirety with grey mortar containing

coarse sand, including also the older sections of the walls from which the fresco

plaster had been previously removed.

The building from the younger phase used to have a wooden floor that was

placed over the flattening soil fill that had the height of 20 cm to 30 cm in relation to

the older floor of the church. In this layer, longitudinally positioned joists were first

placed at the mutual distance of 40 cm to 60 cm, over which 3 cm to 4 cm thick

boards were arranged. Above this floor, in the entire interior of the building we found

a layer of rotten grains, millet to be exact, with the thickness of 20 cm to 60 cm. In

the said layer of grains, we found an akce of Sultan Selim II (1512–1520), which

came from the mint in Kratovo. This find provides a reliable terminus ante quem for

the building of the structure that served as a granary for the storing of grains. The

building of the granary could therefore be most probably dated back to the end of

the 15 th century or the first decades of the 16 th century, but the results of the explorations

did not provide any reliable data as to for how long it used to be used. Above

the said layer with the rotten grains there were layers of debris with a lot of stones,

but with no archaeological finds. The said granary constituted the only modest


Crkve, a pre wenog kona~nog ru{ewa. Sloj {uta od ru{ewa Crkve otkriven je

samo sa spoqne strane wenog severnog zida, gde je, pored blokova sige, bilo i

olovnog liva od topqewa krovnih plo~a. Pusto{ewe, a potom, i delimi~no ru-

{ewe zidova Crkve moè se sasvim pouzdano datovati u vreme neposredno posle

turskog osvajawa Novog Brda u prole}e 1455. godine. Sti~e se utisak da je

ju`ni zid Crkve razgra|en radi dobijawa gra|e za obnovu fortifikacija koje

su bile o{te}ene u vreme opsade.

Ambar – U okviru mla|e faze, u ranom razdobqu turske vladavine, nad ru-

{evinama Crkve podignuto je novo zdawe, nepravilne pravougaone osnove, povr{ine

oko 24 m². Sa severne strane, zate~eni ostaci starijeg, delimi~no poru{enog

zida Crkve su nadzidani. Dogra|eni deo je imao drvenu zategu u ravni

sa licima zida i bio je gra|en me{ovitom priru~nom gra|om – kamenom, komadima

sige i sitnim ulomcima opeka. Za razliku od ovog, sa ju`ne strane podignut

je sasvim novi zid, koji je bio utemeqen du` spoqnog lica razgra|enog

zida Crkve i daqe je leào preko ru{evina susednog malog parnog kupatila

(sl. 50). Gra|en je sli~no nadgradwi severnog zida u me{anom slogu od priru~ne

gra|e. Ovaj novi zid o~uvan je u visinama izme|u 2 i 3 m. Na zate~enim ostacima

zapadnog zida, koji su tako|e nadgra|eni, zazidan je nekada{wi portal

Crkve. U ovu zazidu ugra|en je i gorwi deo stuba ~asne trpeze, kao {to je ve}

istaknuto, kao i nekada{wi nadvratnik ovoga portala. Sa isto~ne strane, deo

sa apsidom, koji je bio boqe o~uvan, nadgra|en je, dok je deo prema ju`nom uglu

iznova podignut. Sve unutra{we povr{ine su u celini prekrivene sivim malterom

grube strukture sa krupnim peskom, ukqu~uju}i i starije delove zidova,

sa kojih je prethodno uklowen fresko-malter.

Gra|evina mla|e faze imala je pod od drveta, koji je bio postavqen na izravnavaju}em

nasipu zemqe, visine 20 do 30 cm u odnosu na stariji pod Crkve.

Na ovom sloju bile su prvo podu`no postavqene potpatosne grede na me|usobnim

rastojawima od 40 do 60 cm, preko kojih su se nalazile daske, debqine 3

do 4 cm. Nad ovim podom u celoj unutra{wosti gra|evine otkriven je sloj istrulelog

ìta, odnosno prosa, debqine 20 do 60 cm. U pomenutom sloju ìta

otkrivena je jedna ak~a sultana Selima II (1512–1520), koja poti~e iz kovnice

u Kratovu. Ovaj nalaz daje pouzdan terminus ante quem za podizawe objekta koji je

sluìo kao ambar za skladi{tewe ìta. Gra|ewe ambara bi se, stoga, najverovatnije

moglo datovati u kraj 15. ili prve decenije 16. veka, ali o tome koliko je

dugo bio u upotrebi, rezultati istraìvawa nisu pruìli pouzdane podatke.

Nad pomenutim slojem sa istrulelim ìtom nalazili su se slojevi {uta sa dosta

kamena, ali bez arheolo{kih nalaza. Pomenuti ambar predstavqao je jedino

skromno zdawe u ru{evinama dvori{ta Zamka podignuto posle 1455. godine.

Ova ~iwenica, kao i izostanak kulturnog sloja iz osmanskog razdobqa, pouzdano

je svedo~anstvo o tome da Turci tokom svoje vladavine prostor Zamka prakti~no

nisu ni koristili.

* * *

Za na{a razmatrawa od posebnog su zna~aja ostaci Crkve, koja je, bez sumwe, po

poloàju, ali i po zna~ewu, predstavqala sredi{we zdawe u dvori{tu Zamka.

U tom smislu, ne}emo pogre{iti ako zakqu~imo da je zidana istovremeno sa

okolnim fortifikacijama, kao i gra|evinama koje je okruùju, odnosno, kako je

128



ve} ranije istaknuto, najverovatnije tokom druge ~etvrtine 14. veka, {to pokazuju

i odlike wene arhitekture.

Ovu malu jednobrodnu gra|evinu odlikuje jednostavan plan, konstruktivni

sklop i skroman arhitektonski ukras. Na osnovu otkrivenih ostataka izvr{ena

je restitucija wenog horizontalnog plana i utvr|eno je da je imala skoro

pravilnu pravougaonu osnovu, podeqenu sa dva para pilastera na tri traveja

(sl. 52). Na isto~noj strani nalazi se proskomidija, o kojoj u celosti svedo~e sa-

~uvani materijalni podaci, kao i polukru`na oltarska apsida, koju je mogu}e

pouzdano rekonstruisati, i |akonikon, koji je bio uz wu. Oltarska apsida je spoqa

bila trostrana, a po izgradwi ambara je poznije preoblikovana.

Unutra{wi prostor bio je presveden poluobli~astim svodom izgra|enim

od sige, ~iji su brojni svodari na|eni prilikom arheolo{kih istraìvawa.

Pretpostavqamo da je svod po~ivao na vencu. Na to upu}uje nalaz samo jednog komada

ugaonog venca, visine 14 cm, izvedenog od tamnocrvene bre~e, na|enog u

turskom nadzi|ivawu severnog zida Crkve. Venac se, bez sumwe, nalazio na nekom

od pilastara.

Ovaj mali hram zasnovan je i izgra|en u modularnom sistemu, a razmeravawem

je utvr|eno da je wegov neimar pri projektovawu koristio kompozicijsko-

-geometrijsku shemu zasnovanu na kvadratu (sl. 53). Osnovni unutra{wi gabarit

Sl. 52. Crkva u Zamku – osnova

i preseci sa delimi~nom grafi~kom

rekonstrukcijom (R = 1 : 100)

Fig. 52. Church in the Castle – ground

plan and cross-sections with partial

graphic reconstruction (R = 1 : 100)

130


building within the ruins of the Castle’s courtyard constructed after 1455. This fact,

as well as the lack of a cultural layer from the Ottoman period constitute a reliable

testimony that during their rule the Ottomans practically did not use the space of

the Castle at all.

130 ânak-Medi} 1989, 131–132.

* * *

For our considerations, the remains of the church are of particular importance. By

its position, as well as by its significance, the church undoubtedly constituted the

central edifice within the Castle’s courtyard. In this sense, we will not be wrong if

we conclude that it was built at the same time with the surrounding fortifications,

as well as the buildings that surround it, that is, as it has already been pointed out

earlier, most probably during the second quarter of the 14 th century, which is also

corroborated by the features of its architecture.

This small single-nave church is characterised by a simple ground plan, structural

assembly and modest architectural decoration. On the basis of the revealed

remains, we did a restitution of its horizontal plan and established that it had an

almost regular rectangular ground plan divided with two pairs of pilasters into three

bays (fig. 52). On the east side there was the prothesis, the entirety of which is testified

to by the preserved material data, a semi-circular altar apse which was possible

to be reliably reconstructed, as well as the diaconicon that was beside it. The altar

apse was three-sided on the outside and after the construction of the granary it was

later reshaped.

The interior space used to be covered by a semi-spherical vault made of tufa, the

numerous arch-stones of which were found during the archaeological surveying.

We presume that the vault rested on a cornice. This is corroborated by the find of

only one piece of a corner cornice, 14 cm high, made of dark red breccia, found in the

Ottoman constructional addition on the north wall of the church which without

any doubt used to be on one of the pilasters.

This small temple was founded and built using a modular system and with the

scaling we established that when doing the design its creator used compositional

and geometrical scheme based on a square (fig. 53). The basic interior dimension

of the church was divided with pilasters into three bays and in all of this the east

and the west bays, in relation to the central section, had the width that was ¼ of its

span. According to this scheme, the width of the church is 4 modules, while the

length is 6 modules. As the width of the church is 3.6 m, the size of 1 module would

be 0.9 m, that is, 3 feet. The length of the dimension of 5.2 m contains 6 modules,

that is, 18 feet of 29 cm each. From this approach applied by the master-builder, it

ensues that the main measures of the ground plan of the church, as regards its

width and length, have the ratio of 1:1.5, i.e., that its width is 12 feet and its length is

18 feet. The semi-circular altar apse fits into this modular system, since it measures

1 module in relation to the basic dimensions of the interior space.

The earlier surveyors who worked in much more details on the topic of the

scale of the sacral buildings believe that this manner of designing and scaling of the

ground plan also used to be applied to a large degree to the shaping up of the upper

structures, as well as to the exterior shaping up. 130 Led by this, in an attempt to

reconstruct the vertical plan, we applied the same geometrical scheme. We came to

a conclusion that the above-mentioned parting cornice within the church may have


Sl. 53. Crkva u Zamku

– merna analiza

Fig. 53. Church in the Castle

– measurement analysis

hrama pilastrima je podeqen na tri traveja, pri ~emu su isto~ni i zapadni

travej u odnosu na centralni deo {irine ¼ wegovog raspona. Prema toj shemi,

{irina Crkve je 4 modula, a duìna 6 modula. Kako {irina hrama iznosi 3,6 m,

veli~ina 1 modula bi iznosila 0,9 m, odnosno 3 stope. Duìna gabarita od 5,2 m

sadrì 6 modula, odnosno 18 stopa od po 29 cm. Iz primene ovakvog postupka neimara

proisti~e da su glavne mere osnove Crkve u pogledu wene {irine i du-

ìne u odnosu 1 : 1,5, odnosno da wena {irina iznosi 12 stopa, a duìna 18 stopa.

U ovaj modularni sistem uklapa se i polukru`na oltarska apsida, koja meri

1 modul u odnosu na osnovni gabarit unutra{weg prostora.

Raniji istraìva~i, koji su se mnogo podrobnije bavili temom razmera

sakralnih gra|evina, smatraju da je ovakav na~in projektovawa i razmeravawa

osnove u velikoj meri primewivan i u oblikovawu gorwih konstrukcija, kao i

spoqnog oblikovawa. 130 Rukovode}i se time u poku{aju da rekonstrui{emo vertikalni

plan hrama, primenili smo istu geometrijsku shemu. Do{li smo do

zakqu~ka da je pomenuti podeoni venac unutar Crkve mogao biti na visini od

10 stopa, odnosno 3 m, a da je visina do temena svoda iznosila 16 stopa ili 4,8 m.

Zavr{ni venac u temenu pro~eqa Crkve nalazio bi se na visini od 18 stopa,

{to bi u odnosu na {irinu unutra{weg gabarita od 12 stopa zaista bilo u razmeri

1 : 1,5. Crkva je, bez sumwe, imala preko svodne konstrukcije dvovodni

krov, koji je bio pokriven olovnim plo~ama.

Fasade Crkve bile su skromno obra|ene. Ulazni portal, {irine 82 cm i

visine oko 164 cm, izveden je masivnim blokovima pe{~ara bez profilacije

(sl. 54). Nadvratna greda, visine 20 cm, tako|e od pe{~ara, imala je jednostavnu

profilaciju, koja je poznije preklesana, verovatno prilikom zazi|ivawa

portala. Nad wom se svakako nalazila, pretpostavqamo nadvi{ena, polukru`no

obra|ena ni{a, sa freskom za{titnika kome je posve}ena Crkva, a koji nam

danas nije poznat.

130 ânak-Medi} 1989, 131–132.

132


Sl. 54. Crkva u Zamku, zapadni

portal sa delimi~nom grafi~kom



west portal with partial


been at the height of 10 feet, that is, at 3.0 m, while the height of the crown of the

vault was 16 feet or 4.8 m. The finishing cornice in the crown of the front of the

church would be at the height of 18 feet, which would in relation to the width of

the interior size of 12 feet indeed be at the ratio of 1:1.5. Undoubtedly, the church

had a gable roof over the vault structure which would be covered with lead slabs.

The facades of the church were modestly finished. The entrance portal, 82 cm

wide and around 164 cm high, was made using massive blocks of sandstone with no

moulding (fig. 54). The lintel beam with the height of 20 cm, also made of sandstone,

had simple moulding which was later re-carved probably during the walling-in

of the portal. Above it, there certainly used to be, we presume canted, semi-circularly

finished niche with a fresco of the patron saint to whom the church was dedicated,

but who is not known today.

It is also not known whether such small single-nave church had any other windows

except for the one, subsequently walled-in, in the altar apse. It would be expected

that there was a window each in the north and the south walls of the church,

in the central bay, although no corresponding fragments were reliably discerned

during the archaeological surveying. Only in the Ottoman additional construction

above the north wall, where we found a fragment of the above-mentioned parting

cornice, there was a nicely chiselled piece of breccia built in which had a trapezoid

cross-section and which may have been a capital of a post. This leads us to a supposition

that it may have belonged to a biforated window, so we believe we would

not be wrong if we presume that originally there used to be two very modestly

shaped biforated windows in these walls.

No remains of the sub-eaves cornice, which certainly used to exist, were found

during the surveying. We presume that it, too, was quite simply moulded, like the

portal’s lintel beam and probably had the same dimensions.


Nije poznato ni da li je ovako mali jednobrodni hram imao jo{ neke prozore

osim onog, kasnije zazidanog, u oltarskoj apsidi. O~ekivalo bi se da je u

severnom i ju`nom zidu Crkve postojao po jedan prozor, i to u sredi{wem traveju,

mada prilikom arheolo{kih istraìvawa nisu pouzdano prepoznati odgovaraju}i

fragmenti. Jedino je u turskom nadzi|ivawu severnog zida, gde je prona|en

fragment pomenutog podeonog venac, bio ugra|en i jedan lepo klesani

komad bre~e, trapezoidnog preseka, koji je mogao biti kapitel na stubi}u. To

nas navodi na pretpostavku da je pripadao nekoj bifori, pa smatramo da ne}emo

pogre{iti ako kaèmo da su na ovim zidovima, mogu}e, prvobitno postojale

dve bifore, veoma skromno oblikovane.

Ostaci podstre{nog venca, koji je svakako postojao, nisu na|eni prilikom

istraìvawa. Pretpostavqamo da je i on bio sasvim jednostavno profilisan,

poput nadvratne grede portala i verovatno istih dimenzija.

U oltarskoj apsidi in situ je sa~uvana poligonalna baza i deo stuba ~asne

trpeze, isklesane od bre~e, ~iji ostaci po dimenzijama odgovaraju fragmentu

konstatovanom u turskoj zazidi portala (sl. 55). Gorwi deo stuba je elipsoidnog

oblika, promera 56 cm, i na wemu je svakako bila plo~a ~asne trpeze, ~ija je

veli~ina iznosila oko 70 cm. Wena visina bila je najmawe 1,25 cm.

Kasnije dozidana priprata je nepravilne osnove, o~igledno prilago|ene

ve} izgra|enim strukturama u Zamku. I ona je svakako bila presvedena. Pretpostavqamo

da je uz zapadni zid priprate zasnovan svod poluobli~astog oblika,

koji se u pravcu zapadnog zida Crkve {irio i prelazio u svod segmentnog oblika.

îni se da je ovakva geometrija svodne konstrukcije, uslovqena pre svega

nepravilnim planom osnove, vrlo brzo pokazala svoje nedostatke. Zbog velikog

pritiska na bo~ne zidove, a posebno zbog na~ina osnivawa severnog zida na blokovima

bre~e postavqenim na maloj cisterni, verovatno je do{lo do wihovog


ostaci ~asne trpeze sa delimi~nom

grafi~kom rekonstrukcijom


remains of the oblation table

with partial graphic reconstruction

134



portal priprate sa grafi~kom



narthex portal with graphic

reconstruction (R = 1 : 50)

In the altar apse, a polygonal base was preserved in situ, as well as a part of the

pillar of the table of oblation, chiselled out of breccia, the remains of which by their

dimensions correspond to the fragment encountered in the Ottoman walling-in of

the portal (fig. 55). The upper section of the pillar has an ellipsoid shape with the

diameter of 56 cm and the slab of the table of oblation certainly used to stand on

it, with its dimension of around 70 cm. Its height was at least 1.25 cm.

The subsequently added narthex has an irregular ground plan, obviously adjusted

to the already constructed buildings in the Castle. It was certainly also covered with

a vault. We presume that a semi-spherical vault was based along the west wall of the

narthex which was then extended towards the west wall of the church and turned

into a segment-shaped vault. It seems that such geometry of the vault structure,

caused primarily by the irregular shape of the ground plan, showed its shortcomings

very soon. Because of the large pressure on the lateral walls, especially on account

of the way in which the north wall was founded on the breccia blocks laid down on

top of the small cistern, they probably started to move apart and cracks appeared in

the vault. We believe that this was precisely the reason why the vault was supported

by the construction of pillars and an arch along the west wall of the temple.

Like the church, the narthex was built using broken stone with no particular

architectural decoration. On the basis of the finds of massive breccia blocks scattered

within the debris, which were recognised as parts of the portal, we may conclude that

it certainly used to be decoratively moulded (fig. 56). Among these pieces we recognised

fragments of the threshold, the jambs and the lintel beam, which all allowed for

a reconstruction of its original structure and appearance. According to our analyses,


razmicawa i pojave pukotina u svodu. Verujemo da je upravo to bio razlog podupirawa

svoda izgradwom stubaca i luka uz zapadni zid hrama.

Priprata je, kao i Crkva, gra|ena lomqenim kamenom bez posebnog arhitektonskog

ukrasa. Na osnovu nalaza masivnih blokova bre~e na|enih rasutih

u {utu, koji su prepoznati kao delovi portala, zakqu~ujemo da je on svakako bio

dekorativno obra|en (sl. 56). Me|u wima su prepoznati fragmenti praga, zatim

dovratnika i nadvratne grede, {to je sve omogu}ilo rekonstrukciju wegove prvobitne

konstrukcije i izgleda. Prema na{im analizama bio je {irok 1,1 m i

visok oko 1,65 m. Dovratnici nisu imali profilaciju, a nad wima se nalazila

masivna nadvratna greda, visine 28 cm, koja je imala jednostavnu zaobqenu

profilaciju, kao i portal Crkve. Nad wom je tako|e postojala ni{a. Ostaci

prepoznatog praga, nadvratne grede i komadi dovratnika izvedeni su od lepo

oblikovane bre~e.

U severnom zidu priprate postojala su dva prozora, koji su o~igledno na

fasadi bili oblikovani blokovima sige, sude}i prema sa~uvanim ostacima na

I

III

II

IV

Sl. 57. Crkva u Zamku – analogije:

I – Novo Brdo; II – Sveti Nikola (Sveti apostoli, Pe}); III – Sveti Nikola, Velika Ho~a; IV – Sveti Jovan Prete~a, Crkolez

Fig. 57. Church in the Castle – analogies:

I – Novo Brdo; II – St. Nicholas (Holy Apostles, Pe}); III – St. Nicholas, Velika Ho~a; IV – St. John the Baptist, Crkolez

136

131 ânak-Medi} 1989, 52–53,

fig. 42 and fig. 58.


it was 1.10 m wide and around 1.65 m high. The jambs did not have any moulding

and above them there used to be a massive lintel beam with the height of 28 cm,

which had a simple rounded moulding, just like the portal of the church. Above it,

there also used to be a niche. The remains of the recognised threshold, lintel beam

and pieces of the jambs were made of nicely shaped breccia.

In the north wall of the narthex, there used to be two windows which were

obviously shaped on the facade using tufa blocks judging by the preserved remains

on the one closer to the church. We presume that they were finished in an architrave,

with no moulding.

The fact that the parting cornice within the church, the table of oblation, probably

and possibly the biforated windows in its longitudinal walls, as well as the portal

of the narthex were made of breccia leads us to a conclusion that the protomaster of

Novo Brdo tried to enrich colouristically the simple and modest architectural elements

of the church applying different building materials, primarily by using the local

dark red breccia. This was doubtless similar to the building technique applied to the

defence structures of the Castle where the corner segments of the towers, as well as

those of the gates, were done using massive breccia blocks which certainly contributed

to the overall colouristic impression.

Small single-nave churches on the territory of the Serbian medieval state have

been only partially studied so far, which has been primarily contributed to by the

modest level of surveying of these buildings (fig. 57). The generally accepted opinion

is that these were the endowments of the Serbian nobility with close ties to the

court or members of the clergy who had the rulers and other church dignitaries as

paragons. The appearance of this type of churches may be followed over a longer

period of time, starting from the 14 th century and all the way to the 16 th and the

17 th centuries.

If observed in this light, we can classify our church from Novo Brdo as the type

that includes single-nave edifices with pilasters and reinforcing arches, without a

dome and with the altar apse that is three-sided on the outside (fig. 58). It is certain,

as the surveying has confirmed, that the church was built at the same time as all

other buildings within the Castle of Novo Brdo, as a part of a unique plan and concept

of the master-builder and thus its construction may be dated back to the second

quarter of the 14 th century. This dating is also corroborated by the modest preserved

remains of the wall paintings above the floor in the prothesis which are

almost identical to the ornament in the socle of the church in Gra~anica Monastery

from 1320/21.

According to the characteristics of its architecture, the church in Novo Brdo’s

Castle is very close to a whole number of small temples not only in the nearby region,

but also more broadly. The closest analogies may be established with the Chapel of

Saint Nicholas at Pe} Patriarchate which was built around 1330 by Archbishop

Danilo II, next to the church dedicated to the Holy Virgin Hodegitria. With its shape

and dimensions, this small single-nave building is almost identical to the church in

Novo Brdo. 131

Today’s sepulchral church of St. Nicholas in Velika Ho~a is also a single-nave

building with a semi-circular apse that is three-sided on the outside. It was built by

the parents of Headman Gradislav Su{enica and its construction has been reliably

dated back to the time before 1345, although it was reconstructed and fresco painted


onom blièm Crkvi. Pretpostavqamo da su bili arhitravno zavr{eni, bez ikakve

profilacije.

îwenica da su podeoni venac unutar Crkve, ~asna trpeza, verovatno i mogu-

}e bifore u wenim podu`nim zidovima, kao i portal priprate, izvedeni od bre-

~e, navodi nas na zakqu~ak da je protomajstor Novog Brda nastojao da jednostavne

i skromne arhitektonske elemente Crkve koloristi~ki obogati primenom

razli~itih gra|evinskih materijala, pre svega upotrebom lokalne tamnocrvene

bre~e. To je, bez sumwe, sli~no tehnici gra|ewa odbrambenih struktura Zamka,

gde su ugaoni delovi kula, kao i kapija, izvedeni masivnim blokovima bre~e,

{to je svakako doprinosilo op{tem koloristi~kom utisku.

Mali jednobrodni hramovi na podru~ju srpske sredwovekovne dràve do

sada su samo parcijalno prou~eni, ~emu je doprinela pre svega skromna istra-

ènost ovih gra|evina (sl. 57). Op{teprihva}eno gledi{te je da su to zadu`bine

srpske vlastele bliske dvoru ili pripadnika sve{tenstva, koji su se ugledali

na vladare i druge crkvene velikodostojnike. Pojava ovog tipa crkava moè

se pratiti u {irem vremenskom razdobqu, i to od 14, pa sve do 16. i 17. veka.

Posmatraju}i u tom svetlu, na{ novobrdski hram moèmo svrstati u tip

jednobrodnih gra|evina sa pilastrima i oja~avaju}im lucima, bez kupole, sa

spoqa trostrano oblikovanom oltarskom apsidom (sl. 58). Izvesno je, {to su

istraìvawa pokazala, da je Crkva izgra|ena kada i sve ostale gra|evine u Zamku

Novog Brda, kao deo jedinstvenog plana i zamisli neimara, te se wen nastanak

moè opredeliti u drugu ~etvrtinu 14. veka. Na ovakvo datovawe ukazuju i


pogled sa zapada i istoka

(foto novembar 2016)


view from the west and from the east

(photo from November 2016)

138


again in the 16 th century. 132 Since the wall between the naos and the narthex was

later demolished, we presume that the original length of the church used to be

around 5.7 m.

There is also the nobleman’s Church of St. John the Forerunner in village

Crkolez, near Istok in Kosovo. It was built by Headman Radoslav not later than by

1355 and he was buried in it, too. 133 Although it has a protruding five-sided altar

apse, by dimensions and scales its ground plan, as well as the simple outside appearance

are similar to the church of Novo Brdo.

The explorations have shown that such small and modest churches on the territory

of Kosovo and Metohija used to be built later, but in the same construction

manner and following the same forms. An example of this is the Church of the

Entrance of the Theotokos into the Temple in Devi~ Monastery, built around the

grave of Joanikije Devi~ki a century later, 134 as well as churches around Prizren,

Pe} and Sreda~ka @upa.

132 Spomeni~ko nasle|e Srbije, 141.

133 Raki} 2007, 6;

Spomeni~ko nasle|e Srbije, 434.

134 [uput 1991, 63;

Spomeni~ko nasle|e Srbije, 179;

[uput 1984, 91.

North Building – the Hall

The remains of this relatively big structure are located in the north corner of the

Castle, built adjacent to the East Rampart and Tower 6. They were discovered under

layers of debris and collapsed stones that were between 4 and 5 m high. During the

surveying, we established the basic construction phases that include the original

building and its later date reconstruction, while the basic size of the building’s

ground plan had not gone through any major modification (fig. 59).

The North Building has an irregular rectangular ground plan, the size of which

is 10.50 m × 7.60 m, that is, it covers the surface area of around 80 m². It was

founded on a flattened rock, just like the neighbouring Tower 6. It used to have

solidly built walls, around one metre thick, made of bigger hewn broken stone with

broadly flattened joints. Along the south corner there used to be an entrance into a

ground floor room accentuated by a somewhat thicker wall. It was finished with

tufa ashlars and had a threshold made of wooden beams (fig. 60). Since the exterior

terrain was by around 80 cm higher than the level of the floor, there used to be a

step at the very entrance, also with a wooden beam, while on the interior side there

were two more steps made of stone blocks. Within the scope of the south wall we

discovered another walled-in door with the lateral sides finished using tufa ashlars.

We got an impression that this originally conceived door had been walled-in already

during the construction of the building or directly after its completion. There is a

niche each on the both sides of this walled-in door, in the interior face of the wall.

The only window in the ground floor room existed within the west wall. It was made

in the shape of a loophole, that is, it narrowed down towards the exterior side. The

floor in the ground floor room, significant surface areas of which were discovered,

was made in the shape of a layer of mortar above the flattened rock.

Above the ground floor room, the North Building used to have another storey.

In the face of the East Rampart, at the height of 2.80 m in relation to the level of the

floor, there are 15 separately finished rectangular bearings for the placement of the

inter-floor structure beams. There were certainly similar bearings on the opposite

side, as well, within the west wall that was found mostly demolished. As opposed to

a similar find in the South Building, where the inter-floor beams were built in during

the construction itself, here the bearings had been prepared in advance for the


skromni o~uvani ostaci ìvopisa nad podom u proskomidiji, koji su gotovo

identi~ni sa ornamentom u soklu crkve u Gra~anici iz 1320/21. godine.

Prema odlikama svoje arhitekture, Crkva u novobrdskom Zamku veoma je

bliska ~itavom nizu malih hramova ne samo u bliskoj regiji ve} i {ire. Najbliè

analogije nalazimo sa kapelom Svetog Nikole u Pe}koj patrijar{iji,

koju je oko 1330. godine sagradio arhiepiskop Danilo II pored crkve posve}ene

Bogorodici Odigitriji. Ova mala jednobrodna gra|evina svojim oblikom i

dimenzijama gotovo je identi~na sa novobrdskim hramom. 131

Dana{wa grobqanska crkva Svetog Nikole u Velikoj Ho~i tako|e je jednobrodna

gra|evina sa polukru`nom apsidom spoqa trostrano oblikovanom. Podigli

su je roditeqi ~elnika Gradislava Su{enice, a wena izgradwa je pouzdano

datovana u vreme pre 1345. godine, mada je u 16. veku obnovqena i ponovo ìvopisana.

132 Kako je zid izme|u naosa i priprate poznije poru{en, prvobitna

duìna crkve je, pretpostavqamo, iznosila oko 5,7 m.

Tu je i vlasteoska crkva Svetog Jovana Prete~e u selu Crkolez, kod Istoka

na Kosovu. Sagradio ju je ~elnik Radoslav najkasnije do 1355. godine i u woj je i

sahrawen. 133 Iako ima isturenu petostranu oltarsku apsidu, wen plan po dimenziji

i razmerama, i jednostavan spoqa{wi izgled, sli~ni su novobrdskom hramu.

Istraìvawa su pokazala da su ovako male i skromne crkve na prostoru

Kosova i Metohije podizane poznije u istom graditeqskom maniru i oblicima.

Primer je crkva Vavedewa Bogorodice u manastiru Devi~, nastala oko groba

Joanikija Devi~kog, izgra|ena jedno stole}e kasnije, 134 kao i hramovi oko Prizrena,

Pe}i i u Sreda~koj ùpi.

Severna gra|evina – dvorana

Ostaci ovog relativno velikog objekta nalaze se u severnom uglu Zamka, prizidani

uz Isto~ni bedem i Kulu 6. Otkriveni su ispod slojeva {uta i osutog kamena,

a visine su izme|u 4 i 5 m. U toku istraìvawa konstatovane su osnovne

gra|evinske faze, koje obuhvataju prvobitno zdawe i wegovu kasniju obnovu,

pri ~emu osnovni gabarit osnove objekta nije pretrpeo ve}u izmenu (sl. 59).

Severna gra|evina je nepravilne pravougaone osnove, veli~ine oko 10,5 ×

7,6 m, odnosno povr{ine oko 80 m². Bila je zasnovana na zaravwenoj steni, kao

i susedna Kula 6. Imala je solidno gra|ene zidove, debqine oko 1 m, zidane

krupnijim pritesanim lomqenim kamenom, sa {iroko dersovanim spojnicama.

Uz ju`ni ugao nalazio se ulaz u prizemnu prostoriju, nagla{en ne{to debqim

zidom. Ulaz je bio obra|en tesanicima sige i imao je prag od drvenih greda

(sl. 60). Budu}i da je spoqni teren bio za oko 80 cm vi{i od ravni poda, u samom

ulazu se nalazio jedan stepenik, tako|e sa drvenom gredom, dok su sa unutra-

{we strane postojala jo{ dva stepenika od kamenih blokova. U okviru ju`nog

zida otkrivena su jo{ jedna zazidana vrata sa bo~nim stranama obra|enim tesanicima

sige. Ima se utisak da su ova prvobitno zami{qena vrata zazidana

jo{ u toku gra|ewa objekta ili neposredno po wegovom zavr{etku. Sa obe strane

ovih zazidanih vrata u unutra{wem licu zida nalazi se po jedna ni{a. Jedini

prozor u prizemnoj prostoriji postojao je u okviru zapadnog zida. Bio je gra|en

u vidu strelnice, odnosno suàvao se prema spoqnoj strani. Pod u prizemnoj

prostoriji, od koga su otkrivene znatne povr{ine, bio je ra|en u vidu sloja

maltera nad zaravwenom stenom.

131 ânak-Medi} 1989, 52–53,

i sl. 42 i sl. 58.

132 Spomeni~ko nasle|e Srbije, 141.

133 Raki} 2007, 6;

Spomeni~ko nasle|e Srbije, 434.

134 [uput 1991, 63;

Spomeni~ko nasle|e Srbije, 179;

[uput 1984, 91.

140



Sl. 59. Severna gra|evina – osnova



Fig. 59. North Edifice – ground plan

and cross-sectionswith partial graphic


142


subsequent positioning of beams. On account of the large span, the inter-floor beams

also rested on a girder that was built into the shorter lateral walls and that rested on

two wooden pillars, in the direction of the longitudinal axis of the Building. At the

level of the former floor of the upper storey, along the exterior side of the south wall,

there also used to be a porch. There are several bearings for floor beams preserved

there and by the manner of construction they were the same as those in the face of

the rampart. On the opposite side, the porch rested on three wooden pillars with

stone bases above which there used to be a horizontal beam which was with one of

its ends built into the rampart. It was through this porch that the room on the upper

storey was entered.

During a subsequent period, which cannot be dated more closely on the basis

of the archaeological findings, the North Building got destroyed in a fire. The action

of a powerful blaze is particularly noticeable on the interior face of the south wall.

Following this fire there was a reconstruction which included the interior wooden

structures and probably the upper collapsed sections of the walls. On that occasion,

in the north corner in the ground floor room we found a semi-circularly modelled

substructure for the corner fireplace on the upper floor. Most probably, during these

works Tower 6 was added to the corpus of the North Building. In the wall of the

tower, towards the ground floor room, a 0.70 m wide door was driven through and

shaped. The floor in the tower which consisted mostly of flattened wall mass above

which the tower was built and of rock but only to a smaller degree was by around

0.80 m higher in relation to the floor of the ground floor room. The first inter-floor

structure in the tower was located, like in the Building itself, at the height of 3.20 m

and therefore the level of their floors was uneven on the upper storey as well. The

interior space of the tower at the level of the upper storey was closed towards the

Sl. 60. Severna gra|evina,

detaq praga na ulazu

u prizemnu prostoriju


Fig. 60. North Edifice,

a detail of the threshold

at the entrance into a ground room



Nad prizemnom prostorijom Severna gra|evina je imala i sprat. U licu

Isto~nog bedema, na visini od 2,8 m u odnosu na ravan poda, nalazi se 15 posebno

obra|enih pravougaonih leì{ta za postavqawe greda me|uspratne konstrukcije.

Sli~na leì{ta svakako su postojala sa suprotne strane, u okviru zapadnog

zida, koji je otkriven poru{en u ve}oj meri. Za razliku od sli~nog nalaza

u Ju`noj gra|evini, gde su me|uspratne grede ugra|ivane u samom procesu zidawa

bedema, ovde su leì{ta unapred pripremqena za kasnije postavqawe greda.

Zbog velikog raspona, me|uspratne grede su bile oslowene i na podvlaku,

koja je bila ugra|ena u kra}e bo~ne zidove i oslowena na dva drvena stuba, na

pravcu podu`ne ose gra|evine. Na nivou nekada{weg poda na spratu, uz spoqnu

stranu ju`nog zida, postojao je i trem. Tu je o~uvano nekoliko leì{ta za podne

grede, koja su prema na~inu gra|ewa bila ista kao i ona u licu bedema. Sa

suprotne strane trem je bio oslowen na tri drvena stuba na kamenim bazama.

Nad stubovima je stajala horizontalna greda, koja je jednim svojim krajem bila

ugra|ena u bedem. Preko ovog trema ulazilo se u prostoriju na spratu.

U jednom poznijem razdobqu, koje se na osnovu arheolo{kih nalaza ne moè

bliè datovati, Severna gra|evina je stradala u poàru. Dejstvo jake vatre uo~qivo

je posebno na unutra{wem licu ju`nog zida. Posle ovog poàra usledila

je obnova, koja je obuhvatala unutra{we drvene konstrukcije i, verovatno, gorwe

obru{ene delove zidova. Tom prilikom u prizemnoj prostoriji u severnom uglu

dogra|ena je polukru`no modelovana supstrukcija za ugaoni kamin na spratu.

Najverovatnije, u toku ovih radova korpusu Severne gra|evine prikqu~ena je i

Kula 6. U zidu kule prema prizemnoj prostoriji probijena su i oblikovana

vrata, {irine 0,7 m. Pod u kuli, koji je na ve}em delu ~inila zaravwena zidna

masa, nad kojom je kula gra|ena, a samo mawim delom stena, bio je za oko 0,8 m

Sl. 61. Severna gra|evina

sa ulazom u Kulu 6 – op{ti izgled


Fig. 61. North Edifice with entrance

into Tower 6 – general appearance


144


adjacent room by building a wall the remains of which have been preserved only to

a lesser degree. Because of this it may only be presumed that the upper storey section

of the North Building was, similar to the ground floor, also linked with the

room in the tower by a door (fig. 61).

When this building was abandoned and how it was destroyed may be presumed

rather reliably. Under the floor of its ground floor room we discovered a cultural

layer which was in places over 50 cm thick and contained numerous wedges, but was

poor in other archaeological finds. There were mostly fragments of glazed pottery

vessels congruent to the other similar finds which correspond to the last decades of

the life here and the time when the buildings in the Castle were destroyed. In the

tower, under the floor, we discovered a layer with traces of rotten organic matters,

perhaps grains or something similar. This layer closed a layer of soot with pieces of

charred beams which come from the collapsed burned inter-floor structures. Above

this situation there were layers of mortar and toppled stones that were over 4 m high.

In the layer above the floor in the tower we discovered over 480 lead round shots

for the kuka~a rifles, as well as several smaller lead balls.

In the ground floor of the building we also discovered a furnace for the melting

of lead, in the shape of an ellipsoid cylindrical recess, partially dug into the cultural

layer and in the lower section into the floor as well. It was filled with small lead slag

and we also found cut pieces of lead vessels, prepared to be re-melted. This entire

situation above the cultural layer was closed by the earlier mentioned thick layers

of debris and collapsed stone.

On the basis of an analysis of the stratigraphic situation in the interior of the

North Building it may be concluded that this large and important building perished

before the Ottoman siege and the final conquest of the town in 1455. This probably

happened at the time of the first Ottoman siege in 1440–1441 after which the

building was not reconstructed to its original appearance and it did not keep its former

function either. The traces that were revealed in the interior of the ground

floor suggest that there used to be an eave under which there was the above-mentioned

furnace for the melting of lead. Wooden pillars that carried the roof structure

of this eave were placed along the interior face of the west wall and they rested on

stone bases. To serve as one of these bases, in the corner between the west wall and

the rampart, a profiled, finely carved console was used as a spolium and judging by

all it came from a machicolation. Parallel to these repairs, a passage was driven

through in the rampart between Towers 6 and 1 in order to establish a connection

with the space on the east side and the added platform for cannons, which has

already been dealt with.

When observed as a whole, the revealed remains of the North Building provide

a lot of elements to be able to grasp its former appearance and structural assembly,

as well as to presume its function within the scope of the Castle as a whole. The simple

corpus of this building was placed on the most favourable location within the

not too large space of the Castle, in its northeast section. Such position provided it

with favourable insolation, as well as the possibility to see all of its facades, particularly

the west facade, which was noticeable from the very entrance into the fortress

(fig. 62).

The remains of the North Building clearly lead to a conclusion that this used

to be an important edifice within the whole ensemble of the Castle, about which it


vi{i u odnosu na pod u prizemnoj prostoriji. Prva me|uspratna konstrukcija

u kuli nalazila se, kao i u samoj gra|evini, na visini od 3,2 m, te im je ravan

podova i na spratu bila nejednaka. Unutra{wi prostor kule je u nivou sprata

bio zatvoren prema susednoj prostoriji dogradwom jednog zida, ~iji su ostaci

samo u mawoj meri sa~uvani. Usled toga moè se samo pretpostaviti da je

spratni deo Severne gra|evine sa prostorijom u kuli, sli~no prizemqu, bio

tako|e povezan vratima (sl. 61).

Kada je napu{tena i kako je postradala ova gra|evina, moè se dosta pouzdano

pretpostaviti. Nad podom wene prizemne prostorije otkriven je kulturni

sloj, debqine mestimi~no i preko 50 cm, sa brojnim klinovima, ali siroma{an

drugim arheolo{kim nalazima. Uglavnom su zastupqeni ulomci

gle|osanih kerami~kih posuda, podudarni sa drugim sli~nim nalazima, koji

odgovaraju posledwim decenijama ìvota i vremenu destrukcije zdawa u Zamku.

U kuli nad podom otkriven je sloj sa tragovima istrulelih organskih materija,

mo`da ìta ili sli~nog. Ovaj sloj zatvarao je nivo gari sa komadima

ugqenisanih greda, koje poti~u od obru{enih izgorelih me|uspratnih konstrukcija.

Nad ovom situacijom su slojevi maltera i osutog kamena, visine

preko 4 m. U sloju nad podom u kuli otkriveno je oko 480 olovnih kuglica – zrna

za pu{ke kuka~e, kao i nekoliko mawih olovnih kugli.

U prizemnoj prostoriji gra|evine otkrivena je pe} za topqewe olova, u vidu

elipsoidnog koritastog udubqewa. Delimi~no je ukopana u kulturni sloj, a

u nièm delu i u pod. Bila je ispuwena sitnom olovnom zgurom, a na|eni su i

ise~eni komadi olovnih posuda, pripremqeni za pretapawe. Celu ovu situaciju

nad kulturnim slojem zatvarali su ranije pomenuti visoki nasipi {uta

i obru{enog kamena.

Na osnovu analize stratigrafske situacije u unutra{wosti Severne gra-

|evine moè se zakqu~iti da je ovo veliko i zna~ajno zdawe postradalo pre

turske opsade i kona~nog zaposedawa grada 1455. godine. To se verovatno desilo

u vreme prve turske opsade 1440–1441. godine, nakon ~ega gra|evina vi{e

nije obnovqena u svom izvornom obliku, niti je zadràla nekada{wu funkciju.

Tragovi koji su otkriveni u unutra{wosti prizemne etaè ukazuju na postojawe

jedne nadstre{nice, pod kojom se nalazila i pomenuta pe} za pretapawe

olova. Drveni direci koji su nosili krovnu konstrukciju ove nadstre{nice

bili su postavqeni uz unutra{we lice zapadnog zida i osloweni na kamene baze.

Za jednu od ovih baza, u uglu izme|u zapadnog zida i bedema, upotrebqena je

kao spolija jedna profilisana, fino klesana konzola, koja, po svemu sude}i,

poti~e od neke ma{ikule. Istovremeno sa ovim prepravkama izvr{eno je i

probijawe prolaza u bedemu izme|u Kula 6 i 1, kako bi se ostvarila veza sa prostorom

na isto~noj strani i dogra|enom platformom za topove, o ~emu je ve}

bilo re~i.

Posmatrani u celini, otkriveni ostaci Severne gra|evine pruàju dosta

elemenata da se sagleda wen nekada{wi izgled i konstruktivni sklop, a tako-

|e i pretpostavi funkcija u okviru celine Zamka. Jednostavan korpus ove gra-

|evine sme{ten je na najpovoqnijoj lokaciji u okviru nevelikog prostora

Zamka, i to u wenom severoisto~nom delu. Ovakav poloàj obezbedio joj je povoqnu

insolaciju, kao i sagledivost wenih fasada, posebno zapadne, koja je bila

uo~qiva od samog ulaska u utvr|ewe (sl. 62).

146


is possible to present quite well founded suppositions. Judging by all, the partially

dug-in ground floor used to serve as storage. This was most likely a unique space,

since no traces of any partitions were found, which does not exclude a possibility

that perhaps there were some wooden partitioning structures which left no discernible

traces. Above the ground floor there was only one spacious room – the hall

which was entered from the exterior staircase via the porch. It may be presumed

that the hall had two or maybe even three windows that were, like the entrance portal

in the south wall, probably decoratively finished. In the northeast corner of the

hall, as it has already been said, there was a hearth – a fireplace, which would all

suggest a representative character of this space. The hall in the Castle belonged to

the most important buildings where the daily public life took place, where the business

was conducted, feast organised, etc. In that sense, the North Building of Novo

Brdo did not differ from the similar buildings in the castles of the then Serbian

lands. 135

135 Popovi} 2006a, 199.


281, fig. 53.

West Building

This edifice the interior of which was excavated in its entirety back in 1954 got filled

again in the meantime with stones and debris, mostly collapsed from Tower 4. 136

After the removal of this fill, with the average height of around 2 m, we got to the

level of the former floor with no traces of any cultural layer which had been removed

already during the earlier surveying. The plane of the floor consists of a flattened

rock with no traces of mortar or possible paving. Above this relatively flat rock surface,

we noticed traces of very intensive soot, which suggests that the building perished

in a fire.

The West Building has a trapezoid ground plan, with the size of 5.20 m × 5.30 m

and the interior surface area of around 28 m². With its west side, it is adjacent to

the interior side of Tower 4. It used to have 0.80 m thick walls made of broken hewn

stone (fig. 63 and 64). In the northeast corner there are remains of a hearth in the

shape of a semi-circular niche. In the preserved wall mass on the one side of this

hearth, at the height of around 1.40 m, there is a preserved impression of a wooden

beam which, most likely, like a console came out of the face of the wall. There was

certainly a similar situation on the other side of the semi-circular niche, so that above

these consoles there was the upper structure of the hearth.

The entrance into the Building, that was around 1 metre wide, was located

beside the opposite southeast corner and it was finished with breccia ashlars. The

threshold with a wooden beam structure was made in the shape of two steps over

which it was possible to go from the exterior, higher terrain down to the level of the

floor in the Building. Within the scope of the north wall there was originally a window,

0.80 m wide, which had window frames carved out of tufa. During a subsequent

period, the window was partly walled-in and turned into a niche. The reason for this

walling-in was most probably the construction of Cistern 2 the upper surface of

which was above the parapet of the said window. Within the walls of Building 1, there

were also two more niches, one in the south wall and another, probably smaller, that

used to be in the east wall. Its remains that were not preserved this time around

were found during the 1954 works.

Judging by the impressions of the inter-floor structure’s beams in the south

wall, above the ground floor there was quite certainly yet another storey. These beams


Ostaci Severne gra|evine jasno navode na zakqu~ak da je to bilo zna~ajno

zdawe u okviru celine Zamka. O Severnoj gra|evini mogu se izneti dosta utemeqene

pretpostavke. Delimi~no ukopano prizemqe prvobitno je, sude}i po

svemu, sluìlo kao ostava. U pitawu je bio najverovatnije jedinstven prostor

s obzirom na to da nisu na|eni ostaci pregrada, {to ne iskqu~uje mogu}nost

da su mo`da postojale neke drvene pregradne konstrukcije, od kojih nisu uo~eni

eventualni tragovi. Nad prizemqem je postojala samo jedna prostrana prostorija

– dvorana, u koju se ulazilo spoqnim stepeni{tem preko trema. Moè

se pretpostaviti da je dvorana imala dva, a mo`da i tri prozora, koji su, kao i

ulazni portal u ju`nom zidu, verovatno bili dekorativno obra|eni. U severoisto~nom

uglu dvorane, kako je ve} re~eno, nalazilo se loì{te – kamin, {to

bi sve ukazivalo na reprezentativni karakter ovoga prostora. Dvorana u Zamku

spadala je u red najzna~ajnijih zdawa u kojima se odvijao svakodnevni javni

ìvot, obavqali poslovi, svetkovine i sl. U tom smislu novobrdska Severna

gra|evina nije se razlikovala od sli~nih zdawa u zamkovima onovremenih

Sl. 62. Severna gra|evina,

zami{qeni izgled

(prema zamisli autora

obradio arhitekta I. Bjeli})

Fig. 62. North Edifice,

imagined appearance

(according to the concept of the author

processed by architect I. Bjeli})

srpskih zemaqa. 135 135 Popovi} 2006a, 199.

148


Sl. 63. Zapadna gra|evina – osnova i

preseci sa delimi~nom grafi~kom


Fig. 63. West Edifice – ground plan

and cross-sections with partial


rested against the north and the south walls of the building and they were parallel

to the direction in which the ramparts go. This is testified to by the found impressions

of only three beams in the south walls. Their dimensions were 15 cm × 15 cm and

they were arranged at the mutual distance of around 21 cm. Since it had already

been excavated before, there were no traces of any cultural layer or any archaeological

finds in the interior of the building.


Sl. 64. Zapadna gra|evina

– op{ti izgled


Fig. 64. West Edifice

– general appearance


Zapadna gra|evina

Ovo zdawe, ~ija je unutra{wost u celini iskopana 1954. godine, u me|uvremenu

je ponovo bilo zasuto kamenom i {utom, i to najve}im delom obru{enim sa

Kule 4. 136 Posle uklawawa ovog nasipa, prose~ne visine oko 2 m, do{lo se do

ravni nekada{weg poda bez tragova kulturnog sloja, koji je ve} prilikom ranijih

istraìvawa bio uklowen. Ravan poda predstavqa zaravwena stena bez

tragova maltera i eventualnog poplo~avawa. Nad ovom, relativno ravnom, stenovitom

povr{inom uo~eni su tragovi veoma intenzivne gari, {to ukazuje na

to da je gra|evina stradala u poàru.

Zapadna gra|evina je trapezaste osnove, veli~ine 5,2 × 5,3 m i unutra{we

povr{ine od oko 28 m². Svojom zapadnom stranom prislowena je na unutra{wu

stranu Kule 4. Imala je zidove, debqine 0,8 m, gra|ene lomqenim pritesanim

kamenom (sl. 63 i 64). U severoisto~nom uglu nalaze se ostaci loì{ta, gra|enog

u vidu polukru`ne ni{e. U o~uvanoj zidnoj masi sa jedne strane ovog ogwi-

{ta, na visini oko 1,4 m, o~uvan je otisak drvene grede, koja je, najverovatnije,

u vidu konzole izlazila iz lica zida. Sli~no je sigurno bilo i sa druge strane

polukru`ne ni{e, tako da se nad ovim konzolama nalazila gorwa konstrukcija

ogwi{ta.

Ulaz u Zapadnu gra|evinu, {irine oko 1 m, nalazio se uz suprotni jugoisto~ni

ugao i bio je obra|en tesanicima bre~e. Prag, sa konstrukcijom od

drvenih greda, bio je gra|en u vidu dva stepenika, preko kojih se sa spoqnog,

vi{eg terena silazilo na nivo poda u gra|evini. U okviru severnog zida nalazio

se prvobitno prozor, {irine 0,8 m, koji je imao doprozornike klesane od

sige. U jednom kasnijem razdobqu prozor je delom bio zazidan i pretvoren u

ni{u. Povod za ovo zazi|ivawe najverovatnije je bila izgradwa Cisterne 2, ~ija

je gorwa povr{ina bila iznad parapeta pomenutog prozora. U okviru zidova


281, sl. 53.

150


Today we can only guess the former purpose of this building. Since it was located

beside the main gate, it would be expected that it served for the control of the

entrance and it is also possible that it was used for placing the crew at the ground

floor and at the upper storey. Most likely it used to have a shed roof which, judging

by all, used to be covered in wood shingles.

South building – the Palace

This spacious residential building was located adjacent to the interior face of the

rampart, as well as Towers 2 and 3. The remains of the building lay under layers of

rocks and debris with the height between 4 and 5 m, under which there was a relatively

thin cultural layer. Since the building was surveyed down to the plane of the

original floor, it was established that there were two construction phases, that is,

that there were remains of the original building and a later-date reconstruction

which did not change its original appearance.

The South building has a rectangular ground plan and the interior space of

12.50 m × 6.50 m, that is, it covers the surface area of around 80 m². The walls, the

thickness of which is approximately one metre, were built, as was usual, using broken

stone and lime mortar (fig. 65). The entrance was located within the shorter

northwest side, closer to the north corner. In the same wall there was also the only

window on the ground floor. The whole building, as well as the adjacent rampart

were built on a flattened rock which in a good deal of the surface appears directly

under the floor made in the form of a layer of mortar up to 10 cm thick. Above the

ground floor, originally there used to be two more storeys. Impressions of 24 beams

of the former first inter-floor structure were discovered as a sequence in the face

and the wall mass of the rampart, at the height of around 2.85 m above the level of

the ground floor’s floor. The same sequence of beams at an equal height remained

partially preserved also within the longitudinal northeast wall of the Building.

Taking into account the large span, the inter-floor beams also rested on a girder that

extended along the longitudinal axis of the Building. The girder, in the shape of a

massive beam, 30 cm × 30 cm, was built into the wall of Tower 2, where its nicely

shaped bearing had been preserved, and into the opposite northwest lateral wall, and

it rested also on three wooden pillars arranged through the middle of the ground

floor. As for the second storey, that used to have the same height as the previous one,

around 2.55 m, there are impressions in the rampart of only 4 beams of the upper

inter-floor structure. The level of this storey approximately coincided with the plane

of the inter-floor structures at the level of the open section of Towers 2 and 3. It

cannot be reliably concluded whether the second storey of the South Building was

linked with the interior spaces of the towers, that is, whether it constituted a unique

functional ensemble with them (fig. 66).

During a period, which could not be establish more closely on the basis of the

archaeological finds, the South building was destroyed in a large fire. This blaze

destroyed the upper sections of the northeast wall, while on the lower preserved

sections it is possible to see traces of a strong fire action. Also, in the sections above

the rock, at the level of the original floor, we noticed a layer of intensive soot. It was

probably soon after this fire that the building was reconstructed. On that occasion,

the demolished section of the northeast wall was built again and above a series of

inter-floor beams the northeast wall differs somewhat in the manner of building.


Gra|evine 1 nalazile su se jo{ dve ni{e, jedna u ju`nom zidu, a druga, verovatno

mawa, bila je u isto~nom zidu. Weni ostaci, koji sada nisu o~uvani, konstatovani

su prilikom radova 1954. godine.

Nad prizemqem je, sude}i prema otiscima greda me|uspratne konstrukcije

u ju`nom zidu, sasvim sigurno postojala jo{ jedna etaà. Ove grede bile su

oslowene na severni i ju`ni zid gra|evine i bile su paralelne sa pravcem pru-

àwa bedema. O tome svedo~e na|eni otisci samo tri grede u ju`nom zidu. Bile

su dimenzija 15 × 15 cm i stajale su na me|usobnim rastojawima od oko 21 cm.

U unutra{wosti gra|evine, budu}i da je ve} ranije bila iskopavana, nije bilo

tragova kulturnog sloja niti arheolo{kih nalaza.

O nekada{woj nameni ove gra|evine danas se moè samo naga|ati. Kako je

locirana uz glavnu kapiju, o~ekivalo bi se da je sluìla kontroli ulaza, a mogu-

}e i sme{taju posade u prizemqu na spratnoj etaì. Verovatno je imala jednovodni

krov, po svemu sude}i, pokriven {indrom.

Ju`na gra|evina – palata

Ovo prostrano stambeno zdawe nalazi se prisloweno uz unutra{we lice bedema,

kao i Kule 2 i 3. Ostaci gra|evine su leàli pod slojevima kamena i {uta,

visine izme|u 4 i 5 m, ispod kojih se nalazio relativno tanak kulturni sloj.

Budu}i da je gra|evina istraèna do ravni prvobitnog poda, konstatovano je da

postoje dve gra|evinske faze, odnosno ostaci prvobitnog zdawa i poznije obnove,

koja nije promenila wen izvorni izgled.

Ju`na gra|evina je pravougaone osnove, veli~ine unutra{weg prostora

12,5 × 6,5 m, odnosno povr{ine od oko 80 m². Zidovi, ~ija {irina iznosi pribli`no

1 m, gra|eni su, kao {to je to i uobi~ajeno, lomqenim kamenom i kre~nim

malterom (sl. 65). Ulaz se nalazio u okviru kra}e severozapadne strane,

bliè severnom uglu. U istom zidu bio je sme{ten i jedini prozor prizemne eta-

è. Cela gra|evina, kao i susedni bedem, podignuti su na zaravwenoj steni, koja

se na dobrom delu povr{ine pojavquje neposredno ispod poda, ra|enog u vidu

sloja maltera, debqine do 10 cm. Iznad prizemqa postojala su prvobitno jo{

dva sprata. Otisci 24 grede nekada{we prve me|uspratne konstrukcije otkriveni

su kao niz u licu i zidnoj masi bedema, na visini od oko 2,85 m iznad ravni

poda prizemqa. Isti niz greda na jednakoj visini ostao je delimi~no o~uvan

i u okviru podu`nog severoisto~nog zida gra|evine. Imaju}i u vidu veliki raspon,

me|uspratne grede bile su oslowene i na podvlaku, koja se pruàla po podu`noj

osi gra|evine. Podvlaka, u vidu masivne grede, dimenzija 30 × 30 cm,

bila je ugra|ena u zid Kule 2, gde joj je o~uvano lepo oblikovano leì{te, i u

suprotni, severozapadni bo~ni zid, a bila je oslowena i na tri drvena direka,

postavqena kroz sredinu prizemqa. Od druge etaè, koja je bila iste visine

kao i prethodna, oko 2,55 m, ostali su u bedemu otisci od svega 4 grede gorwe

me|uspratne konstrukcije. Nivo ove etaè bio je pribli`no podudaran sa ravni

me|uspratnih konstrukcija u nivou otvorenog dela Kula 2 i 3. Ne moè se

pouzdano zakqu~iti da li je druga etaà Ju`ne gra|evine bila povezana sa unutra{wim

prostorima kula, odnosno da li je sa wima ~inila jedinstvenu funkcionalnu

celinu (sl. 66).

U jednom razdobqu, koje se na osnovu arheolo{kih nalaza nije moglo bli-

è odrediti, Ju`na gra|evina je stradala u velikom poàru. U tom poàru su

152



stradali gorwi delovi severoisto~nog zida, dok se na niìm o~uvanim deonicama

zida vide tragovi jakog dejstva vatre. Tako|e, i na delovima nad stenom, u

ravni prvobitnog poda, uo~en je sloj intenzivne gari. Verovatno je ubrzo posle

ovog poàra gra|evina obnovqena. Tom prilikom joj je dogra|en poru{eni deo

severoisto~nog zida, koji se iznad niza me|uspratnih greda unekoliko razlikuje

u opusu zidawa, i ponovo izgra|ene sve drvene konstrukcije. U ju`nom uglu dogra|ena

je polukru`na supstrukcija za ugaoni kamin, koji se nalazio na spratu.

Osim toga, ravan poda u prizemqu na pojedinim delovima izravnata je novim

slojem maltera. U ovom malteru ostali su otisci drvenih pregradnih zidova

jedne male prostorije, prislowene uz zid Kule 2. Tako|e je ostao i dobro o~uvan

otisak jednog od direka koji su nosili podvlaku. U ju`nom delu prizemne

etaè, gde je novi pod dobro sa~uvan, uo~eno je da leì na sloju gari prethodnog

poàra. Na jednom mawem prostoru, gde je to bilo mogu}e, uo~eno je da debqina

ovog sloja poàra iznosi oko 10 cm i da leì neposredno na steni. Sa tog prostora

poti~u nalazi ulomaka jednog ve}eg lonca, koji bi se prema nekim svojim

odlikama mogao datovati u 14. vek. Kulturni sloj iznad malternog poda relativno

je tanak, do 40 cm, i sa veoma malo arheolo{kih nalaza. Pored ulomaka

keramike, na|eno je i vi{e gvozdenih klinova.

Sl. 65. Ju`na gra|evina – osnova



Fig. 65. South Edifice – ground plan

and cross-sectionswith partial graphic


154

137 For the analysis of this find,

we owe gratitude to our colleague

Vujadin Ivani{evi}, PhD.

138 Milo{evi} 1997, 180–189.


All the wooden structures were made again, too. In the south corner a semi-circular

substructure for a corner fireplace that was located on the upper floor was added.

Other than this, the floor plane on the ground floor was flattened in some sections

using a new layer of mortar. In this mortar there are remains of wooden partition

walls of a small room adjacent to the wall of Tower 2. Also, there is a well preserved

impression of one of the wooden pillars that carried the girder. In the south section

of the ground floor, where the new floor has been well preserved, we noticed that it

lay on top of a layer of soot belonging to the previous fire. In one smaller area, where

this was possible, we noticed that the thickness of this layer of fire was around 10 cm

and that it was lying directly on the rock. It was from this area that came the finds

of fragments of a larger pot which could by some of its features be dated back to the

14 th century. The cultural layer above the mortar floor is relatively thin, up to 40 cm,

and with very little archaeological finds. In addition to pottery fragments, several

iron wedges were also found.

A particular find from the layer above the younger floor is the lower section of

an iron mould with a butt used for its attachment to a wooden base. By its shape,

this type of mould is most often linked to the moulds for mining coins. Our mould,

however, has the upper surface of a smaller diameter than the one that is commonly

used in the minting of coins, which brings its such possible use under a question mark.

Judging by all, the specimen from the South Building could represent a mould for

the production of buttons or similar type of objects that were used in the daily life.

By making them with a mould, it was possible to produce a larger number of smaller

objects made of bronze or other alloys. 137

The finds of pottery vessels’ fragments mostly come from the younger level of

the cultural layer. In the said layer, there were no traces that would suggest the

beginning and later stages of the demolition of the South Building. The levels of

debris and destruction closed off the cultural layer which, judging by all, got created

before the middle of the 15 th century, that is, before the Ottoman conquest of

Novo Brdo.

Today, we can presume the former appearance of the South Building only by the

preserved remains of its perimeter walls made of stone. The entire interior structure

was made of wooden materials. In addition to the inter-floor structures, there

were also, without any doubt, wooden partition walls between several rooms. Also,

it may be presumed that there used to exist an interior wooden staircase that was

used for going to the upper floors, since there are no traces that suggest that there

used to be some external staircase.

When observed as a whole, the South Building represents an edifice of a higher

standard of living, which was on the territory of the medieval Serbian lands always

designated as the palace. In addition to the palaces, which were frequently, as separate

buildings, built using solely wooden materials, in fortresses, monasteries and

towns there were also more solidly constructed buildings. The main feature of their

structural assembly was the basic frame of the building made of stone with mortar

binder, often resting on the adjacent ramparts (fig. 67). By the rule, all the interior

structures were made of wooden materials, with a noticeable absence of vault structures.

Such manner of building is testified to by the numerous examples throughout

the Serbian lands. 138 If observed in that context, the South Building represents a

typical example of a palace intended for residential housing.


Osoben nalaz iz sloja nad mla|im podom predstavqa dowi deo gvozdenog kalupa

sa usadnikom za pri~vr{}ivawe za drvenu osnovu. Ova vrsta kalupa, prema

svom obliku, naj~e{}e se vezuje za kalupe za kovawe novca. Na{ kalup, me|utim,

ima gorwu povr{inu maweg pre~nika od one koja je uobi~ajena za kovawe novca,

{to dovodi u pitawe takvu wegovu eventualnu namenu. Po svemu sude}i, primerak

iz Ju`ne gra|evine mogao bi da predstavqa kalup za izradu dugmadi ili

sli~ne vrste predmeta koji su kori{}eni u svakodnevnoj upotrebi. Kovawe u

kalupu omogu}avalo je izradu ve}eg broja sitnih predmeta od bronze. 137

Nalazi ulomaka kerami~kih posuda uglavnom poti~u iz mla|eg nivoa kulturnog

sloja. U pomenutom sloju nema tragova koji bi ukazivali na po~etak i

kasnije etape ru{ewa Ju`ne gra|evine. Nivoi {uta i destrukcije zatvorili su

kulturni sloj, koji se, po svemu sude}i, obrazovao pre sredine 15. veka, odnosno

turskog osvajawa Novog Brda.

O nekada{wem izgledu Ju`ne gra|evine sada se moè suditi samo prema o~uvanim

ostacima wenih kamenom gra|enih okvirnih zidova. Celokupna unutra-

{wa struktura bila je od drvene gra|e. Osim me|uspratnih konstrukcija, tu su,

bez sumwe, postojali i drveni pregradni zidovi izme|u vi{e odaja. Tako|e moè

se pretpostaviti postojawe unutra{weg drvenog stepeni{ta kojim se izlazilo

na gorwe etaè, budu}i da nema tragova o postojawu nekog spoqnog stepeni{ta.

Posmatrana u celini, Ju`na gra|evina predstavqa zdawe vi{eg standarda

stanovawa, koje je na podru~ju sredwovekovnih srpskih zemqa uvek ozna~avano

Sl. 66. Ju`na gra|evina sa Kulom 2

– u toku radova


Fig. 66. South Edifice with Tower 2

– during the works

(photo November 2016)

Sl. 67. Ju`na gra|evina

– op{ti izgled, pogled ka severu


Fig. 67. South Edifice

– general appearance, north view


137 Za analizu ovog nalaza

zahvalnost dugujemo kolegi

dr Vujadinu Ivani{evi}u.

156


Structure above the Entrance in to the Castle

Beside the lateral sides of the gate at the Castle, that is, directly beside the South

and the West Buildings, we revealed remains of walls of yet another structure that

was located above the communication next to the gate. Along the lateral wall of the

South Building, from the interior face of the rampart towards the entrance into its

ground floor room, we discovered subsequently added remains of a wall, with the

thickness of around 0.80 m, whose former length was around 4 m. On the opposite

side, in the corner between the interior face of the rampart and the lateral wall of

the West Building, we discovered a semi-circularly built structure, full of soil fill, 139

which was recognised as the substructure of a fireplace on some upper storey. At the

foot of this structure, towards the passage of the gate, there are preserved remains

of two built steps.

On the basis of an analysis of these modestly preserved remains, it could be concluded

that adjacent to the Gate, above the crown of its vault, there used to be yet

another smaller structure, which was almost certainly made of wood. In structural

terms, its floor beams rested on the leaning wall adjacent to the South Building and,

probably, to the lateral wall of the West Building. At that level, this wooden building

had a room of a trapezoid ground plan, with the surface area of around 15 m²

in which there used to be a corner fireplace. The access to this elevated storey was

possible through an attached wooden staircase adjacent to the wall of the West

Building. The revealed remains do not provide the grounds for a broader analysis of

the appearance and former function of this structure. It may only be presumed that

there used to be a room for the placement of guards or a crew of the Castle. In those

terms, we should not exclude a possibility that there was a direct link with the wall

walk of the rampart above the Gate.


281.

140 See about this building in more detail

Popovi} 2018, 175–190.

Small Steam Bath 140

This building of small dimensions was built into the space between the ramparts,

the South Building and the Church. With its walls it rested against these buildings

and it was also noticed that the upper section of its wall mass leaned against the

exterior face of the reconstructed north wall of the neighbouring building. The revealed

remains of the walls lay under the layers of debris and stone, where they had

been relatively well preserved, but the north section of this small building remained

unsurveyed, since it was over its ruins that the younger wall of the Ottoman granary

was founded. On the basis of the revealed remains we got the basic data on the structure

and function of this building which should be supplemented only after the dismantling

of the younger Ottoman wall (fig. 68).

The bath in the Castle of Novo Brdo had only one room, then a water tank and

an anteroom with a furnace. Although partially demolished, its remains, in addition

to the reconstruction of its former appearance, also allow us to determine the manner

in which it was used and to consider its function within the Castle as a whole (fig.

69a and b). It was not possible to provide inflow of running water for this bath, taking

into account that there are no natural water springs on the territory of the urban

zone of Novo Brdo, so that the water supply was primarily limited to rainwater that

used to be collected in the cisterns with filter wells. This impacted the functional possibilities

of the bath and made its use more difficult. On the other hand, because of the

very small area in which it was built, the bath of Novo Brdo was limited in terms of the


kao palata. Pored palata koje su ~esto kao izdvojeni objekti bile podizane iskqu~ivo

od drvene gra|e, u utvr|ewima, manastirima i gradovima bile su to i

solidnije zidane gra|evine. Glavnu odliku wihovog konstruktivnog sklopa predstavqao

je osnovni okvir zdawa gra|en kamenom sa malternim vezivom, ~esto

oslowen na susedne bedeme (sl. 67). Sve unutra{we konstrukcije po pravilu su

bile od drvene gra|e, uz uo~qivo odsustvo svodnih konstrukcija. O ovakvom na-

~inu gra|ewa svedo~e brojni primeri {irom srpskih zemaqa. 138 Posmatrana u

tom kontekstu, Ju`na gra|evina predstavqa tipi~an primer palate namewene

rezidencijalnom stanovawu.

Objekat iznad ulaza u Zamak

Kraj bo~nih strana kapije u Zamku, odnosno neposredno uz Ju`nu i Zapadnu gra-

|evinu otkriveni su ostaci zidova jo{ jednog objekta koji se nalazio iznad komunikacije

uz kapiju. Uz bo~ni zid Ju`ne gra|evine od unutra{weg lica bedema,

pa prema ulazu u wenu prizemnu prostoriju otkriveni su prizidani ostaci

jednog zida, debqine oko 0,8 m, ~ija je nekada{wa duìna iznosila oko 4 m. Sa

suprotne strane, u uglu izme|u unutra{weg lica bedema i bo~nog zida Zapadne

gra|evine, otkrivena je polukru`no zidana struktura, ispuwena zemqanim nasipom,

139 koja je prepoznata kao supstrukcija kamina na nekoj gorwoj etaì. U

podno`ju ove konstrukcije, prema prolazu kapije, ostali su o~uvani tragovi dva

ozidana stepenika.

Na osnovu analize ovih skromno o~uvanih ostataka moglo se zakqu~iti da

se uz kapiju, iznad temena wenog svoda nalazio jo{ jedan mawi objekat, koji je,

gotovo sigurno, bio gra|en od drveta. U konstruktivnom smislu, wegove podne

grede bile su oslowene na prisloweni zid uz Ju`nu gra|evinu, a, verovatno, i na

bo~ni zid Zapadne gra|evine. Na tom nivou ovo drveno zdawe je imalo prostoriju

trapezaste osnove, povr{ine oko 15 m², u kojoj je postojao ugaoni kamin.

Pristup ovoj povi{enoj etaì bio je mogu} preko prislowenog drvenog stepeni{ta

uz zid Zapadne gra|evine. Otkriveni ostaci ne pruàju mogu}nost {ire

analize izgleda i nekada{we funkcije ovog zdawa. Moè se samo pretpostaviti

da se tu nalazila odaja za sme{taj straè ili posade Zamka. U tom smislu ne

bi trebalo iskqu~iti ni mogu}nost da je postojala neposredna veza sa {etnom

stazom bedema iznad kapije.

Malo parno kupatilo 140

Ovo zdawe malih dimenzija bilo je ugra|eno u prostor izme|u bedema, Ju`ne gra-

|evine i Crkve. Svojim zidovima bilo je prisloweno uz ove objekte, pri ~emu

je uo~eno da mu se gorwi deo zidne mase prislawa uz spoqno lice obnovqenog

severnog zida susedne gra|evine. Otkriveni ostaci zidova leàli su pod nasipima

{uta i kamena, gde su relativno dobro o~uvani, ali severni deo ovog malog

zdawa ostao je neistraèn, budu}i da je preko wegovih ru{evina utemeqen

mla|i zid turskog ambara. Na osnovu otkrivenih ostataka dobijeni su osnovni

podaci o konstrukciji i funkciji ove gra|evine, koje bi trebalo dopuniti tek

posle razgradwe mla|eg turskog zida (sl. 68).

Kupatilo u novobrdskom Zamku imalo je samo jednu prostoriju, zatim rezervoar

za vodu i pretprostor sa loì{tem. Wegovi ostaci, iako delimi~no poru{eni,

omogu}avaju da se uz rekonstrukciju nekada{weg izgleda, utvrdi na~in

138 Milo{evi} 1997, 180–189.

139 Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955, 281.

140 Detaqno o ovom zdawu v. Popovi} 2018,

175–190.

158


Sl. 68. Malo parno kupatilo

– osnova posle iskopavawa

(R = 1 : 100)

Fig. 68. Small steam bath

– ground plan after the excavations

(R = 1 : 100)

space only to the main heated room above the hypocaust, with no antechambers and

other auxiliary rooms. Also, there was no built bathtub, that is, a small pool that constituted

one of the important assets of the buildings of this type, which was primarily

caused by the very small space in which this building was constructed. On the other

hand, this could have been impacted, as it has been already pointed out, by the very

limited possibilities concerning the supply with sufficient quantities of water.

The revealed remains of the walls provide for a possibility to reconstruct rather

reliably the former appearance of the bath in the residential complex of the Castle

(fig. 70). At the lower level of this building there used to be a hypocaust under the

main room which was on the west side linked to a very solidly built cylindrical furnace.

On the opposite side, along the east rampart, there were two chimney-type


upotrebe i razmotri funkcija u okviru celine Zamka (sl. 69a i b). Za ovo kupatilo

nije bilo mogu}nosti da se obezbedi priliv teku}e vode, budu}i da na

prostoru urbane zone Novog Brda nema prirodnih izvora, tako da je snabdevawe

vodom bilo ograni~eno prevashodno na ki{nicu, koja se prikupqala u cisternama

sa filter-bunarima. To je uticalo na funkcionalne mogu}nosti kupatila

i oteàvalo wegovu upotrebu. S druge strane, usled veoma male povr{ine na

kojoj je podignuto, novobrdsko kupatilo je prostorno bilo ograni~eno samo na

glavnu grejanu prostoriju iznad hipokausta, bez predvorja i drugih pomo}nih

odeqewa. Tako|e nije postojala ni zidana kada, odnosno mali bazen, koji je predstavqao

jedan od va`nih sadràja gra|evina ovoga tipa, {to je na prvom mestu

bilo uslovqeno veoma malim prostorom na kome je ovo zdawe podignuto. S druge

strane, na to su mogle uticati, kao {to je ve} istaknuto, i veoma ograni~ene

mogu}nosti snabdevawa dovoqnim koli~inama vode.

Otkriveni ostaci zidova pruàju mogu}nost da se dosta pouzdano rekonstrui{e

nekada{wi izgled kupatila u rezidencijalnom kompleksu Zamka (sl.

70). U dowem nivou ovog zdawa ispod glavne prostorije nalazio se hipokaust,

koji je na zapadnoj strani bio povezan sa veoma solidno gra|enim cilindri~nim

loì{tem. Sa suprotne strane, uz Isto~ni bedem, bila su izvedena dva dimwa~ka

kanala. Ispred loì{ta nalazio se relativno mali, ukopan i podzidan

otkriveni prostor, odakle se loìlo i gde su se mogle nalaziti samo mawe koli~ine

priru~nog ogreva. Nad ovim prostorom, najverovatnije, postojala je

drvena nadstre{nica.

U gorwem nivou, iznad loì{ta, nalazio se rezervoar za vodu. Sude}i prema

o~uvanim ostacima, bio je zasveden poluobli~astim svodom od tankih opeka.

Unutra{wost rezervoara bila je malterisana debqim slojem vodonepropustivog

Sl. 69. Malo parno kupatilo:

a) izgled prema istoku;

b) izgled prema zapadu

(foto 2015)

Fig. 69. Small steam bath:

a) appearance towards the east;

b) appearance towards the west

(photo 2015)

a

b

160


canals. In front of the furnace, there used to be a relatively small, dug-in and underpinned

open space from where the fire was stoked and where only smaller quantities

of handy fuel could be placed. Above this room, most probably there used to be

a wooden eave.

At the upper level, above the furnace, there used to be a water tank. Judging by

the preserved remains, it was covered with a semi-spherical vault made of thin bricks.

The whole interior of the tank was covered with a thick layer of waterproof plaster.

Above the cylindrical furnace, there was a metal slab built into the wall mass under

the floor which was used to heat the water. Since the dimensions of the tank were

quite precisely established and taking into account the level up to which it could be

filled with water, it may be concluded that its useful volume did not exceed 0.5 m³ or

a little over 500 litres. In order to provide water supply, which used to be brought in

vessels here from the cisterns with filter wells, there was, undoubtedly, an opening in

the crown of the vault that was most probably accessed via some wooden structure

leaning against the exterior face of the south wall of the Church. The heated steam

from this tank was channelled to the room above the hypocaust through walls using

ceramic pipes that ended in circular openings on the west, as well as the lateral walls.

A direct entrance into the bath, from the exterior space, was located within the

north wall. On the basis of the revealed remains, it was possible to determine only

A

B


maltera. Iznad cilindri~nog loì{ta bila je u zidnu masu ispod poda ugra|ena

metalna plo~a preko koje se zagrevala voda. Budu}i da su dimenzije rezervoara

dosta precizno utvr|ene, a imaju}i u vidu nivo do koga je mogao biti ispuwen

vodom, moè se zakqu~iti da wegova korisna zapremina nije prelazila 0,5 m³

ili ne{to mawe od 500 l. Radi snabdevawa vodom, koja je u posudama dono{ena

iz cisterni sa filter-bunarima, postojao je, bez sumwe, otvor u temenu svoda,

kome se najverovatnije prilazilo preko neke drvene konstrukcije prislowene

uz spoqno lice ju`nog zida Crkve. Zagrejana para iz ovog rezervoara do prostorije

iznad hipokausta sprovo|ena je kroz zidove kerami~kim cevima, koje su se

zavr{avale kru`nim otvorima na zapadnom, kao i bo~nim zidovima.

Neposredni ulaz u kupatilo sa spoqnog prostora nalazio se u okviru severnog

zida. Na osnovu otkrivenih ostataka bilo je mogu}e da se odredi samo ta-

~an poloàj i {irina ovih vrata, ali ne i wihov nekada{wi izgled. Na izgled

i konstrukciju gorweg dela prostorije nad hipokaustom ukazuju konstruktivni

detaqi u okviru o~uvanih zidova. U uglovima prostorije sa isto~ne i ju`ne

strane nalazili su se pilastri, povezani lukovima od tesanika sige. Sli~ni

lukovi postojali su i u okviru slabije o~uvanih zidova sa zapadne i severne

strane. Konstrukcije ovih lukova ome|avale su povr{inu 2,2 × 2 m, koja je preko

ugaonih pandantifa prelazila u elipsastu, gotovo kru`nu formu, nad kojom

Sl. 70. Malo parno kupatilo –

osnove i preseci sa restitucijom

poru{enih delova

(R = 1 : 100)

Fig. 70. Small steam bath –

ground plans and cross-sections with

the restitution of the ruined sections

(R = 1 : 100)

C

D

E

162

141 Caskey 1999, 175–190; Popovi} 2018,

175–190.


the accurate position and the width of this door, but not its former appearance. The

appearance and the structure of the upper section of the room above the hypocaust

were suggested by structural details within the preserved walls. In the corners of

the room on the east and the south sides, there were pilasters linked by arches made

of tufa ashlars. There were similar arches as well within the more poorly preserved

walls on the west and the north sides. The structures of these arches bordered the surface

area of 2.20 m × 2.00 m which via corner pendentives turned into an ellipsoid,

almost circular form that used to be vaulted. Most likely above that space there was a

shallow dome with a very low drum. Since on account of its position the bath could

not have any other openings, apart from the door, it is prudent to presume that there

used to be two smaller windows between the drum and the base of the dome. The

roof covering over the entire structure of the bath was, judging by all, made of lead.

This would also be suggested by the fact that during the archaeological excavations

there were no roof hollow tiles or stone slabs found in the ruins of this building which

could be used for the covering of the roof.

In the interior of the room above the hypocaust, all the walls were covered by

finely burnished red hydraulic plaster with no traces of stucco decoration. The only

special detail was a vaulted niche within the east wall which undoubtedly served for

the placement of a lamp. As it has been already said, the bath in Novo Brdo’s Castle

did not have a built pool – a bath tub. This was, in fact, a well heated room by the floor

above the hypocaust and by warm steam that was channelled here through ceramic

pipes from the tank with boiling water. In the absence of a built structure for the

taking of bath, a movable wooden bath tub must have been used.

The specific position in relation to the other buildings in the Castle conditioned

the place where the bath was entered. This building could be accessed solely through

a narrow corridor behind the Church which in the section between the apse and the

rampart was only 0.80 m wide. Since there was no built antechamber, it may be presumed

that in front of the entrance into the bath there used to be only a wooden

eave. The furnace site with the relevant anteroom was accessed from the other side,

also using a narrow corridor between the wall of the Church and the South Building

(fig. 71)

Functionally and by its structural assembly, for the time being the bath of the

Castle in Novo Brdo has only close parallels with the known examples of five small

baths in the area around Amalfi in South Italy. 141 Taking into consideration that it

was simplified in terms of the space, the comparisons may be done only with respect

to the central chambers of the said baths. The most important closeness is reflected

in the details of the applied structures. All the examples of the baths from the former

residential complexes in the Amalfi region had a dome above the central room which

was, without any doubt, also the case with the bath of Novo Brdo’s Castle. In addition

to these parallels with the said buildings from South Italy, there are no other

analogies for the building from Novo Brdo on the territory of the Central Balkans

or in the Byzantine regions of the present-day Greece and therefore for the time

being it represents the only known building of this kind on the territory of the

medieval Serbian lands.

The dating of the bath from Novo Brdo to the end of the 14 th century or the

first years of the 15 th century is based on the reliably established chronology of the

construction works in the Castle. As it has been pointed out, the residential buildings


je bilo izvedeno zasvo|avawe. Nad tim prostorom se najverovatnije nalazila

plitka kupola sa veoma niskim tamburom. Budu}i da zbog svog poloàja kupatilo,

osim vrata, nije moglo imati drugih otvora, razlo`no je pretpostaviti

postojawe dva mawa prozora izme|u tambura i baze kupole. Krovni pokriva~ nad

celim zdawem kupatila bilo je, po svemu sude}i, olovo. Na to bi ukazivala i

~iwenica da prilikom arheolo{kih iskopavawa u ru{evinama ove gra|evine

nije bilo krovnih opeka – }eramida, niti kamenih plo~a, koje su mogle sluìti

za pokrivawe krova.

U unutra{wosti prostorije nad hipokaustom svi zidovi su bili prekriveni

fino gla~anim crvenim hidrauli~nim malterom bez tragova {tuko-dekoracije.

Jedini poseban detaq predstavqala je zasvedena ni{a u okviru isto~nog zida,

koja je, bez sumwe, sluìla za postavqawe svetiqke. Kupatilo u novobrdskom

Zamku, kao {to je ve} navedeno, nije imalo zidani bazen – kadu. Bila je to, zapravo,

dobro zagrejana prostorija preko poda nad hipokaustom i toplom parom,

koja je kerami~kim cevima bila dovedena iz rezervoara sa kqu~alom vodom. U

Sl. 71. Malo parno kupatilo –

zami{qeni izgled sa razrezom

Fig. 71. Small steam bath – imagined

appearance with the section cut

164


with the Church and the cisterns were most probably a part of the original concept

for a fortified residential complex built already during the first stage of construction.

If we put aside the church’s narthex that was added later, already at that point in time

these buildings had filled up almost the entire space within the ramparts of the Castle.

For the subsequent additions, the only remaining possibility was in the limited space

between the Church and the South Building. This undoubtedly determined the

modest dimensions of the new bath’s chamber, as well as the unusual access to this

structure. Although it rested against the main residential building, the new bath did

not have a direct communication with it. The entrance on the opposite side with a

narrow access constituted, without any doubt, the only possible, albeit not functional

solution.

The bath in the Castle of Novo Brdo was not used for long. After only several

decades it was destroyed together with the neighbouring buildings. This may have

happened already in 1441 after the Ottoman siege that lasted for several months and

the first temporary conquest of the town. Even if it had survived at the time, it would

have been demolished together with the walls of the neighbouring church right

after the final Ottoman conquest of Novo Brdo in the spring of 1455.

Water Supply Facilities

Along with the residential and sacral buildings, in order to ensure the survival of the

crew and the residents of the Citadel it was necessary to provide sufficient quantities

of water. This need was particularly pronounced during the times of siege, but

it was also a persistent problem in the area that was covered by the fortifications of

Novo Brdo where there were no natural water springs or a possibility to build wells.

During the explorations, at the plane with the original level of the terrain in the

Citadel, two spacious cisterns with filter wells were discovered.

Cistern 1 – It is located dug-in into the rocky ground in the free space between

the Church and the North Building (fig. 72). During the explorations its entire surface

circumference was defined, but no further excavations were conducted, so that

it remained unknown how deeply it was dug in. It may only be presumed that it was

not deeper than 3 m. It covered the surface area of around 25 m². It was built in the

manner that was usual when it came to this type of water supply facility. A dug-in

pit was partially surrounded by a thin wall made with only one face. Over this base,

a layer of clay was applied on the lateral sides and on the bottom, and in the case of

Cistern 1 this layer had the thickness of 12 cm – 15 cm and only in places over 20 cm.

In the central section, a well was made, which in our case had a diameter between

60 cm and 70 cm. After that, the entire space was filled with sand. Originally, over

this sand fill there was a layer of clay, which was in the case of Cistern 1 discovered

only in traces. On the surface, above the enclosure wall of the well, there was a circular

opening for the catching of water, finished with hewn breccia blocks. On the

upper surface, above the sand fill, there were three breccia blocks, arranged in a

sequence, which served, as it has been already said, as the bases for the wooden pillars

of the porch. Above the cistern, in the space between the North Building and the

Church, under a fill of debris and rocks we surveyed a cultural layer, thick between

20 cm and 25 cm. This layer was somewhat more intensive in the very corner between

the rampart and the said building. In this layer, as it has already been pointed out,

along with pottery fragments we also found over 40 stone cannonballs with the dia-


nedostatku zidane konstrukcije za kupawe, bez sumwe, kori{}ena je pokretna

drvena kada.

Specifi~an poloàj u odnosu na druge gra|evine u Zamku uslovio je mesto

ulaza u kupatilo. Ovom zdawu se moglo pri}i iskqu~ivo uskim koridorom iza

Crkve, koji je na delu izme|u apside i bedema bio {irok svega 0,8 m. Budu}i da

nije bilo zidanog predvorja, moè se pretpostaviti da je ispred ulaza u kupatilo

postojala samo drvena nadstre{nica. Loì{tu sa odgovaraju}im pretprostorom

prilazilo se sa druge strane, tako|e uskim koridorom izme|u zida Crkve

i Ju`ne gra|evine (sl. 71).

Funkcionalno i prema svom konstruktivnom sklopu, kupatilo Zamka u

Novom Brdu ima za sada jedine bliske paralele sa poznatim primerima pet

malih kupatila iz oblasti Amalfija u ju`noj Italiji. 141 Budu}i da je bilo

prostorno svedeno, upore|ewa je mogu}e vr{iti samo u odnosu na centralne

odaje pomenutih kupatila. Najzna~ajnija bliskost ogleda se u detaqima primewenih

konstrukcija. Svi primeri kupatila iz nekada{wih rezidencijalnih

kompleksa u regionu Amalfija imali su nad centralnom prostorijom kupolu,

kao {to je to, bez sumwe, bio slu~aj i sa kupatilom novobrdskog Zamka. Osim

ovih paralela sa pomenutim gra|evinama iz ju`ne Italije, za novobrdsko zdawe

analogija nema na podru~ju centralnog Balkana, kao ni u vizantijskim

oblastima dana{we Gr~ke, te za sada predstavqaju jedinu poznatu gra|evinu te

vrste na podru~ju sredwovekovnih srpskih zemaqa.

Datovawe novobrdskog kupatila u kraj 14. ili prve godine 15. veka zasnovano

je na pouzdano utvr|enoj hronologiji gra|ewa u Zamku. Stambene gra|evine

sa Crkvom i cisternama bile su, kao {to je ve} istaknuto, najverovatnije deo

prvobitne zamisli utvr|enog rezidencijalnog kompleksa, podignutog ve} u

prvoj etapi gra|ewa. Ako izuzmemo kasnije podignut narteks Crkve, ovim zdawima

je ve} u to vreme bio popuwen gotovo ~itav prostor u okviru bedema Zamka.

Za pozniju dogradwu jedina preostala mogu}nost bila je na ograni~enom prostoru

izme|u Crkve i Ju`ne gra|evine. To je, bez sumwe, predodredilo skromne

dimenzije nove kupatilske komore, kao i neobi~an prilaz ovom objektu. Iako

je bilo osloweno na glavno stambeno zdawe, novo kupatilo nije imalo sa wim

neposrednu komunikaciju. Ulaz na suprotnoj strani sa uskim prilazom predstavqao

je, nesumwivo, jedino mogu}e, mada nefunkcionalno re{ewe.

Kupatilo u novobrdskom Zamku nije bilo dugo u upotrebi. Posle svega nekoliko

decenija postradalo je zajedno sa susednim gra|evinama. To se moglo dogoditi

ve} 1441. godine posle vi{emese~ne turske opsade i prvog privremenog

zaposedawa grada. Ukoliko je tada i opstalo, ru{eno je zajedno sa zidovima

susedne Crkve odmah posle kona~nog turskog osvajawa Novog Brda u prole}e

1455. godine.

Objekti vodosnabdevawa

Uz stambena i sakralna zdawa za opstanak posade i ìteqa citadele bilo je neophodno

obezbediti dovoqne koli~ine vode. To je posebno dolazilo do izraàja

u vreme opsada, ali je to bio i stalni problem na podru~ju koje je bilo obuhva}eno

novobrdskim fortifikacijama, gde nije bilo prirodnih izvora, niti mogu}-

nosti gra|ewa bunara. Prilikom istraìvawa, u ravni sa prvobitnim nivoom

terena u citadeli otkrivene su dve prostrane cisterne sa filter-bunarima.

141 Caskey 1999, 175–190; Popov} 2018,

175–190.

166


meter between 11 cm and 26 cm. In the area along the rampart, covered with this

cultural layer, we found remains of walls built in stone with mud mortar, which

formed a structure with an almost square ground plan. These were probably the

foundations of a wooden structure that served as an access to the entrance into the

Main Tower which, judging by all, was located at the level of its third storey.

On the basis of the stratigraphic relation between Cistern 1 and the neighbouring

buildings, it could be concluded that its digging in and the construction were

done after the construction of the Church and the North Building, and before the

addition of the narthex the north wall of which partially lies over its edge.

Cistern 2 – It encompasses the entire free space between the rampart with Tower

5, the West Building and the North Building (fig. 73). It was partially dug in into

the rocky ground and was significantly bigger than the previous one. It covered the

surface area of almost 60 m². It was built in the same manner as Cistern 1. Its depth

was not explored, but it may be presumed that it was also not deeper than around

3 m. Within its south half there was a well with the diameter of around 50 cm which

was above the level of the ground finished with breccia ashlars (fig. 74). Above the

sand fill, over its entire surface, originally there used to be a layer of clay, around

10 cm thick, which had remained preserved only in one section towards the North

Building. At the time when the Cistern was being dug in, there were neighbouring

buildings around so that the lower sections of the walls of these buildings, as well as

the face of the rampart, against which it leaned, were covered with layers of clay. Only

on the southeast side of the cistern there was a thin wall over which there was clay.

On that side, there was also an underpinning towards the communication that was

lower than the ground above the cistern. On account of the installation of the cistern,

the earlier plane of the ground was elevated in that area, so that on that occasion

the window of the ground floor room in the North Building was partially filled and a

Sl. 72. Cisterna 1 – op{ti izgled


Fig. 72. Cistern 1 – general appearance



Cisterna 1 – Nalazi se ukopana u stenovitom tlu na slobodnom prostoru

izme|u Crkve i Severne gra|evine (sl. 72). U toku istraìvawa definisan joj

je ceo povr{inski obim, ali daqa iskopavawa nisu vr{ena, tako da je ostalo

nepoznato do koje dubine je bila ukopana. Moè se samo pretpostaviti da nije

bila dubqa od 3 m. Zahvatala je povr{inu od oko 25 m². Gra|ena je na uobi~ajen

na~in kada je u pitawu ova vrsta objekata vodosnabdevawa. Ukopana jama bila

je delom obzidana tankim zidom, gra|enim samo sa jednim licem. Preko ove

podloge nano{en je na bo~ne strane i dno sloj gline, koji je kod Cisterne 1

imao debqinu 12–15 cm, a samo mestimi~no i preko 20 cm. U sredi{wem delu

gra|en je bunar, koji je u na{em slu~aju imao pre~nik izme|u 60 i 70 cm. Ceo

prostor nakon toga je bio zasut peskom. Prvobitno nad ovim nasipom peska postojao

je sloj gline, koji je kod Cisterne 1 otkriven samo u tragovima. Na povr-

{ini, iznad obzi|a bunara nalazi se kru`ni otvor za zahvatawe vode, obra|en

klesanim blokovima bre~e. Na gorwoj povr{ini, iznad nasipa peska nalaze se

tri bloka bre~e, postavqena u nizu, koji su sluìli, kao {to je ve} napred re-

~eno, kao baze za drvene stubove trema. Nad cisternom, na prostoru izme|u Severne

gra|evine i Crkve, ispod nasipa {uta i kamena istraèn je kulturni

sloj debqine 20 do 25 cm, koji je bio ne{to intenzivniji u samom uglu izme|u

bedema i pomenute gra|evine. U ovom sloju, uz ulomke keramike, kao {to je ve}

Sl. 73. Cisterna 2 – op{ti izgled


Fig. 73. Cistern 2 – general appearance


168


a

b

Sl. 74. Cisterna 2:

a) osnova i presek;

b) presek

Fig. 74. Cistern 2:

a) ground plan and the cross-section;

b) cross-section

similar situation happened with the window in the north wall of the West Building,

which was on account of this walled-in and turned into a niche. Above the whole

surface area of the cistern there was a cultural layer 20 cm to 30 cm thick. It was

from this layer that numerous finds of pottery fragments came. They were similar to

the finds in the other layers that originate from the last decade before the Ottoman

conquest of the town and the time when the structures in the Castle were demolished.

This cultural layer was covered with 2 m to 3 m of debris and collapsed rocks. In a period

that could be dated back to the end of the 18 th century or the first decade of the

19 th century, through this debris an access path was dug to the well which on that

occasion had an addition built above it. The old cistern was obviously used again by

the local population, certainly for several decades, which is testified to by numerous

finds of fragments of unglazed jugs and an Ottoman pipe from the 19 th century.

In addition to the above-mentioned buildings and structures in the Castle, we

also discovered remains of the main communication that led from the gate to the

North Building and that was used for the approach to the Church and the other

buildings. Its surface consists of a flattened rock, in places smoothed out by use, the

gaps of which were filled with mortar paving. In some sections, there are also preserved

traces of one to two built steps.

* * *

The Castle that we talked about above constituted the main defence stronghold and

the centre around which the urban structure of Novo Brdo formed. This is the fact

that we need to start from when considering the times when the Castle was being built

and its former primary function. The archaeological explorations did not provide


istaknuto, otkriveno je i preko 40 kamenih topovskih kugli, pre~nika izme|u

11 i 26 cm. Na prostoru uz bedem, zasuti ovim kulturnim slojem, otkriveni su

ostaci zidova, gra|enih kamenom sa blatnim vezivom, koji obrazuju konstrukciju

gotovo kvadratne osnove. U pitawu je verovatno temeq za drvenu konstrukciju

koja je sluìla za prilaz ulazu u Glavnu kulu, koji se, po svemu sude}i, nalazio

u nivou wene tre}e etaè.

Na osnovu stratigrafskog odnosa Cisterne 1 prema susednim objektima

moglo se zakqu~iti da je weno ukopavawe i gra|ewe izvedeno nakon podizawa

Crkve i Severne gra|evine, a pre dogradwe priprate, ~iji severni zid delom

leì preko ruba ove cisterne.

Cisterna 2 – Zahvata ceo slobodan prostor izme|u bedema sa Kulom 5, Zapadne

gra|evine i Severne gra|evine (sl. 73). Ukopana je delom u stenovito tlo i

bila je znatno ve}a od prethodne. Obuhvatala je povr{inu od gotovo 60 m². Gra|ena

je na isti na~in kao i Cisterna 1. Dubina joj nije istraìvana, ali se moè

pretpostaviti da ni ona nije bila dubqa od oko 3 m. U okviru wene ju`ne polovine

nalazio se bunar, pre~nika oko 50 cm, koji je iznad ravni tla bio obra|en

tesanicima bre~e (sl. 74). Iznad nasipa peska na celoj wenoj povr{ini prvobitno

se nalazio sloj gline, debqine oko 10 cm, koji je ostao o~uvan samo na jednom

delu prema Severnoj gra|evini. U vreme ukopavawa Cisterne postojale su

susedne gra|evine, tako da su niì delovi zidova ovih zdawa, kao i lice bedema

na koji se naslawa, bili oblepqeni slojevima gline. Samo sa jugoisto~ne strane

cisterne bio je podignut tanak zid, preko koga je bila glina. Sa te strane

postojao je i podzid prema komunikaciji, koja je bila nià od tla nad cisternom.

Usled ugradwe cisterne, ranija ravan tla na tom prostoru je izdignuta,

tako da je tom prilikom delom zasut prozor prizemne prostorije Severne gra-

|evine, a sli~no je bilo i sa prozorom u severnom zidu Zapadne gra|evine, koji

je usled toga bio zazidan i pretvoren u ni{u. Nad celom povr{inom cisterne

nalazio se kulturni sloj, debqine 20 do 30 cm. Iz ovog sloja poti~u brojni

nalazi ulomaka keramike sli~ni nalazima iz ostalih slojeva, koji poti~u iz

posledwih decenija pred osmansko osvajawe grada i vremena ru{ewa objekata

u Zamku. Ovaj kulturni sloj bio je zasut sa 2 do 3 m {uta i obru{enog kamena.

Kroz ovaj {ut, u jednom razdobqu, koje bi se moglo datovati u kraj 18. ili prve

decenije 19. veka, bio je prokopan prilaz do bunara, koji je tom prilikom nadzidan.

Staru cisternu o~igledno je ponovo koristilo lokalno stanovni{tvo,

sigurno vi{e decenija, o ~emu svedo~e brojni nalazi ulomaka negle|osanih

kr~aga i turske lule iz 19. veka.

Osim pomenutih objekata, u Zamku su otkriveni i ostaci glavne komunikacije,

koja je vodila od kapije prema Severnoj gra|evini i sa koje se prilazilo

Crkvi i drugim zdawima. Wenu povr{inu ~ini zaravwena stena, mestimi~no

ugla~ana tokom kori{}ewa, koja je u raselinama popuwena malternim zastorom.

Na pojedinim deonicama o~uvani su i tragovi jednog do dva zidana stepenika.

* * *

Zamak, o kome je napred bilo re~i, predstavqao je glavno upori{te odbrane i

sredi{te oko koga se obrazovala urbana struktura Novog Brda. To je ~iwenica od

koje treba po}i prilikom razmatrawa vremena gra|ewa Zamka i wegove nekada{we

primarne funkcije. Arheolo{ka istraìvawa nisu pruìla dovoqne i

170


sufficient and quite reliable data as to when the building of this fortified ensemble

started nor when the works were brought to their end. This, however, is suggested by

indirect findings based on the news from historical sources which were mentioned

in the introduction. Taking into account that already in the second decade of the

14 th century Novo Brdo had a significant mining production and an organised market

square, it may be concluded that the urbanisation in this area was well into its

beginning. In those terms, we will not be wrong if we presume that the Castle was

built during the third and the fourth decades of the 14 th century. At that time,

beside this fortified ensemble, the fortified Lower Town was created towards the

west, while towards the east there was a spacious suburb as the main section of

Novo Brdo’s urban structure. The abrupt development of the town and the large

production of precious metals, followed by the founding of the most important

mint of Serbian coins, created a need to set up a powerful defence stronghold in the

newly-founded settlement.

In addition to being in the middle of the defence system of the town, Novo

Brdo’s Castle also constituted a pronounced example of a well-fortified ruler’s or

nobleman’s court. There, within ramparts, there was a two-storey “palace” with one

more residential building (the West and the South Buildings), then a “large hall”

which was entered via a wooden porch. In the middle there was a church which served

as a court chapel. In-between these buildings, the court also included the spacious

cisterns. As the archaeological explorations have shown, it is noticeable that within

the Castle itself there were no auxiliary court’s structures – kitchens, stables, etc.

It may be presumed that together with other accompanying structures required for

the daily life of the residents of the court they used to be in the fortified section of

the town, west of the Castle.

Within the system of the fortifications of Novo Brdo, in addition to its exceptional

importance for the purpose of the defence, this central fortress which we may

call the town’s castle also had, as we have already pointed out above, a primary residential

function, judging by all, as the court of a vojvoda – a governor of the Serbian

rulers and his accompanying services. However, this Castle could also have the function

of the court of Serbian kings, later despots, during their occasional visits to

Novo Brdo. This could refer in particular to the period of the reign of Despot Stefan

Lazarevi} (1389–1427), who seems to have stayed in Novo Brdo often. On those

occasions, it is almost certain, his court stayed at the Castle of Novo Brdo. It is perhaps

precisely this fact, for which admittedly there is not enough data in the preserved

historic materials, that was the reason to add the bath to the Castle. In residential

complexes, built structures intended for body’s hygiene constituted a luxury available

only to the most important representatives of a medieval society. Under the conditions

where there was no running water, preparations of warm baths and organisation

of bathing constituted a very expensive activity.


sasvim pouzdane podatke o tome kada je zapo~eto gra|ewe ove utvr|ene celine,

niti kada su radovi privedeni kraju. Na to, me|utim, ukazuju posredna saznawa

zasnovana na vestima iz istorijskih izvora, o kojima je u uvodnom delu bilo

re~i. Imaju}i u vidu da je Novo Brdo ve} u drugoj deceniji 14. veka imalo zna~ajnu

rudarsku proizvodwu i organizovan trg, moè se zakqu~iti da je urbanizacija

na ovom prostoru ve} uveliko bila u za~etku. U tom smislu ne}emo pogre{iti

ako pretpostavimo da je Zamak gra|en tokom tre}e i ~etvrte decenije 14. veka.

U to vreme uz ovu fortificiranu celinu obrazuje se prema zapadu utvr|eni

Dowi grad, a prema istoku prostrano Podgra|e, kao glavni deo novobrdske urbane

strukture. Nagli razvoj grada i velika produkcija dragocenih metala, a potom

i zasnivawe najzna~ajnije kovnice srpskog novca, ukazivali su na potrebu

za tim da se u novozasnovanoj naseobini formira jako odbrambeno upori{te.

Novobrdski Zamak, osim {to se nalazio u sredi{tu sistema odbrane grada,

predstavqao je izrazit primer dobro utvr|enog vladarskog ili vlasteoskog dvora.

Tu se u okviru bedema nalazila dvoeta`na „palata“ sa jo{ jednom stambenom

zgradom (Zapadna i Ju`na gra|evina), zatim i „velika dvorana“, u koju se ulazilo

preko drvenog trema. U sredi{tu se nalazila Crkva, koja je sluìla kao dvorska

kapela. Izme|u ovih zdawa dvoru su pripadale i prostrane cisterne. Uo~qivo

je, kako su to pokazala arheolo{ka istraìvawa, da u okviru samog Zamka nije

bilo pomo}nih dvorskih zdawa – kuhiwe, {tale i sl. Moè se pretpostaviti da

su se, zajedno sa drugim prate}im objektima neophodnim u svakodnevici ìteqa

dvora, nalazila u utvr|enom delu grada, zapadno od Zamka.

U okviru sistema fortifikacija Novog Brda, ovo centralno utvr|ewe, koje

moèmo nazvati gradskim Zamkom, pored svoje izuzetne va`nosti za odbranu,

imalo je, kao {to smo ve} napred istakli, primarnu rezidencijalnu funkciju,

i to, po svemu sude}i, kao dvor vojvode – namesnika srpskog vladara i wegovih

prate}ih slu`bi. Me|utim, ovaj Zamak mogao je imati i funkciju dvora srpskog

kraqa, kasnije despota, u vreme wihovih povremenih dolazaka u Novo Brdo. To

bi se posebno moglo odnositi na vreme vladavine despota Stefana Lazarevi}a

(1389–1427), koji je izgleda ~esto boravio u Novom Brdu. Wegov dvor je tada,

gotovo sigurno, bio u novobrdskom Zamku. Mo`da je upravo ta ~iwenica, za koju,

istina, nema dovoqno podataka u sa~uvanoj istorijskoj gra|i, i bila povod za

dogradwu kupatila u Zamku. U rezidencijalnim kompleksima zidani objekti za

odràvawe telesne higijene predstavqali su luksuz dostupan samo najzna~ajnijim

predstavnicima sredwovekovnog dru{tva. U uslovima gde nije bilo teku}e

vode, pripreme toplih kupatila i organizovawe kupawa predstavqali su veoma

skupu aktivnost.

172

Lower Town – fortified section

of the town’s settlement

142 As a comparison, the surface area of

the Big Town in Smederevo was ten times

larger, that is, the ramparts there enclosed

an area of around 8 ha.


276–279; Kora} 1954–1955, 266–272;

Pribakovi} 1958, 253–265.

144 Kora} 1954–1955, 270, fig. 37.

ON A BROAD SLOPE WEST OF THE CASTLE THERE WAS A SEPARATE FORTIFIED

part of the urban structure of Novo Brdo known under the name of Lower Town. It

was surrounded by ramparts and reinforced by two corner towers. Its fan-like ground

plan and the size were conditioned, that is, they were adjusted to the existing configuration

of the terrain. Towards the west, the Lower Town was closed by an arcuate

rampart around 180 m long which ended in the corner towers. From these towers

went the ramparts towards the Castle with which they joined thus closing this fortified

space from the northeast and the southeast sides. The Lower Town’s Ramparts

enclosed an area of around 0.80 ha. 142 The access to the Lower Town was located on

the east side where, directly by Tower 2, there used to be the Main Gate (fig. 75).

There is still insufficient knowledge about the fortifications and the interior

space of the Lower Town. The first explorations of a smaller scope were conducted

from 1952 to 1954 and in 1957. During this period, the remains of the Main Gate were

found, the South Corner Tower was partially surveyed and the debris was removed

in a large area next to the Northeast Rampart and the North Corner Tower. 143 Out of

the structures within the Lower Town, only the large cistern not far from the South

Tower and remains of a younger Ottoman building were partially surveyed. 144 The

more recent explorations of a significantly larger scope, carried out in 2016, were

focused on the area of the Northeast Rampart which was surveyed and studied in

its entirety. Taking into account the state of the surveying of the fortifications of

the Lower Town, in the text below we are going to concentrate in more detail on the

findings we collected during these recent explorations, while other parts of this spacious

fortified ensemble will be covered on the basis of the surface observations of

the preserved remains and data collected by the earlier experts.

FORTIFICATIONS OF THE LOWER TOWN

The section of the fortifications of Novo Brdo towards the east includes the North

Rampart with Tower 8, then the barbican – a protechism in front of which there used

173

Doyi grad – utvr]eni deo

gradskog naseqa

NA PROSTRANOJ PADINI ZAPADNO OD ZAMKA NALAZIO SE POSEBAN

utvr|eni deo urbane strukture Novog Brda, poznat pod nazivom Dowi grad. Bio

je opasan bedemima i oja~an dvema ugaonim kulama. Wegova lepezasta osnova i

veli~ina bile su uslovqene, odnosno prilago|ene zate~enoj konfiguraciji terena.

Prema zapadu Dowi grad je zatvarao lu~no povijen bedem, duìne oko 180

m, koji se zavr{avao ugaonim kulama. Od ovih kula pruàli su se bedemi prema

Zamku, sa kojim su se spajali, zatvaraju}i ovaj utvr|eni prostor sa severoisto~ne

i jugoisto~ne strane. Dowogradskim bedemima bio je obuhva}en prostor

povr{ine od oko 0,8 ha. 142 Prilaz Dowem gradu nalazio se sa isto~ne

strane, gde se, neposredno uz Kulu 2 Zamka, nalazila Glavna kapija (sl. 75).

O fortifikacijama i unutra{wem prostoru Doweg grada jo{ uvek se nedovoqno

zna. Prva istraìvawa maweg obima vr{ena su 1952–1954. i 1957. godine.

U tom razdobqu otkriveni su ostaci Glavne kapije, delimi~no istraèna

Ju`na ugaona kula i uklowen {ut na ve}em prostoru uz Severoisto~ni bedem

i Severnu ugaonu kulu. 143 Od objekata u unutra{wosti Doweg grada delimi~no

su istraèni samo velika cisterna nedaleko od Ju`ne kule i ostaci jedne mla-

|e turske gra|evine. 144 Novija istraìvawa, znatno ve}eg obim, obavqena

2016. godine, bila su usmerena na prostor Severoisto~nog bedema, koji je u celosti

istraèn i prou~en. Imaju}i u vidu stawe istraènosti fortifikacija

Doweg grada, u daqem izlagawu detaqno }emo se zadràti na saznawima do

kojih se do{lo u toku ovih novijih istraìvawa, dok }emo ostale delove ove

prostrane fortificirane celine obraditi na osnovu povr{inskih osmatrawa

o~uvanih ostataka i podataka do kojih su do{li raniji istraìva~i.

FORTIFIKACIJE DOWEG GRADA

Deo novobrdskih fortifikacija prema istoku obuhvata Severni bedem sa Kulom

8, zatim predutvr|ewe – Protehizmu, ispred koje se nalazio rov, a sa unutra{we

strane ostatke ~etiri ku}e, koje su bile oslowene na bedem. Istraìvawa su

142 Pore|ewa radi, povr{ina Velikog

grada u Smederevu bila je deset puta ve}a,

odnosno bedemima je bio obuhva}en

prostor od oko 8 ha.


276–279; Kora} 1954–1955, 266–272;

Pribakovi} 1958, 253–265.

144 Kora} 1954–1955, 270, sl. 37.

174


Sl. 75. Utvr|ewa Novog Brda – Zamak i Dowi grad

Fig. 75. Novo Brdo fortifications – Castle and Lower Town


ukqu~ivala uklawawe velikih koli~ina kamena i {uta kojim su fortifikacije

bile zasute, kao i delimi~no pra`wewe rova. Sa unutra{we strane istraèni

su ostaci Kule 8 i objekata uz bedem do ravni podova, a na pojedinim deonicama

i do prvobitne ravni tla (sl. 76–77).

Severoisto~ni bedem sa Kulom 8, predzi|em – Protehizmom i rovom

Ostaci bedema koji je zatvarao prostor Doweg grada prema istoku istraèni su

u celini. Ovaj bedem se pruà u duìnu oko 60 m, od spoqnog obzi|a Kule 6 u

okviru Zamka, pa do ugaone Kule 8, na spoju sa Zapadnim bedemom Doweg grada.

Celom duìnom bedem je zasnovan na zate~enom stenovitom tlu. Samo na pojedinim

deonicama, gde su postojale raseline stena, imao je plitko ukopan temeq.

Gra|en je na isti na~in kao i druge novobrdske fortifikacije, lomqenim pritesanim

kamenom u nepravilnom slogu. Debqina mu nije sasvim ujedna~ena i

uglavnom iznosi 4–4,4 m, dok na jednom delu doseè i do 4,8 m. U okviru bedema,

bliè Kuli 8, na poloàju koji je bio prilago|en zate~enoj konfiguraciji

terena, nalazila se poterna, odnosno kapija koja je vodila prema predutvr|ewu


Doweg grada sa Protehizmom

Fig. 76. North-east rampart of

the Lower Town with the Protechism

176


to be a moat and on the interior side the remains of four houses that used to rest

against the rampart. The surveying included removal of large quantities of rocks and

debris that covered the fortifications, as well as partial emptying of the moat. On

the interior side, we explored the remains of Tower 8 and the structures along the

rampart down to the level of floors and in some sections even to the original plane

of the ground (fig. 76–77).


Doweg grada posle arheolo{kih

iskopavawa 2016

Fig. 77. North-east rampart

of the Lower Town after

archaeological excavations in 2016

Northeast Rampart with Tower 8,

the antemural – the Protechism and the moat

The remains of the rampart that closed off the space of the Lower Town towards the

east were explored in their entirety. This rampart extends over the length of around

60 m, from the external enclosure wall of Tower 6 within the Castle to the Corner

Tower 8, at the joint with the West Rampart of the Lower Town. Along its entire

length, the rampart is founded on the existing rocky ground. Only in some sections,

where there were gaps in the rocks, it had a shallowly dug-in foundation. It was

built in the same manner as the other fortifications of Novo Brdo, using broken

hewn stone laid in an irregular bond. Its thickness is not quite even and it is mostly


– Protehizmi. Weni ostaci, o~uvani u zidnoj masi bedema – prag sa otiscima

dovratnika portala, bo~ne strane, skromni ostatak svodne obloge – omogu}ili

su u toku istraìvawa da joj se sagleda nekada{wi izgled. Prema dimenzijama

i na~inu gradwe – {irina portala 1,02 m, visina 2,23 m, teme svoda 3,57 m –

bila je gotovo podudarna sa kapijom Zamka, {to je nakon istraìvawa pruàlo

pouzdane podatke za izradu projekta wene celovite rekonstrukcije.

Ju`ni kraj bedema, kao {to je ve} re~eno, bio je povezan sa spoqnim bedemom

Zamka izme|u Kula 5 i 6. Me|usobna veza ova dva bedema za sada jo{ uvek

nije u potpunosti jasna, budu}i da su istraìvawa u sondi IV/2016, usled naglog

prekida radova, ostala nezavr{ena. Raniju pretpostavku da se Severni bedem

naslawao na eskarpu spoqnog bedema, te da, stoga, predstavqa pozniju gradwu,

rezultati dosada{wih parcijalnih istraìvawa nisu potvrdili. Kako

sada izgleda, zidane strukture oba bedema su u gra|evinskoj vezi i deluju kao

istovremena gradwa.

Severni kraj bedema zavr{ava se ugaonom Kulom 8, gde se spaja sa susednim

Zapadnim bedemom. Prilikom arheolo{kih istraìvawa na ovom prostoru je

uo~eno da su u toku gradwe ovog dela fortifikacija izvr{ene izmene u odnosu

na izvornu zamisao. Naime, prvobitno na ovom mestu nije bila predvi|ena

ugaona kula, ve} je Severni bedem lu~no skretao i spajao je sa Zapadnim bedemom.

U toku samog procesa gra|ewa, kada su oba ova zidna platna bila podignuta do

visine od oko 3 m, promewena je prvobitna zamisao i uobli~ena je ugaona kula.

U tom smislu dogra|ena je severozapadna bo~na strana nove kule, koja je do pomenute

visine bila prislowena uz ve} izgra|eno lice bedema da bi iznad te

visine bila povezana sa bedemom i jednovremeno gra|ena (sl. 78–79).

Osim ove izmene, koja se moè smatrati prvobitnom etapom gra|ewa, na

o~uvanim ostacima Severnog bedema uo~ava se jo{ jedna mla|a etapa gra|ewa,

odnosno wegovo nadzi|ivawe iznad prvobitne {etne staze. Izvorna visina bedema

nigde nije o~uvana, ali se posredno moè dosta pouzdano utvrditi, budu}i

da je na pojedinim delovima uo~qiva linija nadzi|ivawa. Sude}i prema ovim

tragovima, prvobitna visina bedema, gledano iz Doweg grada, mogla je iznositi

izme|u 4 i 6 m, {to je bilo u zavisnosti od zate~ene konfiguracije stenovitog

tla. U tom smislu, bedem je mawu visinu, izgleda, imao u svom ju`nom delu, dok

je deonica bedema izme|u poterne i Kule 8 bila znatno vi{a. Va`no je primetiti

da su sada postoje}e zidne mase bedema o~uvane pribli`no do tih visina.

Ukoliko se ima u vidu da se iznad ravni {etne staze nalazilo kruni{te sa zupcima,

ukupna visina Severoisto~nog bedema u vreme gra|ewa iznosila je 6 do

8 m. U mla|oj fazi bedem je nadgra|en, odnosno pove}ana mu je visina. Ostaci

ove nadgradwe su samo mestimi~no o~uvani, i to uglavnom bliè ju`nom kraju

bedema. Zahvaquju}i nekim fotografijama iz sredine pro{log veka, kada su

ostaci mla|e faze jo{ uvek bili znatno boqe o~uvani, moè se pretpostaviti

da je bedem bio nadgra|en najmawe za 2,5 m.

Ugaona Kula 8, koja se, kao {to smo istakli, moè smatrati ostvarewem

prve etape gra|ewa novobrdskih fortifikacija, pripada tipu uvu~enih kula,

koje ne izlaze izvan ravni bedema (sl. 80–81). Wen oblik osnove uslovili su

ranije zasnovani delovi bedema sa lu~no modelovanim severnim uglom na me|usobnom

spoju. Debqina tih strana kule na spoqnom uglu bedemske ograde kre}e

se izme|u 4,5 i 4,8 m, dok je {irina drugog bo~nog zida koji ulazi u braweni

178


4.00 m – 4.40 m, while in one section it reaches even 4.80 m. Within the rampart,

closer to Tower 8, at a position that was adjusted to the encountered configuration

of the terrain, there used to be a sally port, that is, a gate that led towards the barbican

– the protechism. Its remains, preserved in the wall mass of the rampart – the

threshold with impressions of the portal’s jambs, lateral sides, and a modest remain

of the vault coating – enabled us to grasp its former appearance during the explorations.

According to the dimensions and the manner of construction – width of the

portal 1.02 m, height 2.23 m, and the crown of the vault 3.57 m – it was almost

identical to the gate of the Castle, which after the explorations provided reliable

data for the development of the design for its overall reconstruction.

As it has already been said, the south end of the rampart was linked with the

External rampart of the Castle between Towers 5 and 6. The mutual connection

between these two ramparts is not entirely clear for the time being, taking into consideration

that the surveying in probe 4/2016 remained unfinished owing to an

abrupt cessation of the works. The earlier supposition that the North Rampart leaned

against the scarp of the External rampart and that therefore it constitutes a laterdate

construction was not confirmed by the results of the partial surveying conducted

so far. As it seems, the wall structures of both ramparts have a constructional

connection and they seem as simultaneous construction.

The north end of the rampart ends with corner Tower 8 where it joins the

neighbouring West Rampart. During the archaeological surveying in this area, it was

observed that during the construction of this segment of the fortifications some

modifications had been introduced in comparison to the original concept. Namely,

originally no corner tower was planned in this place, but rather the North Rampart



Doweg grada, unutra{wi izgled –

postoje}e stawe sa rekonstrukcijom

(R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 78. North-east rampart of t

he Lower Town, interior appearance –

current state with the reconstruction

(R = 1 : 200)

Sl. 79. Presek kroz Severoisto~ni bedem, Protehizmu i rov (R = 1 : 200)

Fig. 79. The cross-section through the North-east rampart, Protechism and ditch

(R = 1 : 200)

180

145 The threshold of the sally port in

the Lower Town is located at the absolute

elevation level of 1087.


turned arcuately and joined the West Rampart. During the construction process,

when both of these wall curtains had been built up to the height of around 3 m, the

original concept was changed and the corner tower was made. In those terms, the

northwest lateral side of the new tower was added and it was pressed against the

already built face of the rampart up to the said height and above that height they

were linked with the rampart and built in parallel (fig. 78–79).

Apart from this modification, that can be considered the original construction

phase, on the preserved remains of the North Rampart it is possible to notice yet

another younger construction phase, that is, its additional building above the original

wall walk. The primary height of the rampart has not been preserved in any of

sections, but it is possible to establish it indirectly rather reliably since in some sections

there is a discernible line of this constructional addition. Judging by these

traces, the original height if observed from the Lower Town may have been between

4 m and 6 m which depended on the existing configuration of the rocky ground. In

those terms, it seems that the rampart had a lower height in its south section, while

the segment of the rampart between the sally port and Tower 8 was significantly

higher. It is important to point out that the wall masses of the ramparts that exist

now have been preserved approximately to these heights. If we take into consideration

that above the level of the wall walk there used to be a crenellated top, the total

height of the Northeast Rampart at the time when it was built was 6 m to 8 m. In

the younger phase, the rampart had additions built, that is, its height was increased.

The remains of these constructional additions have been preserved only sporadically

and mostly closer to the south end of the rampart. Judging by some photographs from

the middle of the previous century, when the remains of the younger phase were

still significantly better preserved, it may be presumed that the rampart was additionally

built by at least 2.50 metres.

The corner Tower 8 which, as we have pointed out, may be considered the creation

of the first stage of the construction of Novo Brdo’s fortifications belongs to

the type of indented towers that do not leave the plane of the rampart (fig. 80–81).

The shape of its ground plan was conditioned by the earlier founded parts of the

rampart with arcuately modelled north corner on the mutual joint. The thickness

of those sides of the tower on the exterior corner of the rampart wall goes between

4.50 m and 4.80 m, while the thickness of the other lateral wall that enters into the

defended scope of the Lower Town is around 2 metres. Similar to the neighbouring

ramparts, the tower was also built using broken stone, while the corners of its lateral

side, like the corner above the West Rampart, were finished using breccia ashlars.

The interior space of the tower, which has a rectangular ground plan and covers the

surface area of around 20 m², was divided along the vertical line with inter-floor

structures. In the walls there are preserved remains of the bearings for beams at the

level of the first and the second inter-floor structures which determine the height

of the storeys of around 3.00 m (fig. 82). When observed as a whole, Tower 8 was

founded on the existing rock ridges that slope towards the north which also caused

different depth of the foundations. After the completion of the construction, the level

of the floor in the tower was flattened using a sand layer up to the level of – 1.80 m,

measured in relation to the threshold of the sally port. 145 In the central part of the

floor, there is a massive base for a wooden pillar – a support for the girder of the interfloor

structure. Under the plane of the floor we observed foundation construction


okvir Doweg grada oko 2 m. Kao i susedni bedemi, kula je bila gra|ena lomqenim

kamenom, dok su joj uglovi bo~ne strane, kao i ugao nad Zapadnim bedemom,

obra|eni tesanicima bre~e. Unutra{wi prostor kule, pravougaone osnove, povr{ine

oko 20 m², bio je po vertikali izdeqen drvenim me|uspratnim konstrukcijama.

U zidovima su o~uvani ostaci leì{ta greda u ravni prve i druge

me|uspratne konstrukcije, koja odre|uju visinu etaà, od oko 3 m (sl. 82).

Kula 8, posmatrana u celini, bila je zasnovana na zate~enim grebenima stena,

koje su u padu prema severu, {to je uslovilo i razli~itu dubinu temeqa. Posle

zavr{ene gradwe nivo poda u kuli je izravnat slojem peska do kote -1,8 mereno

Sl. 80. Kula 8 – osnove i presek

i profil arheolo{kih slojeva

(R = 1 : 100)

Fig. 80. Tower 8 – ground plans and

the cross-section and the profile of

the archaeological layers (R = 1 : 100)

182


that was not surveyed to the bottom within the interior of the tower. On the northwest

lateral side of the tower, the foundation starts at -2.00 m to -2.20 m and it could

be estimated that it was not deeper than -3.00 m. On the exterior side, the front of

the tower was founded on a rock at the level of -5.50 m.

Interior of Tower 8

When surveying the interior space of the tower, above the plane of the floor, we discovered

a powerful cultural layer of an uneven thickness which filled the ground

floor of the tower almost up to the middle of its height (fig. 80a–b). Towards the

northeast lateral side, the upper surface of this layer reaches in places even the level

of +0.40 m, while on the opposite side it is lower than -0.20 m. Above these levels

in the entire interior space of the tower there used to be a layer of debris, 1.50 m to

2.00 m thick, which was created during the centuries-long collapsing. The level and

the quantity of the debris in the tower used to be significantly bigger, but the debris

was partially removed during the 1953–54 works.

The cultural layer in the tower, as it has already been pointed out, comes mostly

from the period before the Ottoman conquest of the town in 1455 and it may be followed

from the plane of the floor, at the level of -1.80 m to the level of -0.20 m and

in places up to +10 m. Above that surface there is a relatively thin layer formed during

the period of the Ottoman rule and its thickness mostly does not exceed 30 cm.

The medieval cultural layer seemed rather homogenous, without clear traces of

layering. It consisted of brown loose soil mixed with pebbles and in places somewhat

bigger stones, then with rare fragments of thin bricks and traces of charred wood.

We also sporadically noticed interbeds of stone with mortar debris in which there

were no archaeological finds. The layers of brown soil also contained numerous fragments

of pottery vessels, then several iron wedges, rare other metal finds and a lot

of animal bones. We got an impression that soon after its construction the space in the

tower was filled and started to be used as a place for dumping waste. It remains an

open question whether the ground floor was filled on purpose in order to strengthen

its structure, as was the case with some of the towers in the Castle, or if this was a

part of the process of the creation of the cultural layer in one of the lowest spaces

of the Lower Town.

The space in front of Tower, towards the interior of the Lower Town, was only

partially surveyed. There, in the lowest layer, we discovered remains of a wall preserved

only at the height of one row of stones which extended from the base of the

central wooden pillar of the tower further towards the east, with the west-east orientation.

It was revealed with the length of only 2.10 m. It had the width of around

0.40 m and was made of stone with mud mortar of red greasy clay. The wall had a

clearly defined face only towards the south and from here a mortar floor base extended,

at the level of -1.66 m, which lay on top of the substructure made stone slabs.

Above the floor there was a layer of intensive soot, 2–3 cm thick, in which there

were no archaeological finds. These are, judging by all, remains of a house made of

wood above stone socle. Taking into consideration that the level of the floor was

almost at the same plane with the floor of the tower, this house was probably built

soon after the construction of the Lower Town’s fortifications. Owing to the partial

surveying, it remains an open question what the mutual relation between this house

and Tower 8 into the ground floor of which in protruded used to be.


u odnosu na prag poterne. 145 Na sredi{wem delu poda nalazi se masivna baza za

drveni stub – oslonac za podvlaku me|uspratne konstrukcije. Ispod ravni poda

uo~eno je temeqno zidawe, koje u unutra{wosti kule nije istraìvano do dna.

Na severozapadnoj bo~noj strani kule temeq po~iwe na -2 do -2,2 m i moglo bi

se proceniti da nije bio dubqi od -3 m. Sa spoqne strane front kule bio je

utemeqen na steni na koti -5,5 m.

Unutra{wost Kule 8

Prilikom istraìvawa unutra{weg prostora kule, iznad ravni poda, otkriven

je mo}an kulturni sloj, neujedna~ene debqine, kojim je gotovo do polovine visine

bila zasuta prizemna etaà kule (sl. 80b). Prema severoisto~noj bo~noj

strani, gorwa povr{ina ovog sloja doseè mestimi~no i do kote 0,4, dok je sa

suprotne strane nià od -0,2 m. Iznad ovih kota u celom unutra{wem prostoru

kule nalazio se sloj {uta, debqine od 1,0 do 2 m, koji se obrazovao tokom vi{evekovnog

obru{avawa. Nivo i koli~ina {uta u kuli bili su ranije znatno ve}i,

ali je tokom radova 1953–1954. godine {ut delimi~no uklowen.

Kulturni sloj u kuli, kao {to je ve} ranije istaknuto, najve}im delom poti~e

iz razdobqa pre turskog osvajawa grada 1455. godine i prati se od ravni

poda, na koti -1,8, pa do nivoa -0,2, a mestimi~no do +10 m. Iznad te povr{ine

konstatovan je relativno tanak sloj, obrazovan tokom razdobqa turske vladavine,

a wegova debqina uglavnom ne prelazi 30 cm.

Sredwovekovni kulturni sloj delovao je dosta homogeno, bez jasnijih tragova

naslojavawa. Sastojao se od mrke rastresite zemqe pome{ane sa sitnijim, a

mestimi~no i krupnijim kamenom, zatim retkim ulomcima tankih opeka i tragovima

ugqenisanog drveta. Mestimi~no su uo~eni i proslojci kamena sa malternim

{utom, u kojima nije bilo arheolo{kih nalaza. Iz slojeva mrke zemqe

poti~u brojni ulomci kerami~kih posuda, zatim vi{e gvozdenih klinova, retki

Sl. 81. Kula 8 sa Ku}om 1 –

unutra{wa strana

u toku radova 2016

Fig. 81. Tower 8 with House 1 –

interior side during works in 2016

Sl. 82. Kula 8 –

prizemna etaà posle iskopavawa

Fig. 82. Tower 8 –

ground floor after the excavations

145 Prag poterne u Dowem gradu

nalazi se na apsolutnoj koti 1087.

184


Northeast Antemural – the Protechism

In front of the North Rampart, as the front line of the defence, there used to be a

Protechism which continued further towards the space in front of the West Rampart

of the Lower Town (fig. 83–84). The interior of the Protechism was of an uneven

width. The widest section, over 10 m, was at the very south end, in front of the

External rampart of Tower 6, but further towards the north near the Sally Port this

space was brought down to only 2 metres. In the extension, around Tower 8 and

further on, the Protechism had mostly a constant width of around 2.50 m. It used

to have a massive rampart that was founded on the edge of rocky ridges, towards the

moat. In the south section, where the Protechism had greater width, the thickness

of the rampart went around 3.00 m, while further towards the north, around Tower

8, the rampart had an even width of 2.40 m. It was built in the same way as the rest

Sl. 83. Protehizma ispred

Severoisto~nog bedema

u toku radova 2016

Fig. 83. Protechismin front of

the North-East Rampart,

during the works in 2016


drugi metalni nalazi i dosta ìvotiwskih kostiju. Ima se utisak da je prostor

u kuli ubrzo posle gra|ewa nasipan i da je po~eo da se koristi kao otpadni

prostor. Otvoreno je pitawe da li je prizemna etaà namerno zasipana u

ciqu oja~avawa wene strukture, kao {to je to bio slu~aj sa nekim kulama u Zamku,

ili je to bio deo procesa obrazovawa kulturnog sloja na jednom od najniìh

prostora Doweg grada.

Prostor ispred kule prema unutra{wosti Doweg grada samo je delimi~no

istraèn. Tu su u najnièm sloju otkriveni ostaci zida, o~uvanog samo u visini

jednog reda kamena. Zid se pruào od baze centralnog direka kule daqe prema

istoku, sa orijentacijom zapad–istok. Otkriven je u duìni od svega 2,1 m.

Imao je {irinu oko 0,4 m i bio je gra|en kamenom sa blatnim vezivom crvene

masne gline. Zid je samo prema jugu imao jasno definisano lice, od koga se daqe

pruàla malterna podnica, na koti -1,66 m, koja je leàla na supstrukciji od

kamenih plo~a. Nad podom se nalazio sloj intenzivne gari, debqine 2–3 cm, u

kojoj nije bilo arheolo{kih nalaza. U pitawu su, po svemu sude}i, ostaci ku}e,

gra|ene od drveta nad kamenim soklom. Budu}i da je nivo poda bio gotovo u istoj

ravni sa podom kule, ova ku}a je verovatno bila podignuta ubrzo nakon izgradwe

dowogradskih fortifikacija. Usled parcijalne istraènosti ostaje otvoreno

pitawe o me|usobnom odnosu ove ku}e i Kule 8, u ~iji je prizemni deo delimi~no

zalazila.

Severoisto~no predzi|e – Protehizma

Ispred Severnog bedema kao predwa linija odbrane nalazila se Protehizma,

koja se nastavqala daqe i na prostor ispred Zapadnog bedema Doweg grada (sl.

83–84). Unutra{wost Protehizme bila je nejednake {irine. Naj{iri deo, od

preko 10 m, bio je na samom ju`nom kraju, pred spoqnim bedemom Kule 6, da bi

daqe prema severu, kod poterne, ovaj prostor bio sveden na svega 2 m. U produètku,

oko Kule 8 i daqe, Protehizma je uglavnom bila konstantne {irine od oko

2,5 m. Imala je masivan bedem, koji je bio zasnovan na rubu stenovitih grebena,

prema rovu. U ju`nom delu, gde je Protehizma bila ve}e {irine, debqina bedema

se kretala oko 3 m, dok je daqe ka severu, oko Kule 8, bedem imao ujedna~enu

Sl. 84. Kula 8 – spoqna strana

sa bedemom Protehizme

Fig. 84. Tower 8 – exterior side

with the Protechism rampart

Sl. 85. Kapija Protehizme

iz mla|e faze

Fig. 85. Protechism gate

from the younger phase

186

Sl. 86. Poterna u Severoisto~nom

bedemu, osnova presek i izgledi –

projekt rekonstrukcije

Fig. 86. Sally Portin the

North-East Rampart, ground plan

the cross-section and appearances –

the reconstruction project


of the fortifications and by the building material used and the manner of construction

it does not differ from them. It was founded on a rocky ground that had not

been particularly prepared for the foundation of the rampart. This was the reason

why the exterior face, predominantly founded on sloping ridges, had mostly collapsed,

which also caused the caving in of the entire wall curtain of the Protechism. In

the south section, where the rampart widens, its remains have been preserved up to

2 m in height at the most. Further towards the north it is possible to follow mostly

the interior face of the rampart with the wall mass that does not exceed the height

of 1 metre, while the exterior face has been preserved only sporadically, at the height

of one to two rows of stones. Within the exterior face of the rampart towards the

moat, we found traces on the rock that would suggest that there used to be a small

triangular tower. This presumed tower was located approximately in the middle of

the length of the rampart.

The south end of the Protechism rampart leaned against the oblique stone scarp

of the external rampart in front of Tower 6, but without mutual constructional link.

On the opposite end, along the direction in which the rampart around Tower 8 extends,

a later-date modification was observed. Namely, the original route of this

rampart went further parallel to the West Rampart, at the distance from 2.50 m to

3.00 m, where there are only preserved traces on the rock and these continue further

into the unsurveyed space. In the section in front of Tower 8, where the

revealed remains were better preserved, we noticed that the space of the Protechism

was partitioned during some younger phase (fig. 85). In this partitioning wall, resting

against the front of the tower, which was of the same thickness as the rampart

(2.20 m), there are remains of a gate, 1.10 m wide. It was made solely using broken

hewn stone, without separately carved portal and it used to have a wooden threshold.

Because of this partitioning, the original section of the rampart in front of the west

wall curtain was neglected and probably also partially dismantled. On the same

occasion, the remaining fortifications of the Protechism from Tower 8 towards the

south were probably reconstructed. Regardless of this partitioning and the neglecting

of the section of the former external fortifications, the communication along

the foot of the West Rampart certainly continued to be in function. This was the


Sl. 87. Poterna

u Severoisto~nom bedemu

posle delimi~ne obnove 2016

Fig. 87. Sally Portin

the North-East Rampart,

after a partial reconstruction in 2016

{irinu od 2,4 m. Bio je gra|en na isti na~in kao i ostale fortifikacije, od

kojih se prema upotrebqenoj gra|i i na~inu zidawa ne razlikuje. Zasnovan je na

stenovitom tlu, koje nije bilo posebno pripremqeno za utemeqewe bedema. To

je bio i razlog {to je spoqno lice, uglavnom zasnovano na kosim grebenima,

ve}im delom obru{eno, a {to je tako|e prouzrokovalo i uru{avawe celog zidnog

platna Protehizme. Na ju`nom delu, gde je bedem {iri, o~uvani su wegovi

ostaci najvi{e do 2 m visine. Daqe ka severu uglavnom se prati unutra{we

lice bedema za zidnom masom, koja ne prelazi visinu od 1 m, dok je spoqno lice

samo mestimi~no sa~uvano, i to u visini jednog do dva reda kamena. U okviru

spoqnog lica bedema prema rovu otkriveni su na steni tragovi koji bi ukazivali

na postojawe jedne male trougaone kule. Ova pretpostavqena kula nalazila

se pribli`no na sredini duìne bedema.

Ju`ni krak bedema Protehizme oslawao se na kosu kamenu eskarpu spoqnog

bedema ispred Kule 6, ali bez me|usobne gra|evinske veze. Na suprotnom kraju,

na pravcu pruàwa bedema oko Kule 8, uo~ena je jedna poznija prepravka.

Naime, prvobitna trasa ovog bedema pruàla se daqe paralelno sa Zapadnim

bedemom, a na rastojawu od 2,5 do 3 m, gde su mu o~uvani samo tragovi na steni,

koji zalaze daqe u neistraèn prostor. Na delu ispred Kule 8, gde su otkriveni

ostaci boqe o~uvani, uo~eno je da je prostor Protehizme u jednoj mla|oj fazi

pregra|en (sl. 85). U tom pregradnom zidu, oslowenom na ~elo kule, koji je

bio iste debqine kao i bedem (2,2 m), nalaze se ostaci kapije, {irine 1,1 m.

Kapija je bila gra|ena iskqu~ivo lomqenim pritesanim kamenom, bez posebno

klesanog portala i imala je drveni prag. Usled ove pregradwe zanemaren je,

a verovatno i delom razgra|en, prvobitni deo bedema ispred zapadnog zidnog

platna. Istom prilikom preostale fortifikacije Protehizme od Kule 8 ka

188


way to approach the new gate of the Protechism which also constituted the only

exterior entrance into this part of the fortress. Furthermore, between the rampart

and Tower 8 this defended road led to the Sally Port which, judging by all, had the

function of the auxiliary entrance into the Lower Town (fig. 86–87).

The area of the Protechism was mostly surveyed down to the former plane of

the ground. In the south section of this space there was practically no cultural layer

to speak of. Only sporadically, mixed with debris, there were rare finds and these were

solely medieval pottery. As opposed to the south section, in the area of the Protechism

between the Sally Port and the added gate, as it has already been pointed

out, a 20 m to 30 cm thick cultural layer found under the debris was surveyed and

it contained a lot of pottery fragments and numerous animal bones.

Northeast Moat

Along the entire length in front of the Protechism rampart, there used to be the

main fortress moat which was found almost completely filled with toppled stones

and debris. The south end of the moat, as well as the section in front of Tower 8 were

cleared from the debris and partially surveyed, while the central section approaching

the Sally Port has remained covered in debris in order to allow the access for

the conservation and restoration works on the Northeast Rampart that are planned

to be conducted. The south end of the moat was cleared and survey over the length

of around 30 metres and thus its western edge over which the Protechism rampart

had been founded was revealed in its entirety (fig. 88). The opposite, east side of

the moat is only sporadically defined since it goes under the temporary access road

to the South Gate. In this section, the bottom of the moat where the debris mixes

with a cultural layer was not surveyed either. The surveyed south section of the

moat had the approximate width between 8 m and 11 m. It was mostly cut into the

rocks which were on the west side, under the Protechism rampart, chiselled almost

vertically. We got an impression that in addition to the primary defensive role the

digging up of this moat also served its function as a quarry from where the stone

was obtained and built into the new fortifications. The depth of the moat on the

west side, measured from the foot of the rampart down the rock cliffs may have

originally been 6 m to 7 m. The main section of the south part of the moat ends in

the rocky cliffs which were approximately at the same level with the scarp on the

north side of the external rampart in front of Tower 6. In that section, in the form

of a very much narrowed continuation, the moat turns towards the east, as it has

been already stated, and cuts through the direction of the former access communication

towards the complex of the main gate of the Lower Town. Here it is possible

to notice that the rocks were cut through at the width not more than 3 metres. That

section of the moat towards the east, the beginning of which may be clearly observed,

used to have the depth of over 3.00 m. The moat was not surveyed any further since

the current temporary communication passes there.

On the north side the moat was surveyed in the section where it went around

Tower 8. Here too the west edge of the moat is cut into the rocks above which the

Protochism rampart was founded. On account of the configuration of the terrain,

the moat had a somewhat smaller depth, less than 3.00 m, while its width went

between 6 m and 8 m. In the section near Tower 8, where the west end of the moat

starts, the opposite side of the moat was also clearly noticed. In this section, above


jugu bile su, verovatno, obnovqene. Bez obzira na ovu pregradwu, kao i zanemarivawe

dela ranijih spoqnih fortifikacija, komunikacija uz podno`je Zapadnog

bedema sigurno je i daqe ostala u funkciji. Tim putem se prilazilo novoj

kapiji Protehizme, koja je predstavqala i jedini spoqni ulaz u ovaj deo utvr|ewa.

Daqe, izme|u bedema i Kule 8 ovaj braweni put vodio je do poterne, koja je,

po svemu sude}i, imala i funkciju pomo}nog ulaza u Dowi grad (sl. 86–87).

Prostor Protehizme najve}im delom je istraèn do nekada{we ravni tla.

U ju`nom delu ovog prostora prakti~no nije ni postojao kulturni sloj. Samo

mestimi~no, izme{ano sa {utom, bilo je retkih nalaza, i to iskqu~ivo sredwovekovne

keramike. Za razliku od ju`nog, u delu Protehizme izme|u poterne

i dogra|ene kapije, kao {to je ve} istaknuto, ispod {uta je istraèn kulturni

sloj, debqine 20 do 30 cm, sa dosta fragmenata keramike i brojnim ìvotiwskim

kostima.

Severoisto~ni rov

Celom duìnom ispred bedema Protehizme nalazio se glavni tvr|avski rov,

koji je zate~en, gotovo u celosti, zasut obru{enim kamenom i {utom. O~i{}en

je od {uta i delimi~no istraèn ju`ni krak rova, kao i deo ispred Kule 8, dok

je sredi{wi deo na prilazu poterni za sada ostao zasut {utom, da bi se omogu}io

prilaz za konzervatorsko-restauratorske radove na Severoisto~nom bedemu,

koji su u planu. Ju`ni krak rova o~i{}en je i istraèn u duìni od oko 30 m,

gde mu je u celosti otkriven zapadni rub, nad kojim je utemeqen bedem Protehizme

(sl. 88). Suprotna, isto~na strana rova samo je mestimi~no definisana,

po{to zalazi pod privremeni pristupni put ka Ju`noj kapiji. Na ovom delu

nije istraèno ni dno rova, gde se sa {utom me{a i kulturni sloj. Istraèn

ju`ni deo rova imao je pribli`no {irinu izme|u 8 i 11 m. Ve}im delom bio

je use~en u stene, koje su sa zapadne strane, ispod bedema Protehizme, bile gotovo

okomito klesane. Ima se utisak da je prokopavawe ovog rova, osim primarne

odbrambene uloge, imalo i funkciju kamenoloma, odakle je kamen va|en i ugra-

|ivan u nove fortifikacije. Dubina rova sa zapadne strane, merena od podno`ja

bedema niz litice stena, prvobitno je mogla iznositi 6 do 7 m. Glavni deo

ju`nog kraka rova zavr{ava se stenovitim liticama, koje su pribli`no bile u

ravni sa eskarpom severne strane spoqnog bedema pred Kulom 6. Na tom delu,

u vidu jako suènog nastavka, rov skre}e prema istoku, kao {to je ve} navedeno,

i preseca pravac nekada{we pristupne komunikacije ka kompleksu glavne kapije

Doweg grada. Ovde se uo~ava da su bile prese~ene stene u {irini ne ve}oj

od 3 m. Prema istoku taj deo rova, ~iji se po~etak jasno sagledava, imao je dubinu

preko 3 m. Daqe, rov nije istraìvan, budu}i da tu prolazi sada{wa privremena

komunikacija.

Sa severne strane rov je istraèn na delu gde je obilazio Kulu 8. I ovde je

zapadni rub rova use~en u stene nad kojima je utemeqen bedem Protehizme.

Usled konfiguracije terena, rov je ovde imao ne{to mawu dubinu, nepuna 3 m,

dok mu se {irina kretala izme|u 6 i 8 m. Na delu kod Kule 8 gde po~iwe zapadni

kraj rova jasno je uo~ena i suprotna strana rova. Tu se nad use~enim stenama

nalaze ostaci zemqanog bedema, ~ija o~uvana visina sada ne prelazi 1 m. Trasa

ovog zemqanog bedema uo~qiva je celom duìnom spoqne strane rova ispred

Zapadnog bedema.

190


the cut-in rocks, there are remains of an earthen rampart the preserved height of

which does not exceed one metre nowadays. The route of this earthen rampart is

noticeable along the entire length of the exterior side of the moat in front of the

West Rampart.

There were practically no archaeological finds in the fill found in the moat. In

the debris found in the south end of the moat, among the collapsed building materials

from the Ottoman enclosure wall of Tower 6, we discovered two fragments

with wattle-type ornament which were like spolia built into the wall of that laterdate

Ottoman reconstruction. The lowest layers in the moat, 0.80 m to 1.20 m thick,

in which there are certainly some archaeological finds, were not surveyed in more

details.

West Rampart of the Lower Town

The main rampart of the Lower Town, with a mildly arcuated base adjusted to the

configuration of the terrain, stretches between corner Towers 7 and 8, as it has

already been pointed out, over the length of around 180 m. The route of this rampart

was not surveyed except for a smaller section next to the North Corner Tower

8 so that our findings on this very important element of the fortifications of Novo

Brdo are mostly based on superficial prospection of the preserved remains. On the

interior side the rampart is filled, that is, it has been preserved to the current plane

of the ground. This is where the best cultural layers are preserved and their thickness

is estimated at around 2 m. This would mean that towards the interior of the

Lower Town the rampart has been preserved at the height of 2 m to 2.5 m. On the

exterior side, the rampart’s wall mass is covered with large quantities of collapsed

rocks and debris under which, doubtlessly, there are lower sections of this wall curtain

with preserved exterior face. In some sections we noticed significant breakings

in the rampart. The basic data on the former structure and dimensions of the West

Rampart have been obtained on the surveyed segment directly next to Tower 8. The

rampart was built in the same way as the other wall curtains of Novo Brdo’s fortress

and it used to have the thickness of around 4 m. Taking into consideration that it

was built on a slope, on the interior side the height of its wall walk could go between

3 m and 4 m. On the exterior side, the rampart used to have the height of around

7 m, while with the crown that included the wall walk it must have been over 9 m.

There is no data as to whether there used to be a sally port within the rampart,

which should certainly not be excluded as a possibility. During the archaeological

surveying on the exterior side of Tower 8, where the protechism was partitioned

during a younger phase, which has already been dealt with, we noticed remains

which suggest that in front of the main wall curtain the original external rampart

extended further to the south.

With superficial observations, as well as according to the data collected during

the explorations next to Tower 8, we came to the basic elements for a supposition

as to what the defence system of the West Rampart as a whole used to look like originally.

Judging by all, in front of the main rampart all the way to Tower 7 originally

there must have been a lower external rampart. In front of this front rampart there

was a moat dug into the rocky ground, nowadays mostly filled, with the width of

around 10 m. There is no available data on the depth of the moat, but it may be presumed

that it was not less than 5 m. On the edge of the exterior side of the moat,


U nasipu rova prakti~no nije bilo arheolo{kih nalaza. U {utu ju`nog kraja

rova, me|u obru{enom gra|om sa turskog obzi|a Kule 6, otkrivena su dva

fragmenta sa pleternim ornamentom, koji su kao spolije bili ugra|eni u zid

te poznije turske obnove. Najniì slojevi u rovu, debqine 0,8 do 1,2 m, u kojima

sigurno ima arheolo{kih nalaza, nisu detaqnije istraìvani.

Zapadni bedem Doweg grada

Glavni dowogradski bedem, blago izvijene osnove, prilago|ene konfiguraciji

terena, pruà se izme|u ugaonih Kula 7 i 8, kao {to je ve} istaknuto, u duìni

od oko 18 m. Trasa ovoga bedema nije istraìvana, osim jednog maweg dela

uz severnu ugaonu Kulu 8, tako da se na{a saznawa o ovom veoma zna~ajnom elementu

novobrdskih fortifikacija najve}im delom zasnivaju na povr{inskoj

prospekciji o~uvanih ostataka. Sa unutra{we strane bedem je zasut, odnosno

o~uvan do sada{we ravni tla. Na tome prostoru su i najboqe sa~uvani kulturni

slojevi, ~ija se debqina procewuje na oko 2 m. To bi zna~ilo da je bedem

prema unutra{wosti Doweg grada sa~uvan u visini 2 do 2,5 m. Sa spoqne strane

zidna masa bedema je zasuta velikim koli~inama obru{enog kamena i {uta,

pod kojima se, bez sumwe, nalaze niì delovi ovog zidnog platna sa o~uvanim

Sl. 88. Rov ispred Kule 6 i

Severoisto~nog bedema Doweg grada

posle iskopavawa 2016

Fig. 88. Ditch in front of Tower 6 and

the North-East Rampart of the Lower

Town after the excavations in 2016

192


it is possible to notice quite well in the configuration of the terrain the route of the

earthen rampart which was, most probably, oversailed by a wooden palisade-type of

fence and which constituted the first line of defence.

146 Zdravkovi} 1958, 342–344, fig. 4–6.

Southeast Rampart of the Lower Town with Tower 7

The rampart which closed the Lower Town towards the south, with the length of 75 m

to 80 m, had mostly collapsed and therefore with superficial observation, taking into

account that it was not surveyed, it was not possible to determine its former widths

reliably. It may only be presumed that like the other ramparts of the Lower Town it

used to have the thickness of around 3 m and that it did not differ from them by

the manner in which it was constructed. In the central section, that is, in the middle

of its route, there are remains of a built structure which could at first glance be

presumed to constitute remains of a tower. However, with more detailed observations

of the visible remains, it could be noticed that this used to be a more complex

structure the shape and meaning of which cannot be clarified before archaeological

surveying.

In the south corner of this fortification route, at the joint with the West Rampart,

as it has already been pointed out, there are ruins of Tower 7 (fig. 89–91). This

massive installation, packed with large quantities of fill, was partially surveyed in

1955. After the removal of the layers of collapsed rocks and mortar debris, the interior

of the tower was partially revealed. Unfortunately, the works were not finished

then, so that we have only an insufficiently clear brief report of the experts which we

quote here in its entirety: “…The debris from the South Corner Tower 7 of the Lower

Town cleared up and we also dug on its interior side in order to establish the foundations

of its external walls. To the same end, we also excavated on the exterior side

and there was a rupture which was rounded. It was established that the tower as

well was open towards the interior of the town, just like the North Corner Tower 8,

but this one had a small rectangular room which was covered by beams from above

(the traces of the holes for these beams may be clearly discerned even today) and it

had an upper storey, since in the floor we came across new holes for beams which

certainly were used for the inter-floor structure. This room was not excavated to

the lowest level of the floor, since in order to do this it is necessary first to secure

the walls and construct the scaffolding for the extraction of earth from larger

depths. The earth was extracted down to the depth of 0.50 m under the lower holes

for the inter-floor beams…” 146

The surveying described in the said report, which remained unfinished, did not

allow us to clarify reliably the complex structure of this edifice. After several decades

even what had been revealed was again filled with collapsed rocks and mortar

debris. Before possible future explorations on the basis of the superficial prospection

and taking into account the results of the 1955 works, it is possible to present only

some suppositions regarding the former structure and the construction stages of

this complex edifice. In the first stage, during the building of the fortifications of the

Lower Town, South Tower 7 did not differ significantly from the North Corner Tower

8. Quite certainly both towers were opened towards the interior space of the fortress.

In one subsequent stage, an edifice with multi-storey interior structure was

built into the interior space of the south tower and this closed the forth, originally

opened side. It remains an open question when this partitioning took place. We can


spoqnim licem. Na pojedinim deonicama uo~ene su i znatne provale u bedemu.

Osnovni podaci o nekada{woj konstrukciji i dimenzijama Zapadnog bedema

dobijeni su na istraènom segmentu neposredno uz Kulu 8. Bedem je bio gra|en

na isti na~in kao i ostala zidna platna utvr|ewa Novog Brda i imao je debqinu

od oko 4 m. Budu}i da je bio gra|en na padini, sa unutra{we strane visina

do {etne staze mogla mu se kretati izme|u 3 i 4 m. Sa spoqne strane bedem je

imao visinu od oko 7 m, a sa kruni{tem sa {etnom stazom sigurno preko 9 m.

Nema podataka o tome da li se u okviru bedema nalazila neka poterna, {to se

kao mogu}nost ne bi smelo iskqu~iti. Prilikom arheolo{kih istraìvawa sa

spoqne strane Kule 8, gde je u mla|oj fazi pregra|ena Protehizma, o ~emu je ve}

bilo re~i, uo~eni su ostaci koji ukazuju na to da se ispred glavnog zidnog platna

prvobitni spoqni bedem pruào daqe ka jugu.

Povr{inskim osmatrawem, kao i prema podacima prikupqenim tokom istraìvawa

uz Kulu 8, do{lo se do osnovnih elemenata za pretpostavku o tome

kako je prvobitno izgledao sistem odbrane Zapadnog bedema u celini. Ispred

glavnog bedema, po svemu sude}i, sve do Kule 7 prvobitno je mogao postojati ni-

ì spoqni bedem. Ispred ovog predweg bedema nalazio se u stenovito tlo ukopan

rov, sada velikim delom zasut, ~ija {irina je iznosila oko 10 m. O dubini

rova nema raspoloìvih podataka, ali se moè pretpostaviti da nije bila mawa

od 5 m. Na rubu suprotne strane rova, u konfiguraciji terena sasvim dobro se

uo~ava trasa zemqanog bedema, koji je, po svoj prilici, bio nadvi{en drvenom

palisadnom ogradom i predstavqao prvu liniju odbrane.

Jugoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada sa Kulom 7

Bedem koji je prema jugu zatvarao Dowi grad, u duìni od 75 do 80 m, u velokoj

je meri zaru{en, tako da mu se povr{inskim osmatrawem, budu}i da nije istra-

ìvan, ne moè pouzdano odrediti nekada{wa {irina. Moè se samo pretpostaviti

da je, kao i ostali dowogradski bedemi, imao debqinu oko 3 m i da se po

na~inu gra|ewa nije razlikovao od ostalih bedema u Dowem gradu. U sredi{-

wem delu, odnosno na sredini wegove trase nalaze se ostaci zidane strukture,

za koje bi se na prvi pogled moglo pretpostaviti da predstavqaju ostatke kule.

Me|utim, detaqnijim posmatrawem vidqivih ostataka moè se uo~iti da je u

pitawu bila neka sloènija konstrukcija, ~iji se oblik i zna~ewe ne moè

razjasniti pre arheolo{kih istraìvawa.

U ju`nom uglu ove fortifikacione trase, na spoju sa Zapadnim bedemom,

kao {to je ve} istaknuto, nalaze se ru{evine Kule 7 (sl. 89–91). Ovo masivno

postrojewe, zasuto velikim koli~inama nasipa, delimi~no je istraèno 1955.

godine. Nakon uklawawa slojeva osutog kamena i malternog {uta delimi~no je

otkrivena unutra{wost kule. Naàlost, radovi nisu tada bili okon~ani, tako

da se raspolaè samo nedovoqno jasnim kratkim izve{tajem istraìva~a, koji

ovde navodimo u celini: „… Ra{~i{}en je {ut iz Ju`ne ugaone kule 7 Doweg

grada, a kopalo se i sa wene unutra{we strane da bi se utvrdili temeqi wenih

spoqnih zidova. U istom ciqu kopalo se i sa spoqne strane i do{lo se do preloma,

koji je zaobqen. Konstatovano je da je i kula bila otvorena prema unutra-

{wosti grada, kao i Severna ugaona kula 8, ali je ova imala jednu pravougaonu

prostoriju, koja je odozgo bila pokrivena gredama (tragovi rupa za te grede jasno

se raspoznaju i danas), a bila je na sprat, jer se u podu do{lo do novih rupa

194


Sl. 89. Ju`na ugaona Kula 7,

sa delom Zapadnog bedema

(foto 1952)

Fig. 89. South Corner Tower 7,

with a part of the West Rampart

(photo 1952)


tursko obzi|e sa ugra|enim

spolijama (foto 1933)


Ottoman enclosure wall with

built-in spolia (photo 1933)

147 Bo{kovi} 1939, 164–166, fig. 3.


257.

only presume that this happened during the first reconstructions of Novo Brdo’s

fortress, most probably during the last quarter of the 14 th century or the beginning

of the next one. The last construction phase, which quite clearly stands out constitutes

in fact a reconstruction of the tower that was partly destroyed during one of

the Ottoman sieges, most likely the one of 1455. On that occasion, the exterior side of

the tower was enclosed and reinforced, as was the case with Tower 6 in the Castle.

The stone of some of the demolished buildings was used for the reconstruction of

these towers. Parts of the stone plastics coming from a demolished church which,

undoubtedly, used to be located in the Lower Town during the conquest of Novo

Brdo were built as spolia into the reconstructed wall of the South Tower. 147

Lower Town’s Gate

The compound complex of the entrance into the Lower Town built in two stages was

located in the southeast corner of this part of the fortress. The original Main Gate

was built into a part of the ramparts which from the northwest rampart of the Lower

Town turned towards Tower 2 of the Castle and the external rampart in this part of

the fortress, against which it rested, but with no mutual constructional link. The width

of this part of the rampart was around 3 m. The gate itself had the width between the

jambs of 2.80 m, while towards the interior side its width was 3.05 m. The corners of

the gate and the jambs were made using breccia ashlars and so was the threshold of

the gate which consisted of two larger breccia blocks. 148 The first experts who found

the remains of the gate covered in debris established that it was covered in a significant

quantity of tufa, which undoubtedly came from a collapsed vault.

On the interior side of the gate, there used to be a small flattened area from

which the rock ridges descended towards the Lower Town. Within these rock ridges,


od greda koje su svakako sluìle za me|uspratnu konstrukciju. Ta prostorija

nije iskopana do najnièg nivoa poda jer se za taj posao moraju prethodno osigurati

zidovi i izraditi skele za izbacivawe zemqe iz ve}ih dubina. Izba~ena

je zemqa do dubine od 0,50 m ispod dowih rupa za me|uspratne grede…“ 146

Istraìvawa opisana u navedenom izve{taju, koja su ostala nezavr{ena,

nisu omogu}ila da se pouzdano razjasni sloèna struktura ovog zdawa. Posle

vi{e decenija i ono {to je bilo otkriveno ponovo je zasuto obru{enim kamenom

i malternim {utom. Pre eventualnih budu}ih istraìvawa na osnovu povr-

{inske prospekcije, a imaju}i u vidu i rezultate radova 1955. godine, mogu}e

je izneti samo neke pretpostavke o nekada{woj strukturi i etapama gra|ewa

ovog sloènog zdawa. U prvoj etapi, prilikom podizawa fortifikacija Doweg

grada, ju`na Kula 7 nije se bitno razlikovala od severne ugaone Kule 8. Sasvim

sigurno, obe kule su bile otvorene prema unutra{wem prostoru utvr|ewa. U

jednoj poznijoj etapi u unutra{wi prostor Ju`ne kule ugra|ena je konstrukcija

sa vi{espratnom unutra{wom strukturom, kojom je zatvorena i ~etvrta, prvobitno

otvorena strana. Otvoreno je pitawe kada se ova pregradwa mogla dogoditi.

Moèmo samo pretpostaviti da se to zbilo u vreme prvih obnova utvr|ewa

Novog Brda, najverovatnije tokom posledwe ~etvrtine 14. veka ili po~etkom

narednog stole}a. Posledwa gra|evinska faza, koja se sasvim jasno izdvaja,

predstavqala je zapravo obnovu kule, delom poru{ene, u toku jedne od turskih

opsada, najverovatnije one 1455. godine. Tom prilikom je obzidana i oja~ana


unutra{wi prostor

posle delimi~nog otkopavawa

(foto 1955)


interior space after

the partial excavation (photo 1955)

196


we discovered remains of several semi-circularly built steps 149 that were used to go

down to the lower sections of the fortress. From the flattened area in front of the gate,

quite to the right, a path led along the foot of the external rampart towards the West

Gate of the Castle.

In the face of the rampart, next to the gate, there is a preserved quadrangular

niche, most likely for the placement of a lantern. A little farther from this niche in

the interior face of the Southeast Rampart of the Lower Town there is a preserved

section of a narrow built-in staircase used for going up to the rampart. This solution

for the reaching of the rampart’s wall walk, which certainly was not unique, is for the

time being the only known one within the scope of the fortifications of Novo Brdo.

Another example that has been mentioned above was a built adjacent staircase that

was used to go up to the Northeast Rampart of the Lower Town. In a subsequent

period, during the Ottoman rule, along the walls in the gate complex a bench was

additionally built, made of broken stone with mud mortar, while its function has

not been made clear. 150

In the decades following the construction of the first fortifications, most probably

before the end of the 14 th century, the complex of the Main Gate of the Lower

Town was reinforced by adding an antemural with an external gate. The rampart

enclosed a rectangular space, 14 m long and between 5 and 6 m wide, which covered

the surface area of around 75 m². Towards the slope on the east side, there was a wall

curtain built, around 2.10 m wide, which continued in the direction of the Southeast

Rampart, resting against its corner, but without mutual constructional link.

Another end of the antemural rampart turned at a right angle and leaned against

the external rampart of the Castle between Towers 1 and 2, without mutual constructional

link. Within this section of the rampart there was an exterior gate only

the west half of which had been better preserved, while the east one remained only

in the traces of the foundations. Judging by these remains, it was possible to conclude

that the former width of the passage through the gate may have been around 2.80 m.

Like the older main gate, this exterior gate, too, had corner sections and thresholds

made of breccia ashlars. In the preserved west lateral side of the gate, there is a preserved

canal for a beam – wooden bar, with the dimensions of 24 cm × 30 cm and

with the depth of over 2.40 m. The space between the interior and the exterior gates

was paved over the width of around 3 m. 151

149 Pribakovi} 1958, 257–258.

150 Ibid., 255.

151 Ibid., 259–260, note 14.

BUILDINGS IN THE LOWER TOWN

The interior space surrounded by the ramparts of the Lower Town was, without any

question, filled with numerous buildings. Our knowledge of the urban structure of

this signification section of Novo Brdo has, however, remained very limited. In this

area there were archaeological explorations of a relatively small scope so that the

results reached do not provide a reliable picture on the population in this part of the

town. There were works of a smaller scope conducted around the middle of the 1950’s,

when remains of a large cistern were revealed. There were also broader excavations

carried out in 2016 on a surface that had the width of 5 m to 6 m in the area along

the interior face of the Northeast Rampart where several houses of the former settlement

of the Lower Town used to be.

Some conclusions concerning the urban structure of the Lower Town were suggested

by the superficial observation of the configuration of the terrain. We got an


spoqna strana kule, kao {to je to bio slu~aj i sa Kulom 6 u Zamku. Za obnovu ovih

kula kori{}en je kamen sa nekih od poru{enih zdawa. U obnovqeni zid Ju`ne

kule ugra|eni su kao spolije delovi kamene plastike neke poru{ene crkve, koja

se, bez sumwe, u vreme osvajawa Novog Brda nalazila u Dowem gradu. 147

Kapija Doweg grada

Sloèni kompleks ulaza u Dowi grad, gra|en u dve stape, nalazio se u jugoisto~nom

uglu ovoga dela utvr|ewa. Prvobitna Glavna kapija bila je ugra|ena u deo

bedema koji je od Severozapadnog bedema Doweg grada skretao prema prema Kuli

2 Zamka i spoqnom bedemu ovoga dela utvr|ewa, na koje se naslawao, ali bez me-

|usobne gra|evinske veze. [irina ovoga dela bedema iznosila je oko 3 m. Sama

kapija je imala {irinu izme|u dovratnika od 2,8 m, dok joj prema unutra{woj

strani {irina iznosi 3,05 m. Uglovi kapije i dovratnici bili su ra|eni tesanicima

bre~e, kao i prag kapije, koji su ~inila dva ve}a bloka bre~e. 148 Prvi

istraìva~i koji su ostatke kapije zatekli zasute {utom konstatovali su da je

bila zasuta znatnom koli~inom blokova sige, koji su nesumwivo poticali od

uru{enog svoda.

Sa unutra{we strane kraj kapije postojala je mala zaravan, od koje su se grebeni

stena spu{tali prema Dowem gradu. U okviru ovih grebena stena otkriveni

su ostaci nekoliko polukru`no ozidanih stepenika, 149 kojima se silazilo u

niè delove utvr|ewa. Sa zaravni pred kapijom, sasvim desno, podno`jem spoqnog

bedema vodila je staza prema Zapadnoj kapiji Zamka.

U licu bedema uz kapiju ostala je o~uvana ~etvrtasta ni{a, najverovatnije za

postavqawe svetiqke. Ne{to daqe od ove ni{e u unutra{wem licu Jugoisto~nog

bedema Doweg grada ostao je o~uvan deo uskog ugra|enog stepeni{ta za izlaz na

bedem. Ovo re{ewe za izlaz na {etnu stazu bedema, koje svakako nije jedinstveno,

za sada je jedino poznato u okviru novobrdskih fortifikacija. Drugi primer,

o kome je napred bilo re~i, predstavqalo je prizidano stepeni{te kojim se

izlazilo na Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada. U jednom poznijem razdobqu, u

vreme turske vladavine, uz zidove u kompleksu kapije bio je prizidan banak, gra-

|en lomqenim kamenom sa blatnim vezivom, ~ija funkcija nije razja{wena. 150

U decenijama posle izgradwe prvih fortifikacija, najverovatnije pre

kraja 14. veka, kompleks Glavne kapije Doweg grada oja~an je dogradwom predzi|a

sa spoqnom kapijom. Bedemom je bio obuhva}en pravougaoni prostor, duìne

14 m, a {irine izme|u 5 i 6 m, koji je obuhvatao povr{inu od oko 75 m².

Prema padini sa isto~ne strane bilo je podignuto zidno platno, {irine oko

2,1 m, koje je nastavqalo pravac Jugoisto~nog bedema, naslawaju}i se na wegov

ugao, ali bez me|usobne gra|evinske veze. Drugi krak bedema predzi|a skretao je

pod pravim uglom i naslawao se na spoqni bedem Zamka izme|u Kula 1 i 2, bez

me|usobne gra|evinske veze. U okviru ove deonice bedema nalazila se spoqna kapija,

od koje je boqe o~uvana samo zapadna polovina, dok je isto~na preostala 146 Zdravkovi} 1958, 342–344, sl. 4–6.

samo u tragovima temeqa. Sude}i prema ovim ostacima, moglo se zakqu~iti da 147 Bo{kovi} 1939, 164–166, sl. 3.

je nekada{wa {irina prolaza kapije mogla iznositi oko 2,8 m. Kao i starija 148 Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955,

glavna kapija, i ova spoqna kapija imala je ugaone delove i pragove od tesanika 257.

bre~e. U o~uvanoj zapadnoj bo~noj strani kapije o~uvan je kanal za gredu – mandal,

dimenzija 24 × 30 cm, i dubine preko 2,4 m. Prostor izme|u unutra{we i

150 Isto, 255.

149 Pribakovi} 1958, 257–258.

spoqne kapije, u {irini od oko 3 m, bio je kaldrmisan. 151 151 Isto, 259–260, nap. 14.

198


impression that most of the buildings were located in the west half of this space,

closer to the rampart. The east section, towards the external rampart of the Castle

has significantly fewer traces of a cultural layer, since to a large extent in that area

even now there are visible rock ridges.

Without venturing into any possible suppositions which buildings could have

been located in the Lower Town, it may be concluded quite reliably that along with

profane residential buildings, there used to be a church as well. An indirect testimony

to its existence are the spolia with relief decoration built into the Ottoman

reinforcements of Towers 6 and 7 which were, as it has already been pointed out,

damaged during the fights for Novo Brdo. Three rosettes were built into the added

face of Tower 7. 152 With careful observation, we noticed that among other elements

there were more spolia in the face of the Ottoman reconstruction, including also

parts of a portal with relief Moravan interlacing ornament. There are similar fragments

also in the structure of the reconstruction of Tower 6 in the Castle. These

reinforcements were built soon after the Ottoman conquest of the town in 1455 which

would mean that quite certainly in addition to the church in the Castle another

church in the Lower Town was also demolished in order to be used as a source of

building material. Taken into consideration that Christians were not allowed to stay

or to enter the Lower Town, it is logical that the Ottomans first started with the demolition

of the churches found within the ramparts of Novo Brdo’s fortress, while

the churches in the Suburb were spared the destruction.

152 Bo{kovi} 1939, 162–166, fig. 3.

House 1

The remains of this building were found directly under a layer of debris in the area

between the Sally Port and Tower 8. The house had a rectangular ground plan with

the dimensions of 7.15 × 5.50 m, and with the surface of the interior area of 21 m².

With one of its narrower side it used to rest against the interior face of the Northeast

Rampart. It had walls built regularly of broken hewn stone using mud mortar.

Its walls have a uniformed width of 0.80 m. They were built on the existing level

line of the terrain with the digging in of only one row of stones. In the middle of the

south wall there is a rectangular niche, 0.90 m wide and around 0.35 m deep, which

was undoubtedly intended for a fireplace although no traces of burning were found

there. The better preserved lateral walls survived up to the heights from 0.50 m to

0.70 m. In the interior of the house only the segment in the east half had a stone

floor arranged like street pavement. In the other areas at that plane there was only

a layer of light brown earth with no traces of floor. The interior of the house was

filled with a lot of stones and traces of clay which, without any doubt, came from its

collapsed walls. In that layer, which did not have characteristics of a layered cultural

layer, there was relatively little Ottoman pottery – fragments of glazed pots, calotteshaped

bowls with feet, unglazed jars and conical cockle stove tiles, as well as a fragment

of a jar from Iznik. Observed as a whole, especially in relation to the abovementioned

archaeological finds, House 1 could be dated back to the early Ottoman

period, most probably the 16 th century.

It remains an open question when this house was demolished, particularly if

we bear in mind that during the archaeological surveying no traces of its use were

found. It could be even presumed that House 1 had never been finished and that

nobody had ever moved in.


GRA\EVINE U DOWEM GRADU

Unutra{wi prostor opasan bedemima Doweg grada bio je, bez sumwe, ispuwen

brojnim zdawima. Na{a znawa o urbanoj strukturi ovog zna~ajnog dela Novog

Brda, ostala su, me|utim, veoma ograni~ena. Na ovom prostoru vr{ena su arheolo{ka

istraìvawa relativno malog obima, tako da rezultati do kojih se do-

{lo ne pruàju pouzdanu sliku o naseqenosti ovog dela grada. Mawi radovi

obavqeni su sredinom pedesetih godina 20. veka, kada su otkriveni ostaci velike

cisterne, a ne{to obimnija iskopavawa obavqena su 2016. godine na povr-

{ini {irine 5 do 6 m na prostoru uz unutra{we lice Severoisto~nog bedema

gde se nalazilo nekoliko ku}a nekada{weg dowogradskog naseqa.

Na neke zakqu~ke o nekada{woj urbanoj strukturi Doweg grada ukazuje povr{insko

osmatrawe konfiguracije terena. Ima se utisak da se ve}ina gra|evina

nalazila u zapadnoj polovini ovoga prostora bliè bedemu. Isto~ni deo

prema spoqnom bedemu Zamka ima znatno mawe tragova kulturnog sloja, budu}i

da su na dobrom delu te povr{ine i sada vidqivi grebeni stena.

Ne zalaze}i u mogu}e pretpostavke koje su se sve gra|evine nalazile u Dowem

gradu, moè se dosta pouzdano zakqu~iti da je uz profana stambena zdawa tu postojala

i jedna crkva. Posredno svedo~anstvo o wenom postojawu predstavqaju

spolije sa reqefnim ukrasom, ugra|ene u turska oja~awa Kula 6 i 7, koje su, kao

{to je ve} istaknuto, bile o{te}ene u borbama za Novo Brdo. U dogra|eno lice

Kule 7 bile su ugra|ene tri rozete. 152 Pa`qivim osmatrawem uo~eno je da se u

licu turske obnove, pored ostalog, nalazi jo{ spolija, pored ostalih, i delovi

jednog portala sa reqefnim moravskim prepletom. Sli~nih fragmenata ima

i u strukturi obnove Kule 6 u Zamku. Ova oja~awa zidana su ubrzo nakon turskog

osvajawa grada 1455. godine, {to bi zna~ilo da je sasvim sigurno da je, osim

Crkve u Zamku, poru{ena i jedna crkva u Dowem gradu kako bi posluìla kao

izvori{te gra|evinskog materijala. Budu}i da hri{}anima nije bio dozvoqen

boravak niti ulaz u Dowi grad, logi~no je {to su Turci prvo pristupili ru-

{ewu zate~enih crkava u okvirima bedema novobrdskog utvr|ewa, dok su crkve

u Podgra|u bile po{te|ene razarawa.

Ku}a 1

Ostaci ovog zdawa otkriveni su neposredno ispod sloja {uta na prostoru izme-

|u poterne i Kule 8. Ku}a je bila pravougaone osnove, dimenzija 7,15 m × 5,5 m,

sa povr{inom unutra{weg prostora od 21 m². Jednom svojom uòm stranom bila

je naslowena na unutra{we lice Severoisto~nog bedema. Imala je zidove

pravilno gra|ene lomqenim pritesanim kamenom sa blatnim vezivom. Zidovi

su joj ujedna~ene {irine od 0,8 m. Gra|eni su na zate~enoj niveleti terena sa

ukopavawem svega jednog reda kamena. Na sredini ju`nog zida nalazi se pravougaona

ni{a, {irine 0,9 m, a dubine oko 0,35 m, koja je, bez sumwe, bila namewena

za kamin, mada tu nisu konstatovani nikakvi tragovi gorewa. Boqe o~uvani

bo~ni zidovi preostali su do visina od 0,5 do 0,7 m. U unutra{wosti ku}e samo

je deo u isto~noj polovini imao kameni pod sloèn u vidu kaldrme. Na ostalim

povr{inama u toj ravni javqa se samo sloj svetlomrke zemqe bez tragova poda.

Unutra{wost ku}e bila je zasuta sa dosta kamena i tragovima gline, {to, o~ito,

poti~e od wenih uru{enih zidova. U tom sloju, koji nije imao karakteristike

naslojenog kulturnog sloja, bilo je relativno malo turske keramike – ulomci 152 Bo{kovi} 1939, 162–166, sl. 3

200

Sl. 92. Ku}a 2, posle

arheolo{kih iskopavawa 2016

Fig. 92. House 2, after the



House 2

The remains of this house are located resting against the interior face of the Northeast

Rampart, around 6 m south of the Sally Port (fig. 92). It was built on a rocky

terrain that descends towards the north. It has a rectangular ground plan with the

dimensions of 4.80 m × 3.10 m and the surface of a little less than 15 m². The walls

made of broken stone using mud mortar have uneven thickness going from 0.55 m

and 0.70 m. The wall on the south side, in the lower section was built in the form of

an underpinning and along the interior face it had an added built seat, made of stone

with mud mortar. The west corner of House 2 was destroyed when digging in and

building a smaller building 5. An entrance probably used to be in that destroyed

area, on the north side, by the very corner. No traces have been preserved, but its

possible structure may be presumed. Namely, in the collapsed section of the wall we

noticed a trace of wall mass that turned towards the north. This allows for a supposition

that there used to be two parallel walls that formed some kind of a vestibule

in front of the entrance.

The level of the floor in the house was conditioned by the exiting configuration

of the terrain. In the south half these were the descending rock ridges the gaps in

which had only sporadically been filled with mortar. In the north section, the rock


gle|osanih lonaca, kalotastih zdela na stopama, negle|osanih bokala i koni~nih

pe}waka, kao i jedan ulomak bokala iz Iznika. Posmatrana u celini, posebno

u odnosu na pomenute arheolo{ke nalaze, Ku}a 1 bi se mogla datovati u

rano tursko razdobqe, najverovatnije 16. vek. Otvoreno je pitawe kada je ova

ku}a poru{ena, posebno ako se ima u vidu da prilikom arheolo{kih istraìvawa

nisu uo~eni nikakvi tragovi wenog kori{}ewa. Moglo bi se ~ak pretpostaviti

da Ku}a 1 nikada nije bila zavr{ena, niti useqena.

Ku}a 2

Ostaci ove ku}e nalaze se osloweni na unutra{we lice Severoisto~nog bedema,

oko 6 m ju`no od poterne (sl. 92). Bila je podignuta na stenovitom terenu,

koji je u padu prema severu. Pravougaone je osnove, dimenzija 4,8 × 3,1 m, i povr{ine

ne{to mawe od 15 m². Zidovi, gra|eni lomqenim kamenom sa jakim

malternim vezivom, nejednakih su debqina, izme|u 0,55 i 0,7 m. Zid sa ju`ne

strane, u nièm delu bio je gra|en u vidu podzida i uz unutra{we lice je imao

prizidan banak, zidan kamenom sa blatnim vezivom. Zapadni ugao Ku}e 2 uni-

{ten je prilikom ukopavawa i gra|ewa mla|eg Objekta 5. Na tom uni{tenom

delu, sa severne strane, uz sam ugao, verovatno se nalazio ulaz. Ostaci nisu

o~uvani, ali se wegova mogu}a konstrukcija moè naslutiti. Naime, u zaru{enom

delu zida uo~en je trag zidne mase, koja je skretala prema severu. To dozvoqava

pretpostavku da su tu postojala dva paralelna zida, koja su obrazovala neku

vrstu vestibula pred ulazom.

Nivo poda u ku}i bio je uslovqen zate~enom konfiguracijom terena. U ju`noj

polovini to su grebeni stena u padu, ~ije su raseline samo mestimi~no bile

popuwene malterom. U severnom delu je stena mestimi~no zaravwena, a pod iznivelisan

nabijenim sitnim kamenom. Preko ove podloge nalazio se zastor od

maltera, koji je samo mestimi~no sa~uvan. Iznad poda ostali su i tragovi kulturnog

sloja. U jugoisto~nom uglu ku}e otkriveno je loì{te, use~eno u stenu,

sa velikom koli~inom gari i ugqenisanog drveta. U loì{tu je prona|en ve}i

broj fragmenata kerami~kih posuda, me|u kojima je jedna gotovo cela crepuqa i

vi{e fragmenata razli~itih crepuqa, kao i fragmenti dva ve}a tipi~na novobrdska

sredwovekovna lonca: jedan ukra{en spiralama, a drugi talasastim

linijama. U sredi{wem delu ku}e na podu otkriven je dobro o~uvan prsten, rezan

od opala zelene boje, sli~an àdu (o prstenu je ve} ranije bilo re~i). Prsten

istog tipa, ra|en od karneola i datovan u posledwe decenije 14. veka, na|en je

u jednom grobu novobrdske katedrale. 153 Unutra{wost ku}e iznad ravni poda

bila je zasuta malternim {utom i sitnim kamenom, bez arheolo{kih nalaza.

Sloj {uta iste strukture, debqine preko 60 cm, nalazio se i sa spoqne strane

severnog zida. Leào je na tankom sloju, koji odgovara nivou na kome je zasnovan

Severoisto~ni bedem. Velika koli~ina {uta sa malterom i kamenom drobinom,

a bez krupnijeg kamena, bez sumwe, poti~e od namerne razgradwe zidova

Ku}e 2 i odno{ewa upotrebqivog gra|evinskog materijala.

Ku}a 3

Podignuta je uz unutra{we lice Severoisto~nog bedema, na 15,4 m ju`no od poterne

(sl. 93–95). Na tom prostoru konstatovano je vi{e sukcesivnih gra|evinskih

faza. U prvoj etapi podignut je Severoisto~ni bedem, koji je gra|en 153 Ze~evi} 2006, 196.

202


had been partially flattened, while the floor had been levelled up using compacted

small rocks. Over this base, there used to be a mortar paving which was only sporadically

preserved. Above the floor there are also traces of a cultural layer. In the

southeast corner of the house we discovered a hearth cut into the rock and containing

a large quantity of soot and charred wood. In the hearth we found a large number

of pottery vessels’ fragments among which there was one almost whole breadbaking

pan and several fragments of different other bread-baking pans, as well as

fragments of two bigger typical Novo Brdo’s medieval pots: one decorated with spirals

and the other one with wavy lines. In the central section of the house on the

floor we found a well preserved ring cut out of green-coloured opal, similar to jade,

which has already been mentioned before. The ring of the same type, made of carnelian

and dated back to the last decades of the 14 th century was found in a tomb

by the cathedral of Novo Brdo. 153

The interior of the house above the plane of the floor was covered in mortar

debris and smaller rocks, with no archaeological finds. A layer of debris of the same

structure, over 60 cm thick, was also located on the exterior side of the north wall.

It lay on a thin layer which corresponds to the level on which the Northeast Rampart

was based. A large quantity of debris with mortar and rock debris with no bigger

stones comes, without any doubt, from an intentional dismantling of the walls of

House 2 and the removal of the usable building material.

153 Ze~evi} 2006, 196.

House 3

It was built adjacent to the interior face of the Northeast Rampart, at 15.40 m south

of the Sally Port (fig. 93–95). In that area, we established several successive construction

phases. The Northeast Rampart was built during the first stage and it was

constructed with no foundations, based on the rock ridges between which the encountered

humus was kept and only in places filled up with rock fills. Probably

simultaneously with the building of the rampart, a built substructure for the staircase

leading to the rampart’s wall walk was also built. This structure which later

found itself within House 3 may have served as a base for a wooden staircase and

it is also possible that originally this used to be completely built structure resting

against the interior face of the rampart. In the next stage, House 3 was leaned against

the rampart and there are two construction phases clearly discernible on the house.

The original house had a rectangular ground plan, with the exterior dimensions of

8.40 m × 7 m and the surface area of the interior space of around 59 m². The house

used to have walls made of smaller pieces of rock laid in mortar. The south wall,

that was also the underpinning towards the terrain on that side, was better preserved,

while only traces of the wall on the opposite side may be observed under the

dry stone wall coming from a younger phase. Its direction was quite reliably observed

by the rock ridges and the remains of the floor. It is still an open question what happened

with the structure for the staircase which, after the construction of House 3,

found itself within the house. It may be presumed that this structure was incorporated

into the house in the as-is state and that the south wall of the house rested

against it. Along the south wall, at the level of the floor, we found remains of a massive

wooden beam, with the dimensions of 16 cm × 14 cm and it was probably used

as a support for some upper structure since several metal wedges were found in its

clearly defined bearing. The entire floor of House 3 was paved with large bricks with


bez temeqa, zasnovan na grebenima stena, izme|u kojih je zadràn zate~eni humus

i samo mestimi~no popuwen naba~ajima kamena. Verovatno istovremeno sa

gra|ewem bedema podignuta je i zidana supstrukcija za stepeni{te ka {etnoj

stazi bedema. Ova konstrukcija, koja se kasnije na{la u okviru Ku}e 3, mogla

je da sluì kao postament za drveno stepeni{te, a nije iskqu~ena ni mogu}-

nost da je prvobitno to bila u celini zidana konstrukcija oslowena na unutra-

{we lice bedema. U narednoj etapi uz bedem je prislowena Ku}a 3, na kojoj se

jasno izdvajaju dve gra|evinske faze. Prvobitna ku}a je bila pravougaone osnove,

spoqnih dimenzija 8,4 × 7 m, i povr{ine unutra{weg prostora oko 59 m².

Ku}a je imala zidove gra|ene sitnijim kamenom u malteru. Ju`ni zid, koji je bio

i podzid prema terenu sa te strane, boqe je o~uvan, dok se od zida sa suprotne

strane uo~avaju samo tragovi ispod suhozida mla|e faze. Pravac mu je sasvim

Sl. 93. Ku}a 3,

osnova i profil slojeva uz

Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada

(R = 1 : 100)

Fig. 93. House 3,

ground plan and the profile of

the layers by the North-East Rampart

of the Lower Town (R = 1 : 100)

204

Sl. 94. Ku}a 3, posle


Fig. 94. House 3, after the



the dimensions of 29 cm × 36 cm × 4 cm. The bricks were laid down on a massive

mortar base and they may be followed in a regular bond. The floor was relatively

well preserved with a note that a part of the bricks had been taken out during the

demolition of the house. In the north corner of the floor we noticed a circular bond,

probably of a decorative character, which was partially destroyed with a subsequent

digging in of a pit. It was possible to see there that the substructure of the wall lay

on a flattened rock. After the placement of the floor, a seat which lies on the floor

tiles was additionally built next to the said beam the impression of which was discovered.

According to the field observations, as well as the analysis of the archaeological

finds, it may be presumed that House 3 was built during the second half of

the 14 th century. In one of the subsequent periods, that could correspond to the end

of the 14 th century, the house was demolished in its entirety so that some of its walls

were taken out down to the very level of the ground. In the place of the destroyed

house, in the fill above its floor, with the thickness of around 0.30 m, House 3 –

younger phase was built, made of stone and mud mortar. On the south side, a new

wall was placed over the remains of the older one, but on account of the pressure of

the terrain it was found deformed. On the opposite side, there was a preserved smaller


pouzdano uo~en prema grebenima stena i ostacima poda. Otvoreno je pitawe

{ta se de{avalo sa konstrukcijom za stepeni{te, koje se nakon gradwe Ku}e 3

na{lo u wenom okviru. Moè se pretpostaviti da je ta konstrukcija inkorporirana

u ku}u u zate~enom stawu i da se na wu naslawao ju`ni zid ku}e. Uz ju`ni

zid, u ravni poda, otkriveni su ostaci jedne masivne drvene grede, dimenzija

16 × 14 cm, na koju je verovatno bila oslowena neka gorwa konstrukcija, budu-

}i da je u wenom jasno definisanom leì{tu otkriveno nekoliko metalnih

klinova. Ceo pod Ku}e 3 bio je poplo~an velikim opekama, dimenzija 29 × 36

× 4 cm. Opeke su bile poloène na masivnu malternu podlogu i prate se u pravilnom

slogu. Pod je relativno dobro o~uvan, s tim {to je deo opeka pova|en u

vreme ru{ewa ku}e. U severnom uglu poda uo~en je kru`ni slog, verovatno dekorativnog

karaktera, koji je poznijim ukopom jedne jame delimi~no uni{ten.

Tu se jasno moglo videti da je supstrukcija poda leàla na zaravwenoj steni.

Nakon postavqawa poda uz pomenutu gredu, ~iji je otisak otkriven uz ju`ni

zid, bio je prizidan banak, koji leì na podnim plo~ama. Prema terenskim

zapaàwima, kao i analizi arheolo{kih nalaza, moè se pretpostaviti da je

Ku}a 3 podignuta tokom druge polovine 14. veka. U jednoj poznijoj epohi, koja

Sl. 95. Ku}a 3, profil slojeva

uz Severoisto~ni bedem

(foto 2016)

Fig. 95. House 3, profile of

the layers by the North-East Rampart

(photo from 2016)

206


remain of a wall resting against the face of the rampart and built using mud mortar.

Towards the west, there was a preserved section of a wall, also made using mud

mortar, which had been founded on the floor slabs of the older building and the relevant

layer. This wall shows that the house from the younger phase had a smaller

surface area. It had a rectangular ground plan with the dimensions of 7.1 m × 4.3 m.

The floor in the house from the younger phase has not been preserved in its entirety

and its level is defined by only several floor stone slabs. It used to lie directly on a

layer that was used to fill the older floor. We got an impression that during this phase

the structure of the staircase was partially destroyed and levelled to the ground. On

the upper surface of this ruined structure, there are impressions of two wooden

planks, but it cannot be reliably claimed that this was some levelling with the floor

of the younger house or if it was an impression that has to do with the structure

from the first phase. In the southwest corner of the house from the younger phase,

we discovered a pit from which comes a find of a well preserved sgraffito bowl (fig.

24/1). After the processing of the pottery fragment finds from the relevant layers,

it may be presumed that the younger house was built soon after the demolition of

the older House 3. In one of the subsequent periods, that cannot be dated, this

younger house was also demolished and its remains were covered with a fill which

was next to the interior face of the rampart over 2 m high. The structure of the fill

has all the features of a medieval cultural layer with no later-date finds. In the

upper section of this fill, next to the very face of the rampart, it is possible to notice

a mound of small pieces of rock and broken stone which, like the entire embankment

had the function to reinforce the interior side of the rampart. This rocky

mound was covered with an earth coating around 30 cm to 40 cm thick. It was only

on top of this layer, which like the original configuration of the terrain descended

towards the north, that a layer of debris coming from the collapsing of the rampart

was formed.

House 4

Its remains were discovered in the direct proximity of Tower 8 (fig. 96–97). The house

had a rectangular ground plan with the width of around 3.50 m and the presumed

length of around 8 m. Its interior space used to be divided into two rooms – the north

one that was surveyed in its entirety and the south one that was only partially revealed.

Its walls were made of stone using mud mortar. It seems that in the structure

of the walls there used to be wooden pillars. At the northeast corner, an impression

of a round pillar with the diameter of 26 cm has been preserved in the wall mass.

In the north room of the house, there used to be a cistern with a filter well that was

dug in under its floor. The cistern of the ellipsoid shape, with the dimensions of

3.00 m × 2.10 m, used to rest against the interior faces of the walls of the room on

the west and the north sides, while on the south side a built stone enclosure was

found which used to surround it. The walls of the cistern were covered in reddish

clay, around 35 cm thick, while its interior was filled with coarser sand. This sand

fill was closed on the upper side with a thin layer of the same clay, around 5 cm

thick, which has been only partially preserved on the edges of the cistern. Above

this layer of clay there were stone slabs, at the level of -1.90, which constituted the

floor of the north room of House 4. The water from the cistern was available

through a batch box-well that is located by the east wall of the house. The batch


bi mogla odgovarati kraju 14. veka, ku}a je u celini poru{ena, tako da su joj neki

zidovi pova|eni do samog nivoa tla. Na mestu poru{ene ku}e u nasipu nad

wenim podom, debqine oko 0,3 m, podignuta je Ku}a 3 – mla|a faza, gra|ena kamenom

sa blatnim vezivom. Sa ju`ne strane novi zid je postavqen preko ostataka

starijeg, ali je usled pritiska terena otkriven deformisan. Sa suprotne

strane o~uvan je mawi ostatak zida, oslowen na lice bedema, gra|en sa blatnim

vezivom. Prema zapadu ostao je o~uvan deo zida, tako|e sa blatnim vezivom, koji

je bio utemeqen na plo~ama poda starije gra|evine i odgovaraju}em sloju.

Ovaj zid pokazuje da je ku}a iz mla|e faze bila mawe povr{ine. Imala je pravougaonu

osnovu, dimenzija 7,1 × 4,3 m. Pod u ku}i mla|e faze nije u celosti

sa~uvan, wegov nivo defini{e svega nekoliko kamenih podnih plo~a. Leào

je neposredno na sloju kojim je bio zasut stariji pod. Ima se utisak da je u ovoj

fazi konstrukcija stepeni{ta delom poru{ena i izravnata sa podom. Na gorwoj

povr{ini ove zaru{ene konstrukcije uo~avaju se otisci dve drvene talpe,

ali se ne moè pouzdano utvrditi da li je u pitawu neko izravnavawe sa podom

mla|e ku}e ili se radi o otisku koji ima veze sa konstrukcijom prve faze. U

jugozapadnom uglu ku}e mla|e faze otkrivena je jama, iz koje poti~e nalaz jedne

dobro o~uvane zgrafito-zdele (sl. 24/1). Nakon obrade nalaza kerami~kih

ulomaka iz odgovaraju}ih slojeva moè se pretpostaviti da je mla|a ku}a podignuta

ubrzo posle ru{ewa starije Ku}e 3. U jednom poznijem razdobqu, koje

se ne moè datovatii, i ova mla|a ku}a je poru{ena, a weni ostaci su zasuti

nasipom, koji je uz unutra{we lice bedema bio visok preko 2 m. Struktura nasipa

ima sve odlike sredwovekovnog kulturnog sloja bez poznijih nalaza. U

gorwem delu ovog nasipa, uz samo lice bedema uo~ava se naba~aj sitnog kamena

i tucanika, koji je, kao i nasip u celini, imao funkciju da oja~a unutra{wu

stranu bedema. Ovaj kameni naba~aj bio je prekriven zemqanim pla{tom, debqine

oko 30 do 40 cm. Tek nad ovim slojem, koji je, kao i prvobitna konfiguracija

terena, bio u padu prema severu, formiran je sloj {uta, koji poti~e od

uru{avawa bedema.

Ku}a 4

Weni ostaci otkriveni su u neposrednoj blizini Kule 8 (sl. 96–97). Ku}a je

bila pravougaone osnove, {irine oko 3,5 m i pretpostavqene duìne od oko 8 m.

Imala je unutra{wi prostor podeqen na dve prostorije – severnu, koja je u celini

istraèna, i ju`nu, samo delimi~no otkrivenu. Zidovi su joj gra|eni kamenom

sa blatnim vezivom. U strukturi zidova postojali su, izgleda, i drveni

direci. Kod severoisto~nog ugla u masi zida o~uvao se otisak kru`nog stuba,

pre~nika 26 cm. U severnoj prostoriji ku}e nalazila se cisterna sa filter-

-bunarom, koja je bila ukopana ispod wenog poda. Cisterna elipsoidnog oblika,

dimenzija 3 × 2,1 m, oslawala se na unutra{wa lica zidova prostorije sa zapadne

i severne strane, dok je na ju`noj strani otkriveno zidano kameno obzi|e,

koje je uokviruje. Zidovi cisterne su obloèni crvenkastom glinom, debqine

oko 35 cm, dok je unutra{wost ispuwena krupnijim peskom. Ova ispuna peskom

sa gorwe strane bila je zatvorena tankim slojem iste gline, debqine oko 5 cm,

koji je samo delimi~no o~uvan na rubovima cisterne. Iznad ovog sloja gline nalazile

su se, na koti -1,9 kamene plo~e, koje su ~inile pod severne prostorije

Ku}e 4. Voda iz cisterne je bila dostupna kroz santra~-bunar, koji se nalazi uz

208


box, now partially damaged, was built using small pieces of flaky rock of green

colour, while its diameter is around 40 cm. The partition wall between the rooms is

not clearly defined. Along its possible route, we discovered a ceramic pipe that carried

water to the south edge of the cistern with the filter well. The length of the pipe

is 36 cm, while its diameter is 12 cm. The floor of the south room of the house was

made of mortar and it lay at the level of -180. We revealed only a smaller section of

this floor since it enters with its major part into the south profile of the surveyed

area. The archaeological finds are relatively few, mostly fragments of pottery vessels.

As for the forms, among the discovered materials there are pots, bowls, jars

and lids, typical of the period at the end of the 14 th century and the first half of the

15 th century.

Edifice 5

The remains of this edifice, the former function of which could not be reliably determined,

were only partially surveyed. According to the discovered remains, it was

possible to discern two construction phases. The original edifice had an elongated

rectangular ground plan of the interior space and was partially dug in into the earlier

mentioned embankment formed along the interior face of the Northeast Rampart.

It was quite duly oriented along the east-west axis and in those terms it differed

from the other houses that mostly followed the direction of the ramparts or

they were adjusted to the configuration of the terrain. The original, east section of

the structure, with the dimensions of 6.60 m × 5.60 m, had the surface area of the

interior space of around 20 m². The north wall was partly dug into the said embankment

along the Northeast Rampart, as well as the remains of House 2 the entire west

angle of which was demolished on that occasion. The walls were made of stone using

mud mortar. In the lower section, which had the function of the underpinning,

they were built with one face that was coated with fine lime plaster. The width of

the north wall is 0.80 m, while the east one is somewhat wider and is around 1 m.

The exterior angle at the joint of these two walls was mildly rounded so that this

entire wall leaves an impression that this may have been a type of an apse ending.

In the structure of the east wall there are preserved remains of a niche that was

based at the height of 0.90 m in relation to the plane of the floor. Its preserved

length is at least 70 cm, while its depth within the wall is around 30 cm. On the

interior face of the niche’s wall, there are preserved remains of plaster formwork.

Within the remains of the wall on the west side, we discovered two doors, asymmetrically

positioned. One door is in the corner along the north wall, while the other

one is moved, in relation to the central axis, by the width of the passage (around

0.45 m). The lateral sides of the doors were finished with breccia ashlars.

The floor of the building (level -0.07) is on a flattened rock that mildly descends

towards the west and for this reason the levelling was done with yellow clay the

traces of which may be observed. In the layer above the floor, we discovered small

fragments of fresco plaster, as well as several fragments in which it is possible to

notice remains of red colour. Above this layer, the whole interior was filled with

stones and light brown earth with little mortar debris.

There are only indirect data for the dating of the older phase of Edifice 5. Taking

into consideration that it was dug into the embankment created along the interior

face of the North Rampart after the demolition of Houses 2 and 3, this edifice could


isto~ni zid ku}e. Santra~, sada delimi~no o{te}en, ozidan je sitnim komadima

plo~astog kamena zelene boje, a pre~nik mu iznosi oko 40 cm. Pregradni zid

izme|u prostorija nije jasno definisan. Na wegovoj mogu}oj trasi otkrivena

je jedna kerami~ka cev, koja je dovodila vodu do ju`nog ruba cisterne sa filter-bunarom.

Duìna cevi iznosi 36 cm, a pre~nik joj je 12 cm. Pod ju`ne prostorije

ku}e bio je od maltera i leào je na koti -180. Otkrivena je samo mawa

povr{ina ovog poda, budu}i da ve}im delom zalazi u ju`ni profil istraìvane

povr{ine. Arheolo{ki nalazi su relativno malobrojni, uglavnom fragmenti

kerami~kih posuda. Me|u prona|enim materijalom, od oblika se javqaju

lonci, zdele, kr~azi i poklopci, karakteristi~ni za razdobqe kraja 14. i prvu

polovinu 15. veka.

Sl. 96. Ku}a 4, deo otkriven u toku


Fig. 96. House 4,

section discovered during the


Sl. 97. Ku}a 4,

detaq filter-bunara

Fig. 97. House 4,

a detail of the filter-well

Objekat 5

Ostaci ovog zdawa, ~ija se nekada{wa funkcija nije mogla pouzdano odrediti,

samo su delimi~no istraèni. Prema otkrivenim ostacima, jasno su izdvojene

dve gra|evinske faze. Prvobitno zdawe imalo je izduènu pravougaonu osnovu

unutra{weg prostora i delimi~no je ukopano u ranije pomenuti nasip obrazovan

uz unutra{we lice Severoisto~nog bedema. Bilo je sasvim pravilno orijentisano

po osi istok–zapad i u tom smislu se razlikovalo od ostalih ku}a,

koje su uglavnom pratile pravac pruàwa bedema ili bile prilago|ene konfiguraciji

terena. Prvobitni, isto~ni deo objekta, dimenzija 6,6 × 5,6 m, imao

je povr{inu unutra{weg prostora od oko 20 m². Severni zid je delom ukopan u

pomenuti nasip uz Severoisto~ni bedem, kao i ostatke Ku}e 2, kojoj je tom prilikom

poru{en ceo zapadni ugao. Zidovi su od kamena sa blatnim vezivom. U

dowem delu, koji je bio u funkciji podzida, gra|eni su sa jednim licem, koje

je bilo omalterisano finim kre~nim malterom. [irina severnog zida iznosi

0,8 m, dok je isto~ni ne{to {iri i iznosi oko 1 m. Spoqni ugao na spoju ova

210


not be older than the second quarter of the 15 th century, but rather more likely it is

closer to the middle of that century. However, as opposed to the dating that may be

considered rather reliable, its function still remains insufficiently clear, since with

the shape of its ground plan and some constructional details it deviates from the

usual spatial solution for a residential building. Its regular orientation, then tiny fragments

of fresco plaster, as well as the fine plaster formwork on the preserved remains

of the walls provide for a possibility that this may have been a sacral building.

The modest manner of construction and cheap building could perhaps suggest

a conclusion that this edifice was built hastily, probably in the years before the

Ottoman conquest of the town. Some architectural details, however, are difficult to

clarify for the time being. This primarily refers to the two finely finished asymmetrically

positioned entrances within the west wall and because of the poor level of

preservation it is also difficult to assess the traces of the niche in the east wall.

Unable to consider this issue in more details, on account of the insufficient finds,

we would like to venture into an imagination-based reflection.

Edifice 5 may have constituted a two-confessional chapel built during the years

preceding the Ottoman conquest of the town. In addition to the Orthodox citizens,

the crew of the Lower Town certainly also consisted of people of the Latin faith who

did not have their separate church within the ramparts of Novo Brdo. Facing the

common difficulty this chapel intended for the liturgies of both confessions may

have been built before the Ottoman siege. In this way we could perhaps explain the

structure of its west wall with two separate entrances and the niche in the east wall

sufficiently big for the icons of both confessions.

During a subsequent phase, along the existing edifice another room was added

on the west side with the surface area of around 19 m². It also had walls made of

stone using mud mortar that have been preserved at the height of two to three rows

of stone in relation to the level of the floor (-0.66). In this younger phase, next to

a door in the south wall of the older building, a furnace with green glazed cockle

stove tiles was added with a square pit that was dug in next to it. With this addition,

which may be dated quite reliably back to the period following the Ottoman conquest

of the town, that is, most likely back to the 16 th century, this edifice got a residential

function.

154 Kora} 1954–1955, 270, fig. 37.

155 Pribakovi} 1958, 265.

Large Cistern

During the earlier surveying in 1953–1957, remains of a large cistern with filter

wells were discovered in the Lower Town adjacent to the interior face of the West

Rampart in the direct proximity of Tower 7. 154 This is a dug-in structure with an

approximately rectangular ground plan and with the interior dimensions of 24 m ×

8.5 m, that is, with the surface area of around 200 m². It had dug-in walls built with

one face covered with a thick layer of clay (fig. 98). It was filled in its entirety with

sand. In its south half, there are five large filter wells dug into this sand. All five wells

have approximately same dimensions with the diameter of around 1.90 m and they

were built in the same manner using circularly arranged flaky stone in dry walling

(fig. 99). Only one filter well was surveyed down to the depth of around 3.80–4.00 m

in relation to the plane of the floor above the cistern where water appeared. 155 It

remained unknown at which depth the bottom of the cistern was. Traces of other

structures in the Lower Town are yet to be surveyed in the future.


dva zida blago je zaobqen, tako da ceo ovaj zid daje utisak neke vrste apsidalnog

zavr{etka. U strukturi isto~nog zida o~uvani su ostaci ni{e, koja je bila zasnovana

na visini 0,9 m u odnosu na ravan poda. Wena o~uvana duìna iznosi

najmawe 70 cm, dok joj je dubina u zidu oko 30 cm. Na unutra{wem licu zida

ni{e ostali su o~uvani ostaci malterne oplate. U okviru ostataka zida sa zapadne

strane otkrivena su dvoja vrata, asimetri~no postavqena. Jedna su u uglu

uz severni zid, dok su druga, u odnosu na sredi{wu osu, pomerena za {irinu

prolaza (oko 0,45 m). Bo~ne strane vrata bile su obra|ene tesanicima bre~e.

Pod objekta (kota -0,07) bio je na zaravwenoj steni, koja blago pada prema

zapadu, te je stoga nivelisawe izvedeno ùtom glinom, ~iji se tragovi uo~avaju.

U sloju nad podom otkriveni su sitni ulomci fresko-maltera, kao i nekoliko

fragmenata, na kojima se uo~avaju ostaci crvene boje. Iznad ovog sloja

cela unutra{wost je bila zasuta kamenom i svetlomrkom zemqom sa malo malternog

{uta.

Za datovawe starije faze Objekta 5 postoje samo posredni podaci. Budu}i

da je ukopan u nasip koji je formiran uz unutra{we lice Severnog bedema posle

ru{ewa Ku}e 2 i Ku}e 3, ovo zdawe ne bi moglo biti starije od druge ~etvrtine

15. veka, ve} najverovatnije bliè sredini toga stole}a. Me|utim, za razliku

od datovawa, koje se moè smatrati dosta pouzdanim, wegova funkcija jo{

uvek ostaje nedovoqno jasna, budu}i da oblikom svoje osnove i nekim detaqima

gradwe odstupa od uobi~ajenog prostornog re{ewa stambenog zdawa. Pravilna

orijentacija, zatim sitni fragmenti fresko-maltera, kao i fina malterna

oplata na o~uvanim ostacima zidova, ukazuju na mogu}nost da je u pitawu bilo

neko sakralno zdawe. Skroman na~in zidawa i jevtina gradwa mo`da bi mogli

da navedu na zakqu~ak da je ovo zdawe gra|eno na brzinu, verovatno u godinama

pred tursko osvajawe grada. Neki detaqi arhitekture, me|utim, za sada se te{ko

mogu objasniti. To se prvobitno odnosi na dva fino obra|ena asimetri~no postavqena

ulaza u okviru zapadnog zida. Zbog slabe o~uvanosti te{ko je suditi

i o tragovima ni{e u isto~nom zidu. U nemogu}nosti da se ovo pitawe, usled nedovoqnosti

nalaza, detaqnije razmotri neka nam bude dozvoqeno da uz malo ma-

{te iznesemo jedno razmi{qawe.

Objekat 5 mogao je predstavqati dvokonfesionalnu kapelu, podignutu u godinama

pred tursko osvajawe grada. Posadu Doweg grada, pored pravoslavnih

gra|ana, sasvim sigurno ~inilo je i qudstvo latinske vere, koje u okviru bedema

Novog Brda nije imalo svoju posebnu bogomoqu. U zajedni~koj nevoqi pred

turskom opsadom mogla je biti podignuta ova kapela, namewena za bogosluèwe

obe veroispovesti. Tako bi se mo`da mogla objasniti struktura zapadnog zida

sa dva odvojena ulaza i ni{a u isto~nom zidu dovoqno velika za ikone obe

konfesije.

U jednoj poznijoj fazi, uz postoje}i objekat je dogra|ena sa zapadne strane

jo{ jedna prostorija, povr{ine oko 19 m². Imala je tako|e zidove od kamena sa

blatnim vezivom, koji su o~uvani u visini dva do tri reda kamena u odnosu na

nivo poda (-0,66). U ovoj mla|oj fazi uz jedna vrata na ju`nom zidu starijeg

objekta ugra|ena je pe} sa zelenogle|osanim pe}wacima, uz koju je bila ukopana

i jedna kvadratna jama. Ovom dogradwom, koja se sasvim pouzdano moè datovati

u razdobqe posle turskog osvajawa grada, odnosno najverovatnije u 16. vek,

objekat je dobio stambenu funkciju.

212



Sl. 99. Dowi grad,

velika cisterna kod Kule 7,

detaq filter-bunara

Fig. 99. Lower Town,

large cistern beside Tower 7,

detail of the filter-well

Velika cisterna

Prilikom ranijih istraìvawa 1953–1957. godine u Dowem gradu su uz unutra{we

lice zapadnog bedema u neposrednoj blizini Kule 7 otkriveni ostaci

jedne velike cisterne sa filter-bunarima. 154 U pitawu je ukopano zdawe, pribli`no

pravougaone osnove, unutra{wih dimenzija 24 × 8,5 m, odnosno povr-

{ine od oko 200 m². Imala je ukopane zidove, gra|ene sa jednim licem, oblepqene

debelim slojem gline (sl. 98). U celosti je bila ispuwena peskom, u koji

je u wenoj ju`noj polovini ukopano pet velikih filter-bunara. Svih pet bunara

su pribli`no jednakih dimenzija, pre~nika oko 1,9 m, i jednako su gra|eni

kru`no sloènim plo~astim kamenom u suhozidu (sl. 99). Istraèn je samo jedan

filter-bunar, i to do dubine od oko 3,8–4 m u odnosu na ravan poda iznad

cisterne gde se pojavila voda. 155 Ostalo je nepoznato na kojoj dubini se nalazilo

dno cisterne. Tragovi ostalih objekata u Dowem gradu tek treba da budu

istraìvani u budu}nosti.

Sl. 98. Dowi grad, velika cisterna kod Kule 7 u toku istraìvawa 1953

Fig. 98. Lower Town, large cistern beside tower 7, during the surveying in 1953

154 Kora} 1954–1955, 270, sl. 37.

155 Pribakovi} 1958, 265.

214

The Suburb

156 Zdravkovi} 1953–1954, 809–812.

AS OPPOSED TO THE CASTLE AND THE LOWER TOWN, THE FORTIFIED SECTION

of the urban settlement where, as it has been presented above, there were explorations

conducted to a greater or a lesser degree, little is known about the former

spacious Suburb of the town of Novo Brdo. The area of the Suburb has remained

almost completely unsurveyed to the present days. The position in which the new

settlement was founded in line with the characteristics of the existing relief was not

suitable for the building of an urban settlement. It was an area of smaller ravines

between three smallish elevations. The Castle was built on the main elevation towards

the west and its position determined the expansion of the urban zone towards

the east. This area is dominated by a hillock on which at the beginning of the eight

decade of the 14 th century the Church of Saint Nicholas, the former Orthodox

Cathedral of Novo Brdo, was founded. Further towards the north a part of the town

expanded across a spacious height known by the name of Grozni~avac. A relatively

flat or better said mildly wavy interspace between the said heights was relatively

suitable, that is, it provided the only possibilities for a free expansion of the Suburb.

(fig. 100)

On the basis of superficial observations little can be said now about the appearance

of the structure of the Suburb. The first surveyors of Novo Brdo, around the

middle of the last century, were in a slightly better situation since at that time it

was still possible to discern some of the material remains of the disappeared town

(fig. 101). At that time, the urban structure of Novo Brdo’s suburb, as recorded by

\ur|e Bo{kovi}, could be distinguished by the traces of individual communication

lines. As it was noted then, all of them led radially from one centre, that is, towards

one centre. In the area of the former suburb it was possible to notice numerous

traces of stone walls of buildings in-between the routes of the former communications.

Through superficial observations, taking into account that no broader

archaeological surveying was carried out, it was possible to notice the positions of

the former town’s quarters. 156 In the middle of the settlement, where streets from

215

Podgra]e

O NEKADA[WEM PROSTRANOM PODGRA\U GRADA NOVOG BRDA SADA SE

malo zna, za razliku od Zamka i Doweg grada – utvr|enog dela gradskog naseqa,

gde su, kao {to je napred navedeno, vr{ena istraìvawa u ve}em ili mawem

obimu. Prostor Podgra|a je do na{eg vremena ostao gotovo sasvim neistraèn.

Poloàj na kome je zasnovano novo naseqe prema odlikama zate~enog reqefa

nije bio podesan za gra|ewe urbane naseobine. To je bio prostor mawih udolina

izme|u tri nevelika uzvi{ewa. Na glavnom visu prema zapadu podignut je

Zamak, ~iji je poloàj predodredio {irewe gradske urbane zone prema istoku.

Tu se isticao breg na kome je po~etkom osme decenije 14. veka zasnovana crkva

Svetog Nikole, potowa pravoslavna katedrala Novog Brda. Daqe prema severu

deo grada se {irio na prostrani vis, poznat pod imenom Grozni~avac. Relativno

ravan ili, boqe re}i, blago zatalasan me|uprostor izme|u pomenutih

visova bio je donekle podesan, odnosno pruào je jedine mogu}nosti za slobodno

{irewe Podgra|a (sl. 100).

O tome kako je izgledala struktura Podgra|a, sada se na osnovu povr{inskog

osmatrawa malo {ta moè re}i. Prvi istraìva~i Novog Brda sredinom

pro{log veka bili su u ne{to boqoj situaciji budu}i da je u to vreme jo{ uvek

bilo mogu}e po ne{to uo~iti od materijalnih ostataka i{~ezlog grada (sl.

101). U to vreme urbana struktura novobrdskog Podgra|a, kako je zabeleìo

\ur|e Bo{kovi}, nazirala se prema tragovima pojedinih saobra}ajnica. Kako

je tada zapaèno, sve one su vodile radijalno iz jednog centra, odnosno ka jednom

centru. U prostoru nekada{weg Podgra|a mogli su se uo~iti brojni tragovi

kamenih zidova zgrada izme|u pravaca nekada{wih komunikacija. Povr-

{inskim osmatrawem, s obzirom na to da obimnija arheolo{ka istraìvawa

nisu vr{ena, uo~eni su poloàji nekada{wih gradskih kvartova. 156 U sredi-

{tu naseqa, gde su se susticale ulice iz razli~itih pravaca, nalazio se prostrani

trg. 157 Nedaleko od ovog sredi{ta naseqa nalazila se glavna gradska crkva

– katedrala Svetog Nikole (sl. 102).

156 Zdravkovi} 1953–1954, 809–812.

157 Popovi} 2016, 58.

216

157 Popovi} 2016, 58.

158 Bo{kovi} 1974, 102.

159 Zdravkovi} 1953–1954, 809–811.

160 For more details about

Catholic churches in Novo Brdo,

see Gogi} 2016, 1–25.

161 Popovi} 2019, 245–256;

Popovi} 2019a, in print.

162 êr{kov 1958, 338–340;

Bo{kovi} 1974, 108;

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 106–114.

163 Recently, an erroneous supposition

was presented that this church used to be

situated in the Lower Town of the fortress,

see Gogi} 2016, 8–10.

164 Gogi} 2016, 14.


different directions congregated, there used to be a spacious market square. 157 Not

far from this centre of the town, there used to be the main town’s church – the

Cathedral of Saint Nicholas (fig. 102).

It may be presumed that this was precisely where the main town’s institutions

used to be, as was the case with the other medieval towns. There is no data about

which types of edifices there used to be here. Their material traces, if they still exist,

have been covered in debris and earth fills. One of them, that has endured to the

present days, is a large cistern with a filter well that narrows down towards the top

and has a diameter of over 2 m. Even after several centuries, water collects in this

cistern and it is occasionally even used. In addition to the public buildings, around

this town’s centre there must have been buildings of wealthier citizens of Novo

Brdo. What these buildings used to look like is anybody’s guess. It is quite possible

that, with an exception of several bigger and more important buildings made of

solid materials, all other residential buildings were made of wood. They were distributed

around mahallas, quarters, populated by the citizens, miners, merchants

and different craftsmen, perhaps grouped up by the guilds which were several in

the town and covered different professions. 158 The first surveyors of Novo Brdo had

the opportunity to conduct interviews with the eldest local residents and to record

the last memories of the former mahallas of Novo Brdo. These were the mahallas

from the last horizon in the life of the town that does not reach further than the

late 18 th century. 159

As opposed to the residential buildings, there is a little bit more knowledge

about the former churches of Novo Brdo. In addition to the archaeological remains

of the churches, some of which have been explored in more details, there is also relatively

modest data in the original historical materials, that is, in the documents

from Dubrovnik and Kotor. The Catholics – the Saxons and the littoral merchants,

who constituted a significant number of residents of Novo Brdo – were organised

within a plebania (parish) which, like in the other Serbian towns, fell under the

jurisdiction of the Bishop of Kotor. Novo Brdo’s catholic parish, founded probably

in the first decades of the 14 th century, was mentioned for the first time in 1346.

As a parish under the Bishopric of Kotor, it was under the spiritual authority of the

church in this town even later when Kotor was no longer under the Serbian rule. 160

It was only in the first decades of the 15 th century that the Catholics of Novo Brdo

moved to the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Bar.

The main Roman Catholic church of Novo Brdo, Santa Maria in Novomonte,

known as the Sa{ka crkva (Saxon Church), was built during the first half of the 14 th

century. 161 It was located within the suburban Lower Market Square, less than a

kilometre southeast of the fortified suburb 162 (fig. 103). Another, smaller Catholic

church, dedicated to Saint Nicholas, which originally served as a chapel (capella Santi

Nicolai), was built around 1380 in the very suburb of Novo Brdo. Its more accurate

location is not known. 163 In the first decades of the 15 th century, both of these

churches were jointed into a single parish. 164 They were mentioned as the catholic

churches in which services were organised, temporarily or constantly, up until the

middle of the 17 th century.

Significantly less is known about the orthodox churches of Novo Brdo. In addition

to the monumental cathedral Church of Saint Nicholas, there were several

other smaller single-nave churches in the Suburb. On the south slope under the

Sl. 100. Novo Brdo, pretpostavqeni areal Podgra|a

Fig. 100. Novo Brdo, presumed coverage of the Suburb


218


a


275–282; Zdravkovi}, Simi} 1956,

245–251.

166 Zdravkovi}, Simi} 1956, 251–254,

fig. 7.

167 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 94.

Cathedral there was a church dedicated to the Virgin. A little farther, in the south

part of the suburb, remains of a single-nave church called “Jov~a” were discovered

and surveyed. 165 Not far from Jov~a, near the route of the south rampart of the

suburb, there were three other single-nave churches, locally known as “Sabornice.”

The walls of one of those small churches with a semi-circular apse were excavated

in 1955. 166 In the far south section, there is a preserved toponym “Markove crkve”

(Mark’s churches) and “~ifte kilise,” which could mean that there used to be two

smaller churches. In the north section of the suburb, at Grozni~avac site, there are

recorded traces of two other smaller churches. 167 These first findings on the sacral

topography of Novo Brdo, partially based on the terrain prospection or the accounts

of the local residents, should be verified in the future by archaeological surveying

of the preserved structures.

These small single-nave churches represented family endowments of the local

nobility and wealthy citizens. Their building is characteristic of the Byzantine urban

centres some of which found themselves within the Serbian state from the times of

the reign of King Stefan Uro{ II. Even under the new conditions their development

continued influencing the creation of the new Serbian urban centres. It is difficult

to say how strong this impact was in Novo Brdo. The appearance of small family

endowments in urban settings, such as those in nearby Prizren and probably in other

towns on which we have no data, is certainly a testimony to such influences.

As it has already been pointed out above, the suburb of Novo Brdo developed

in the areas east of the hillock on which the Castle was built. The setting up of an

urban matrix east of the fortress went on spontaneously while adjusting to the

existing features of the relief. The population density declined going from the central

zone with the market square in the centre towards the peripheral section. It may

be presumed quite reliably that these were the areas to which the Suburb expanded

regardless of the degree of suitability for the setting up of housing insulae. During


b

Sl. 101. Novo Brdo, prostor Podgra|a:

a) severoisto~ni i

b) severni deo (foto 1952)

Fig. 101. Novo Brdo, area of the Suburb:

a) north-east section;

b) north section (photo 1952)

Moè se pretpostaviti da su se upravo tu nalazile glavne gradske institucije,

kao {to je to bilo i u drugim sredwovekovnim gradovima. Nema podataka

o tome koja su sve zdawa tu postojala. Wihovi materijalni tragovi, ukoliko

jo{ uvek postoje, zasuti su {utom i nanosima zemqe. Jedno od wih, koje je pretrajalo

sve do na{ih dana, bila je velika cisterna sa filter-bunarom, koji se

pri vrhu suàvao i imao pre~nik od preko 2 m. I nakon vi{e stole}a u ovoj

cisterni se prikupqa voda, koja se povremeno i koristi. Oko ovog gradskog

sredi{ta, pored javnih zdawa, nalazile su se sigurno zgrade bogatijih gra|ana

Novog Brda. Kako su izgledala ta zdawa, moè se samo pretpostaviti. Lako je

mogu}e da su, sa izuzetkom nekoliko ve}ih i zna~ajnijih zgrada podignutih od

tvrdog materijala, ostale stambene gra|evine bile sagra|ene od drveta. One su

bile raspore|ene po mahalama, u kojima su stanovali gra|ani, rudari, trgovci

i razne zanatlije, mo`da grupisani prema esnafima, kojih je u gradu bilo vi-

{e, i to razli~itih struka. 158 Prvi istraìva~i Novog Brda bili su u mogu}nosti

da anketom me|u najstarijim zate~enim stanovnicima zabeleè posledwa

se}ewa na nekada{we novobrdske mahale. U pitawu su bile mahale iz posledweg

horizonta ìvota grada, koji ne seè dubqe od poznog 18. veka. 159

Za razliku od stambenih gra|evina, o nekada{wim novobrdskim crkvama

ne{to se vi{e zna. Pored arheolo{kih ostataka crkava, od kojih su neki i detaqnije

istraèni, postoje i relativno skromni podaci u izvornoj istorijskoj

gra|i, odnosno dubrova~kim i kotorskim dokumentima. Katolici – Sasi i primorski

trgovci, koji su ~inili znatan broj stanovni{tva Novog Brda – bili su

organizovani u okviru jedne plebanije (ùpe), koja je, kao i u drugim srpskim

gradovima, spadala pod jurisdikciju kotorskog biskupa. Novobrdska katoli~ka

ùpa, osnovana verovatno u prvim decenijama 14. veka, prvi put se pomiwe 159 Zdravkovi} 1953–1954, 809–811.

158 Bo{kovi} 1974, 102.

1346. godine. Kao parohija Kotorske biskupije, bila je pod duhovnom vla{}u 160 Detaqnije o katoli~kim crkvama

crkve ovog grada i kasnije, kada Kotor vi{e nije bio pod srpskom vla{}u. 160 u Novom Brdu v. Gogi} 2016, 1–25.

220


Sl. 102. Katedralni hram Svetog Nikole u Podgra|u – osnova i presek (prema Popovi}, Bjeli} 2018)

Fig. 102. Cathedral church of Saint Nicholas in the Suburb – ground plan and the cross-section (according to Popovi}, Bjeli}, 2018)


Tek u prvim decenijama 15. veka novobrdski katolici su pre{li u nadle`nost

barskog nadbiskupa.

Glavna rimokatoli~ka crkva Novog Brda, Santa Maria in Novomonte, poznata

kao Sa{ka crkva, podignuta je tokom prve polovine 14. veka. 161 Nalazila se u

okviru prigradskog Doweg trga, nepun kilometar jugoisto~no od utvr|enog Podgra|a

162 (sl. 103). Druga, mawa katoli~ka crkva, posve}ena Svetom Nikoli, koja

je prvobitno sluìla kao kapela (capella Santi Nicolai), podignuta je oko 1380.

godine u samom Podgra|u Novog Brda. Wena blià lokacija nije poznata. 163 Obe

ove crkve su u prvim decenijama 15. veka spojene u jednu ùpu. 164 Kao katoli~ki

hramovi u kojima je obavqano bogosluèwe, povremeno ili stalno, pomiwu

se sve do sredine 17. veka.

O pravoslavnim hramovima Novog Brda znatno mawe se zna. U Podgra|u,

osim monumentalnog katedralnog hrama Svetog Nikole, postojalo je nekoliko

malih jednobrodnih crkava. Na ju`noj padini niè katedrale nalazila se crkva

posve}ena Bogorodici. Ne{to daqe, u ju`nom delu Podgra|a, otkriveni su i

istraèni ostaci jednobrodne crkve zvane Jov~a. 165 Nedaleko od Jov~e, u blizini

trase Ju`nog bedema Podgra|a, postojale su jo{ tri jednobrodne crkve, u

narodu poznate kao „Sabornice“. Zidovi jednog od ovih malih hramova sa polukru`nom

apsidom otkopani su 1955. godine. 166 Na krajwem ju`nom delu, ostao

je sa~uvan toponim „Markove crkve“ i „~ifte kilise“, {to bi moglo zna~iti

da su se tu nalazile dve mawe crkve. I u severnom delu Podgra|a, na lokalitetu

Grozni~avac, zabeleèni su tragovi jo{ dve mawe crkve. 167 Ova prva saznawa o

sakralnoj topografiji Novog Brda, zasnovana delom na terenskoj prospekciji

ili kazivawima me{tana, u budu}nosti bi vaqalo proveriti arheolo{kim istraìvawima

sa~uvanih struktura.

Ove male jednobrodne crkve predstavqale su porodi~ne zadu`bine lokalne

vlastele i bogatih gra|ana. Wihova pojava je karakteristi~na za vizantijska

urbana sredi{ta, od kojih su se neka, od vremena vladavine kraqa Stefana

Uro{a II, na{la u okvirima srpske dràve. I u novim uslovima wihov razvoj

je nastavqen, sa uticajem na obrazovawe novih srpskih urbanih sredi{ta. Koliko

je taj uticaj bio jak u Novom Brdu, te{ko je re}i. Pojava malih porodi~nih

zadu`bina u urbanim sredinama, kakvih je bilo u obli`wem Prizrenu, a verovatno

i drugim gradovima o kojima nemamo podataka, sigurno je svedo~anstvo

takvih uticaja.

Kao {to je ve} napred istaknuto, novobrdsko Podgra|e razvijalo se na prostorima

isto~no od brega na kome je podignut Zamak. Formirawe urbane matrice

isto~no od utvr|ewa teklo je spontano, uz prilago|avawe zate~enim odlikama

reqefa. Gustina naseqenosti smawivala se od centralne zone, sa trgom u

sredi{tu, ka rubnim delovima. Moè se dosta pouzdano pretpostaviti da su to

bili prostori na koje se Podgra|e {irilo bez obzira na to do koje su mere postojale

pogodnosti za formirawe stambenih insula. Tokom vi{e decenija od

zasnivawa grada nije bilo prepreka za prostorno {irewe urbane zone, budu}i

da u to vreme, sasvim sigurno, gradski areal nije bio ome|an niti planski

ograni~en. Promene koje su uticale na daqu urbanizaciju Novog Brda nastupile

su sa raspadom Srpskog carstva i pojavom Turaka na centralnobalkanskim

prostorima. Posle hri{}anskog poraza na Marici 1371. godine ranije mirne

sredi{we oblasti srpskih zemaqa na{le su se na udaru otomanske oruàne

161 Popovi} 2019, 245–256;

Popovi} 2019a, u {tampi.

162 êr{kov 1958, 338–340;

Bo{kovi} 1974, 108;

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 106–114.

163 Nedavno je izneta pogre{na

pretpostavka o tome da se ova crkva

nalazila u Dowem gradu utvr|ewa,

v. Gogi} 2016, 8–10.

164 Isto, 14.


275–282; Zdravkovi}, Simi} 1956,

245–251.

166 Zdravkovi}, Simi} 1956, 251–254,

sl. 7.

167 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 94.

222

168 Dini} 1954–1955, 248.

169 Zdravkovi} 1953–1954, 809.

170 Bo{kovi} 1974, 102–103.


several decades from the founding of the town, there were no obstacles for the spatial

expansion of the urban zone since at that time, quite certainly, the town’s areal

was not marked out or limited by any plan. The changes that impacted further

urbanisation of Novo Brdo came about with the dissolution of the Serbian Empire

and the arrival of the Ottomans to the central Balkan territories. After the defeat of

the Christians in the Battle of Maritsa in 1371, the previously peaceful central areas

of the Serbian lands found themselves on the path of the Ottoman army. Under

these new circumstances, the defence of the settlements and other importance places

that had not been fortified before had to be organised. We will not be wrong if we

presume that in the case of Novo Brdo this meant fencing off, that is, the fortifying

of the Suburb.

As for the appearance of the new fortifications and their routes, on the basis of

the available data we may only have a very vague notion. We do not have any reliable

data now as to what this process of fortification looked like and how long it

took. In the middle of the 1950’s, the first experts noticed that even around the

suburb there used to be a system of defence. Unfortunately, there is very little data

about these observations. We only have a sketch by architect A. Deroko with a presumed

route of the fortifications, which as an illustration of his paper was published

by M. Dini}. 168 A little later, the issue concerning the possible fortification

around the suburb was also dealt with by \. Bo{kovi} who, taking into account the

modest traces found in the field, asked if the Suburb was indeed fortified as a

whole. In those considerations of his, he presented a supposition that the traces of

a massive built structure in the south section of the Suburb, which the local population

called Karina kula, 169 actually constituted the remains of the main gate of the

suburb. This led him to an idea that only the gates were built, while the other fortifications

were actually in the form of an earth rampart with palisades. 170 When it

comes to the town’s gate, this insufficiently founded supposition could hardly be

accepted. The built structure, which he presumed to have been the gate, was located

within the interior of the urban matrix of the Suburb and not at its peripheral section.

These are remains of some certainly important building of Novo Brdo about

which nothing can be said now, without archaeological surveying.

Thanks to the subsequent superficial prospecting of the terrain, routes with

traces of the fortifications that marked out the space of the Suburb were noticed in

several places. There is an open question as to what was encompassed by the new fortifications.

The most important segment of the existing urban structure was quite

certainly fenced. The peripheral, more sparsely populated sections were quite certainly

left out. With the construction of the fortifications, the population density in

the defended section of the Suburb quite certainly increased significantly.

The issue concerning the population density in the defended space of the Suburb

and generally of the residents of Novo Brdo was quite successfully dealt with

by architect M. Kova~evi}. On the basis of a comprehensive analysis of the available

documentation and the field researches, he came to a conclusion that the total

number of inhabitants in the Suburb could have been a little over 9,000 residents,

i.e., taking into account the possible errors, somewhere between 8,000 and 10,000

individuals.

In the end, let us go back to our basic consideration which is what the fortifications

of the suburb of Novo Brdo may have looked like and when they were built.


sile. U tim novim okolnostima morala je da se organizuje odbrana naseqa i drugih

zna~ajnih mesta koja ranije nisu bila fortificirana. Ne}emo pogre{iti

ako pretpostavimo da je za Novo Brdo to zna~ilo ogra|ivawe, odnosno fortificirawe

Podgra|a.

O izgledu novih fortifikacija i wihovim trasama, prema raspoloìvim

podacima, moè se samo naslu}ivati. O tome kako je izgledao taj proces utvr-

|ivawa i koliko je trajao, mi sada ne raspolaèmo pouzdanim podacima. Prvi

istraìva~i sredinom pedesetih godina pro{log veka uo~ili su da je i oko

Podgra|a postojao sistem odbrane. O tim zapaàwima ostalo je, naàlost, malo

podataka. Raspolaèmo samo jednom skicom arhitekte A. Deroka sa pretpostavqenom

trasom fortifikacija, koju je kao ilustraciju svog rada objavio M. Dini}.

168 Ne{to kasnije problemom eventualnog utvr|ewa oko Podgra|a bavio se

i \. Bo{kovi}, koji postavqa pitawe, imaju}i u vidu skromne tragove na terenu,

da li je Podgra|e u celini uop{te bilo utvr|eno. U tim svojim razmatrawima

izneo je pretpostavku da bi tragovi jedne masivne zidane strukture u ju`nom

delu Podgra|a, koju je lokalno stanovni{tvo nazivalo Karina kula, 169 zapravo

predstavqali ostatke glavne kapije Podgra|a. To ga je navelo na pomisao da su

samo kapije bile zidane, dok bi ostale fortifikacije zapravo bile u vidu zemqanog

bedema sa palisadama. 170 Ova nedovoqno utemeqena pretpostavka kada je

u pitawu gradska kapija te{ko bi se mogla prihvatiti. Zidana struktura, za

koju je pretpostavio da je bila kapija, nalazila se u unutra{wosti urbane matrice

Podgra|a, a ne na wegovom rubnom delu. U pitawu su ostaci nekog sigurno

zna~ajnog novobrdskog zdawa, o kome se za sada, bez arheolo{kih istraìvawa,

ni{ta ne moè re}i.

Kasnijom povr{inskom prospekcijom terena na vi{e mesta uo~ene su trase

sa tragovima fortifikacija kojima je bio ome|an prostor Podgra|a. Otvoreno

je pitawe {ta je bilo obuhva}eno novim fortifikacijama. Sasvim sigurno

Sl. 103. Santa Maria in Nuovomonte

– Sa{ka crkva na Dowem trgu,

jugoisto~no od Podgra|a

Fig. 103. Santa Maria in Nuovomonte

– the Saxon Church in the Lower Market

Square, south-east of the Suburb

168 Dini}1954–1955, 248.

169 Zdravkovi} 1953–1954, 809.

170 Bo{kovi} 1974, 102–103.

224


When conducting superficial prospection in 2017 we had an opportunity to observe

collapsed remains of a built rampart on the south periphery of the Suburb, in a section

that was not more than 20 metres long. This was a rocky ridge with a vertical

side which in relation to the surrounding terrain could have the height of over 3.00 m.

On the upper surface of the ridge, there were traces of a wall mass with a collapsed

face which was originally at the same plane with the vertical side of the ridge. It remains

unknown what the height of the rampart in that place was, but if we presume

that above the vertical cliff of around 3.00 m there used to be a rampart, the height of

which may have been as much as 4.00 m, we could presume a wall curtain of around

7.00 m in height. The thickness of the rampart could only be guessed. Judging by

the traces in the field, it seems to us that it could not have been wider than 1.40 m.

This piece of data on the built rampart of the Suburb, the only certain one for

the time being, is partially also corroborated by the results of smaller unpublished

probings that were conducted at the north periphery of the Suburb. 171 Three small

probes revealed traces of a wall mass of a rampart, but unfortunately no further

surveying has been carried out. On the basis of these fragmented findings, the fortified

areal of the suburb was defined rather hypothetically. It remains an open

question whether a built rampart was constructed along the entire route or if there

were sections with earth rampart and palisades.

Owing to a change in the geostrategic situation after 1371, it seems that the

citizens of Novo Brdo reacted very quickly. It may be presumed that the fortifying

of the Suburb started already during the eight decade of the 14 th century. It is not

known how long this process took, but an indirect data shows that there was no

delay about these works. A couple of years before 1381, as it was recorded in the

documents of Vatican, in the Suburb the citizens of Kotor built hastily, which means

without the usual prior preparations, a small church or rather a chapel for the Latin

services. One of the justifications was that the main Catholic church Santa Maria

in Nuovomonte was located almost two kilometres away from the Suburb and that

from time to time it was unsafe to go there for the services. 172 From this, it could be

indirectly concluded that already at the very beginning of the ninth decade of the

14 th century, the suburb of Novo Brdo, although perhaps not fortified in its entirety,

already had a defence system which provided safety to the citizens.

The fortifications of the Suburb, the strength of which we cannot assess, played

an important role in the defence of Novo Brdo during the Ottoman attacks in the

first half of the 15 th century. After the Ottoman conquest of the town in 1455, the

defence of the Suburb lost its importance. During the Ottoman rule, the ramparts

that were found there, being unnecessary, were dismantled thus vanishing almost

without a trace.

171 Documentation at the

Institute of Archaeology in Belgrade;

Kova~evi} 2001, 272.

172 Gogi} 2016, 12;

Popovi} 2019, 245–256.


ogra|en je bio najzna~ajniji deo zate~ene urbane strukture. Rubni, re|e naseqeni

delovi su sasvim sigurno bili izostavqeni. Sa gra|ewem fortifikacija gustina

naseqenosti u brawenom delu Podgra|a sasvim sigurno je znatno pove}ana.

Pitawima o gustini stanovni{tva u brawenom prostoru Podgra|a, i uop{te

ìteqa Novog Brda, dosta uspe{no se bavio arhitekta M. Kova~evi}. Na osnovu

svestrane analize raspoloìve dokumentacije i istraìvawa na terenu, on

je do{ao do zakqu~ka da je ukupan broj stanovnika u Podgra|u mogao iznositi

ne{to vi{e od 9.000 ìteqa, odnosno, ra~unaju}i mogu}e gre{ke, izme|u 8.000

i 10.000 individua.

Na kraju, vratimo se na{em osnovnom razmatrawu, kako su mogle izgledati

fortifikacije novobrdskog Podgra|a i kada su gra|ene. Prilikom povr{inske

prospekcije 2017. godine bili smo u prilici da na ju`nom rubu Podgra|a,

na jednoj deonici, ne duòj od 20 m, uo~imo zaru{ene ostatke zidanog bedema.

U pitawu je bio jedan stenoviti greben sa vertikalnom stranicom, koja je u odnosu

na okolni teren nekada mogla imati visinu od preko 3 m. Na gorwoj povr-

{ini grebena ostali su tragovi zidne mase sa obru{enim licem, koje je prvobitno

bilo u istoj ravni sa okomitom stranom grebena. Kolika je visina bedema

bila na tom mestu, ostaje nepoznato, ali ako pretpostavimo da je iznad okomite

litice od oko 3 m stajao bedem, ~ija je visina mogla iznositi i 4 m, mogli

bismo pretpostaviti zidno platno od oko 7 m visine. Kolika je bila debqina

ovog bedema, da se samo naslutiti. Prema tragovima na terenu, ~ini nam se da

nije mogla biti {ira od 1,4 m.

Ovaj, za sada jedini siguran podatak o zidanom bedemu Podgra|a delimi~no

potvr|uju i rezultati mawih neobjavqenih sondirawa koja su vr{ena na severnom

rubu Podgra|a. 171 Tu su u tri mawe sonde otkriveni tragovi zidne mase

bedema, ali daqa istraìvawa, naàlost, nisu nastavqena. Na osnovu ovih fragmentarnih

saznawa, dosta hipoteti~no je definisan utvr|eni areal Podgra|a.

Ostalo je otvoreno pitawe da li je du` cele trase bio podignut zidani bedem

ili je bilo i deonica sa zemqanim bedemom i palisadama.

Usled promene geostrate{ke situacije posle 1371. godine izgleda da su gra-

|ani Novog Brda veoma brzo reagovali. Moè se pretpostaviti da je fortificirawe

Podgra|a zapo~eto ve} tokom osme decenije 14. veka. Koliko je taj proces

trajao, nije poznato, ali jedan posredan podatak ukazuje na to da se sa tim

poslovima nije dugo ~ekalo. Koju godinu pre, 1381, kako je ostalo zabeleèno u

vatikanskim dokumentima, Kotorani su u Podgra|u podigli, na brzinu, {to bi

zna~ilo bez prethodnih uobi~ajenih priprema, malu crkvu, boqe re}i kapelu,

latinskog bogosluèwa. Jedno od obrazloèwa je bilo da se glavna katoli~ka

crkva Santa Maria in Nuovomonte nalazila gotovo 2 km udaqena od Podgra|a i

da je povremeno bilo nebezbedno odlaziti tamo na bogosluèwa. 172 Iz ovoga bi

se posredno moglo zakqu~iti da je ve} u osvit devete decenije 14. veka novobrdsko

Podgra|e, iako mo`da nije u celini bilo fortificirano, ve} imalo

sistem odbrane koji je pruào sigurnost gra|anima.

Utvr|ewa Podgra|a, o ~ijoj ja~ini ne moèmo suditi, imala su va`nu ulogu

u odbrani Novog Brda prilikom turskih napada tokom prve polovine 15. veka.

Posle turskog osvajawa grada 1455. godine odbrana Podgra|a izgubila je svoj

zna~aj. Tokom turske vladavine zate~eni bedemi su, kao nepotrebni, razgra|ivani,

tako da su i{~ezli gotovo bez traga.

171 Dokumentacija u

Arheolo{kom institutu u Beogradu;

Kova~evi} 2001, 272.

172 Gogi} 2016, 12;

Popovi} 2019, 245–256.

226

Final considerations

ALTHOUGH LIMITED TO ONLY A PART OF THE FORTIFICATIONS, THE SURVEYS

of the fortification remains of the medieval town of Novo Brdo, that have been presented

above, provided a number of very important findings. These were not limited

only to the defence system of this town, but also in a broader sense they contributed

to a large degree to the more thorough understanding of the developmental trends

in the military architecture in the medieval Serbian lands. Also, these new findings

will have an impact on the probing of the earlier conclusions concerning the building

of the fortress and the role of the fortifications in the organisation of the defence

of medieval Serbia. 173

173 Popovi} 1989b, 71–87.

174 Stanojevi} 1929, 41–42.

CONSTRUCTION PHASES AND FUNCTIONS

OF DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF NOVO BRDO FORTRESS

The abrupt development of Novo Brdo which was directly linked with the expansion

of the wealthy mines was already in the first and the second decades of the 14 th

century accompanied by a major influx of population, especially the arrival of littoral

merchants, primarily the citizens of Kotor and Dubrovnik. This impacted the

setting up of a settlement not far from the mine which soon started to urbanise.

Already in the second decade of the 14 th century, towards the end of the reign of

King Stefan Uro{ II (1282–1321), there was a market square in Novo Brdo which

was leased by Paskoje Gu~eti} from Dubrovnik who paid out the collected customs

duties to the Serbian ruler. 174 Judging by all, the abrupt growth in the mining production,

followed by a rapid expansion of the settlement and the influx of numerous

littoral merchants imposed very early the question of security of this new economic

centre such that Serbia had never had before. It was without any doubt the main

reason why Novo Brdo was to be fortified in line with the importance it was gaining.

We can presume that the process of Novo Brdo’s urbanisation happened very quickly

and in parallel with the construction of the fortress. Within some, we may say, spatial

planning, the fortress was given a pronounced position which closed the urban zone

227

Zakqu;na razmatraya

ISTRA@IVAWA OSTATAKA UTVR\EWA SREDWOVEKOVNOG GRADA NOVOG

Brda, o kojima je napred bilo re~i, iako su bila ograni~ena samo na deo fortifikacija,

pruìla su ~itav niz veoma zna~ajnih saznawa. Ona nisu bila ograni~ena

samo na sistem odbrane ovog grada ve} su i u {irem smislu doprinela

tome da se u dobroj meri temeqnije sagledaju razvojni tokovi vojnog graditeqstva

u srpskim sredwovekovnim zemqama. Tako|e ova nova saznawa utica}e i na

preispitivawe ranijih zakqu~aka o podizawu utvr|ewa i ulozi fortifikacija

u organizaciji odbrane sredwovekovne Srbije. 173

ETAPE GRA\EWA I FUNKCIJE UTVR\EWA NOVOG BRDA

Nagli razvoj Novog Brda, koji je bio u neposrednoj vezi sa {irewem bogatih

rudnika, ve} u prvoj i drugoj deceniji 14. veka pratio je veliki priliv stanovni{tva,

a posebno dolazak primorskih trgovaca, na prvom mestu Kotorana i

Dubrov~ana. To je uticalo na obrazovawe naseobine nedaleko od rudnika, koja

je veoma brzo po~ela da se urbanizuje. Ve} u drugoj deceniji 14. veka, pri kraju

vladavine kraqa Stefana Uro{a II (1282–1321), u Novom Brdu je postojao trg,

koji je u zakupu drào Dubrov~anin Paskoje Gu~eti}, koji je prikupqenu carinu

ispla}ivao srpskom vladaru. 174 Nagli rast rudarske proizvodwe, pra}en brzim

{irewem naseqa i prilivom brojnih primorskih trgovaca, po svemu sude}i,

ve} je vrlo rano nametnuo pitawe bezbednosti ovog novog privrednog sredi{ta,

kakvo Srbija ranije nije imala. Bio je to, bez sumwe, glavni razlog da se Novo

Brdo fortificira u skladu sa zna~ajem koji je dobijalo. Moèmo pretpostaviti

da se proces urbanizacije Novog Brda odvijao veoma brzo i istovremeno

sa izgradwom utvr|ewa. U okviru nekog, moglo bi se re}i, prostornog planirawa

utvr|ewu je dato istaknuto mesto, koje je urbanu zonu zatvaralo prema zapadu.

Na najistaknutijem mestu, kako je to nalagao zate~eni reqef, podignut je

Zamak, koji je predstavqao sredi{te urbanog areala Novog Brda. Zapadnu polovinu

ove celine ~inio je Dowi grad – utvr|eni deo gradskog naseqa, dok se sa

173 Popovi} 1989b, 71–87.

174 Stanojevi} 1929, 41–42.

228

175 Stanojevi} 1929, 121.

176 Ibid., 202;

Stanojevi} 1934, 16.

177 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 222–246

(V. Ivani{evi}, V. Radi}).

178 Stanojevi} 1929, 65.

179 Bo{kovi} 1974, 104.


towards the west. The Castle, which constituted the centre of the urban areal of Novo

Brdo, was built in the most prominent position, as imposed by the existing relief.

The west half of this ensemble was the Lower Town – a fortified section of the urban

settlement, while during the first several decades a settlement expanded across the

free areas on the east side, especially those suitable for construction.

The fortresses of Novo Brdo – the Castle and the Lower Town constituted a

unique ensemble and they are a part of the same concept. It remains an open question,

which according to your current findings cannot be answered reliably, when

exactly the construction of the fortress of started, but there are some possible suppositions

based on indirect data. Therefore, we are not going to be wrong if we

roughly date the building of the fortress in Novo Brdo back to the second quarter

of the 14 th century. In those terms, a piece of data from a charter issued in 1387 is

particularly important. With this charter, among other things Prince Lazar also

confirmed the privileges granted to the citizens of Dubrovnik by Emperor Stefan

Du{an (1331–1355). One of the provisions clearly points out the earlier obligation

of the citizens of the Republic of Saint Blaise, who had permanent residence in

Novo Brdo, to take part in the construction of the fortress. 175 The same provision,

with the same formulation, was also repeated in subsequent charters on the privileges

which the Serbian rulers granted to the citizens of Dubrovnik during the first

half of the 15 th century. 176 This indirect testimony quite reliably leads to a conclusion

that the construction of the fortifications of Novo Brdo was ongoing or was

being finished at the time of the emperor’s reign. In the second quarter of the 14 th

century, a mint started to operate in Novo Brdo which was the most important mining

centre in Serbia. Over the course of the entire next century, this mint, we could

say, was the main source of the rulers’ revenues. 177 These were very clear reasons

to secure the town with a mint of royal coins, next to which there were rich silver

and gold mines, by building a strong fortress. It could be presumed that at the time

when Emperor Stefan Du{an stayed in Novo Brdo, in September 1349, 178 the building

of the fortress had already been completed. If we presume that the extensive work

related to the building of the solidly constructed fortifications of Novo Brdo took at

least two decades, this would mean that the initial works were carried out in the last

years of the reign of King Uro{ III (1321–1331). As it has already been pointed out,

the main buildings in the Castle were constructed parallel with the fortifications. It

needs to be mentioned that similar dating of the building of the fortress has been

also proposed by some of the earlier surveyors of Novo Brdo. 179

We may presume that, if observed as a whole, the fortress of Novo Brdo was

built in stages within a single constructional enterprise. It is quite certain that the

works were first done on the building of the ramparts and the Castle’s towers. We

got an impression that this was taking place simultaneously, since in the preserved

remains of the wall masses we did not notice traces of partial building of some sections.

During the construction of Towers 3, 4 and 5, and probably also of Tower 2

their ground floors that were not large in terms of the space were filled with an

earth fill up to the level of the wall that closed the tower towards the courtyard of

the Castle. With this procedure, the ground floor area of the towers was reinforced

with respect to the possible action of the projectiles coming from siege engines.

During the surveying, as a working hypothesis, we presented a possibility that this

was a later-date intervention at the time when siege artillery appeared on the scene.


isto~ne strane, tokom prvih nekoliko decenija, naseqe {irilo na slobodnim

prostorima, prvenstveno onim pogodnijim za gradwu.

Novobrdska utvr|ewa – Zamak i Dowi grad – predstavqala su jedinstvenu

celinu i deo iste zamisli. Otvoreno je pitawe, na koje se prema na{im sada{-

wim saznawima ne moè dati sasvim pouzdan odgovor, kada je ta~no zapo~eto

gra|ewe utvr|ewa, ali su mogu}e neke pretpostavke zasnovane na posrednim podacima.

Ne}emo stoga pogre{iti ako gra|ewe utvr|ewa u Novom Brdu okvirno

datujemo u drugu ~etvrtinu 14. veka. U tom smislu, posebno je zna~ajan podatak

iz poveqe izdate 1387. godine kojom knez Lazar pored ostalog potvr|uje i povlastice

izdate Dubrov~anima od strane cara Stefana Du{ana (1331–1355). U

jednoj od odredbi jasno je istaknuta ranija obaveza gra|ana Republike Svetog

Vlaha koji su bili stalno naseqeni u Novom Brdu da u~estvuju u izgradwi utvr-

|ewa. 175 Ista odredba, sa istom formulacijom, ponavqa se i u kasnijim poveqama

o privilegijama koje su srpski vladari izdavali Dubrov~anima tokom prve

polovine 15. veka. 176 Ovo posredno svedo~anstvo dosta pouzdano navodi na zakqu~ak

da je gra|ewe novobrdskih fortifikacija bilo u toku ili je zavr{avano

u vreme careve vladavine. U drugoj ~etvrtini 14. veka u Novom Brdu, kao najzna~ajnijem

rudarskom centru u Srbiji, zapo~iwe rad kovnice novca, koja je

tokom celog narednog stole}a, moglo bi se re}i, bila glavno izvori{te vladarskih

prihoda. 177 To su bili veoma jasni povodi da se grad sa kovnicom carskog

novca, uz koji su se nalazili bogati rudnici srebra i zlata, obezbedi gra-

|ewem jakog utvr|ewa. Moglo bi se pretpostaviti da je u vreme boravka cara

Stefana Du{ana u Novom Brdu, septembra 1349. godine, 178 gra|ewe utvr|ewa

ve} bilo zavr{eno. Ukoliko pretpostavimo da je obiman posao na podizawu solidno

gra|enih novobrdskih fortifikacija trajao najmawe dve decenije, to

bi zna~ilo da su po~etni radovi obavqeni u posledwim godinama vladavine

kraqa Uro{a III (1321–1331). Istovremeno sa fortifikacijama, kao {to je

ve} ranije istaknuto, gra|ena su i glavna zdawa u Zamku. Vaqa ista}i da su

sli~no datovawe gra|ewa utvr|ewa predloìli i neki od ranijih istraìva-

~a Novog Brda. 179

Moèmo pretpostaviti da je, posmatrano kao celina, utvr|ewe Novog Brda

gra|eno etapno u okviru jedinstvenog graditeqskog poduhvata. Sasvim sigurno,

prvo je ra|eno na podizawu bedema i kula Zamka. Ima se utisak da se to de{avalo

jednovremeno, budu}i da na o~uvanim ostacima zidnih masa nisu uo~eni

tragovi parcijalnog zidawa pojedinih deonica. U toku gra|ewa Kula 3, 4 i 5, a

verovatno i Kule 2, wihove prostorno nevelike prizemne etaè ispuwene su

nasipom zemqe do visine zida koji je kulu zatvarao prema dvori{tu Zamka.

Ovim postupkom prizemqi{te kula je oja~ano u odnosu na mogu}a dejstva projektila

opsadnih sprava. U toku istraìvawa kao radnu hipotezu izneli smo i

mogu}nost da je to bila kasnija intervencija u vreme kada se pojavquje opsadna

artiqerija. Posle detaqnije analize ova pretpostavka je morala biti odba-

~ena, jer u drugoj ~etvrtini 15. veka uz ove kule su se nalazile znatno ranije

podignute gra|evine, koje su zatvarale pristup wihovom prizemqi{tu.

Posle podizawa glavne bedemske ograde, oko Zamka je gra|en i spoqni bedem,

koji ga pravilno opasuje sa svih strana, osim ispred Kule 2, gde je bilo odre-

|eno mesto za Glavnu, Ju`nu kapiju Doweg grada. I kod ostataka spoqnog bedema

moglo se uo~iti da je u pitawu bila jednovremena gradwa, bez tragova posebno

175 Stanojevi} 1929, 121.

176 Isto, 202; Stanojevi} 1934, 16.

177 Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 222–246

(V. Ivani{evi}, V. Radi}).

178 Stanojevi} 1929, 65.

179 Bo{kovi} 1974, 104.

230

Sl. 104. Novo Brdo, Zamak,

op{ti izgled sa juga

(foto 2016)

Fig. 104. Novo Brdo, Castle,

south appearance

(photo from 2016)


After a more detailed analysis, this supposition had to be discarded, since in the second

quarter of the 15 th century adjacent to these towers there were buildings that

had been built significantly earlier and that had closed off the access to their

ground floors.

After the construction of the main rampart fence, an external rampart was also

built around the Castle which it encompassed evenly from all sides, except in front

of Tower 2 where the place for the main South Gate of the Lower Town was designed.

In the remains of the external rampart it was also possible to notice that this was a

simultaneous construction, without traces of separately built sections. After the

construction of the fortifications, which represented the attainment of the original

concept without additions and modifications during the construction, the Castle

constituted a complete ensemble capable of autonomous defence.

Following the completion of the works on the Castle’s fortifications and perhaps

even during the building of its ramparts and towers, the construction of a long

and massive rampart that was supposed to defend the Lower Town started. Within

the scope of the preparatory works for the building of this segment of the fortress,

a spacious moat was dug through towards the most accessible east side. A slightly

shallower moat, judging by all, was located on the west side. The moat was dug into

the rocky ground and on that occasion a large quantity of rock was excavated which

was, as it could be concluded during our explorations, used for the building of new

fortifications. The moat ended beside Tower 6 from where it turned to the east and

cut the main access communication which led from the Suburb to the gate of the

Lower Town and farther towards the entrance into the Castle. The fortifications of


zidanih deonica. Nakon izgradwe fortifikacija, koje su predstavqale ostvarewe

prvobitne zamisli bez dopuna i izmena u toku gradwe, Zamak je predstavqao

zaokruènu celinu osposobqenu za samostalnu odbranu.

Posle okon~awa radova na fortifikacijama Zamka, a mo`da jo{ u toku zidawa

wegovih bedema i kula, zapo~eto je gra|ewe dugog i masivnog bedema koji je

trebalo da brani Dowi grad. U okviru pripremnih radova za gra|ewe ovoga dela

utvr|ewa, prokopan je prostran rov prema najpristupa~nijoj, isto~noj strani.

Ne{to pli}i rov, po svemu sude}i, postojao je sa zapadne strane. Rov je ukopavan

u stenovito tlo, a tom prilikom je izva|ena velika koli~ina kamena,

koji je, kako se u toku na{ih istraìvawa moglo zakqu~iti, bio kori{}en za

gra|ewe novih fortifikacija. Rov se zavr{avao kod Kule 6, odakle je skretao

prema istoku i presecao glavnu pristupnu komunikaciju, koja je od Podgra|a

vodila ka kapiji Doweg grada i daqe prema ulazu u Zamak. Dowogradske fortifikacije,

koje su sa Zamkom ~inile jedinstvenu celinu, realizovane su gotovo

u celini prema prvobitnoj zamisli. Obimni bedem, ukupne duìne oko 280 m,

bio je zami{qen bez kula kao kontinuirano zidno platno sa kapijom na spoju

sa ju`nim uglom Zamka. U toku samog procesa gra|ewa ova prvobitna zamisao dopuwena

je ugradwom plitkih uvu~enih kula na severnom i ju`nom uglu Doweg

grada, koje su bile otvorene prema unutra{wosti utvr|enog prostora. Ne raspolaè

se podacima kako je tekao sam proces gra|ewa, budu}i da je istraèna samo

jedna sedmina ukupne duìne bedema. Zbog velikog obima verovatno je gra-

|eno po deonicama, ali se to nije moglo uo~iti na istraènom delu bedema sa

severoisto~ne strane.

Sl. 105. Novo Brdo, Zamak,

op{ti izgled sa zapada

(foto 2016)

Fig. 105. Novo Brdo, Castle,

west appearance

(photo from 2016)

232


the Lower Town, which constituted a unique ensemble with the Castle, were built

almost entirely in line with the original concept. The external rampart with the

total length of around 280 m was envisaged without towers, as a continuous wall

curtain with a gate at the joint with the south corner of the Castle. During the construction

process, this original intention was supplemented by the additional construction

of shallow indented towers on the north and the south corners of the

Lower Town which were open towards the interior of the fortified space. There is

no data about the construction process, since only one seventh of the total rampart

length was surveyed. Because of its large scope, it was probably built consecutively,

but this could not be noticed on the surveyed section of the rampart on the northeast

side.

In front of the main rampart, an additional barbican – protechism was also built

on the most accessible northeast side. The protechism was connected with the Lower

Town through a sally port in the main wall curtain. The rampart of the protechism,

as the first line of defence, was built at the very edge of a steep rocky side of the

moat. If we take into consideration the depth of the moat and the presumed height

of the rampart, this front line of defence constituted a serious obstacle for all those

who attacked the fortress from the easier, accessible side from the direction of the

Suburb. The space of the protechism narrowed down from the sally port towards

Tower 8, so that the rampart of the barbican extended parallel to the main wall curtain.

It is an open question whether a lower, external rampart was built on the edge

of the moat towards Tower 7, in front of the West Rampart where there was no

wider protechism. During our surveying, on a very limited surface area, farther

from Tower 8, we discovered traces of a very much demolished external rampart. On

the basis of data, it may be presumed that an external smaller rampart was planned

in front of the west rampart. However, it remains an open question whether

according to that concept it was entirely or partially built or its construction was

given up already not far from Tower 8. Even it were built to a greater or a lesser

degree, it was certainly radically dismantled during a subsequent phase, which will

be dealt with later.

After the first, that is, the main stage of the construction, the fortification of

Novo Brdo with the Castle and the Lower Town was built in its entirety in line with

the plan adopted beforehand. As we have already pointed out, the construction of

new fortifications was, judging by all, finalised before the middle of the 14 th century.

The new fortified segments had clearly established purposes. The Castle constituted

the administrative centre of the town. This was probably the place where the

vojvoda, as a governor of the Serbian ruler, used to have his seat and it is also not

excluded that ingots of purified silver and certain quantities of newly minted coins

were also kept in the Castle. It may also be presumed that during his visits to Novo

Brdo the ruler used to stay in the Castle. This would refer particularly to Despot

Stefan who stayed in this town on several occasions and for longer periods of time.

There are no reliable data as to what used to be within the ramparts of the Lower

Town. It may only be presumed that this was the place where the houses of wealthier

residents used to be, as well as some of the town’s institutions. In case of sudden

attacks or sieges, a part of the residents of Novo Brdo could also withdraw to the

area defended by the ramparts of the Lower Town. All of these are suppositions for

which there are no reliable confirmations in the preserved historic materials or


Ispred glavnog bedema, sa najpristupa~nije, severoisto~ne strane, bilo je

podignuto i dodatno predutvr|ewe – Protehizma, koja je bila povezana sa Dowim

gradom kroz poternu u glavnom zidnom platnu. Bedem Protehizme, kao prva linija

odbrane, izgra|en je na samom rubu okomite stenovite strane rova. Ako se

ima u vidu dubina rova i pretpostavqena visina bedema, ova predwa linija odbrane

predstavqala je ozbiqnu prepreku za sve one koji su napadali utvr|ewe

sa lak{e pristupa~ne strane iz pravca Podgra|a. Od poterne ka Kuli 8 prostor

Protehizme se suàvao, tako da se bedem predutvr|ewa pruào paralelno

sa glavnim zidnim platnom. Otvoreno je pitawe da li je daqe, prema Kuli 7,

ispred Zapadnog bedema, gde nije bilo {ire Protehizme, na rubu rova bio podignut

i niì spoqni bedem. Prilikom na{ih istraìvawa na veoma ograni-

~enoj povr{ini, daqe od Kule 8, otkriveni su tragovi veoma poru{enog spoqnog

bedema. Na osnovu ovog podatka moè se pretpostaviti da je ispred zapadnog

bedema bio predvi|en spoqni niì bedem. Ostaje otvoreno pitawe, me|utim,

da li je prema toj zamisli on bio u celini ili delimi~no izgra|en, ili se od

wegovog podizawa odustalo ve} nedaleko od Kule 8. Ukoliko je i bio u ve}oj ili

mawoj meri podignut, u jednoj poznijoj fazi je sasvim sigurno radikalno razgra|en,

o ~emu }e jo{ biti re~i.

Posle prve, odnosno glavne etape gra|ewa novobrdsko utvr|ewe sa Zamkom

i Dowim gradom u celini je bilo izgra|eno prema unapred usvojenom planu.

Kao {to smo ve} istakli, gra|ewe novih fortifikacija bilo je, po svemu sude}i,

okon~ano pre sredine 14. veka. Nove utvr|ene celine imale su jasno odre-

|ene namene. Zamak je predstavqao upravno sredi{te grada. Tu je najverovatnije

stolovao vojvoda kao namesnik srpskog vladara, a nije iskqu~eno da su u Zamku

kao bezbednom mestu ~uvani slitci pre~i{}enog srebra i odre|ene koli~ine

novoiskovanog novca. Tako|e se moè pretpostaviti da je u Zamku odsedao i vladar

prilikom poseta Novom Brdu. Ovo bi se posebno moglo odnositi na despota

Stefana, koji je u vi{e navrata i duè boravio u ovom gradu. O tome {ta se

nalazilo u okviru bedema Doweg grada, nema pouzdanih podataka. Moè se samo

pretpostaviti da su se tu nalazile ku}e bogatijih gra|ana, kao i neke gradske

institucije. U prostor brawen bedemima Doweg grada u slu~aju iznenadnih

napada ili opsada mogao je da se skloni i deo novobrdskih gra|ana. Sve su ovo

pretpostavke, za koje nema pouzdanih potvrda u sa~uvanoj istorijskoj gra|i niti

me|u arheolo{kim nalazima, budu}i da je najve}i deo povr{ina u okviru

dowogradskih bedema ostao jo{ uvek neistraèn.

U drugoj ~etvrtini 14. veka, kada su, kako smo pretpostavli, gra|ene nove

fortifikacije, analiza geopoliti~ke situacije nije ukazivala na potrebu da

se u sredi{tu srpskih zemaqa gradi jedno ovako veliko i jako utvr|ewe. Za vlade

kraqa, a potom cara Stefana Du{ana granice su pomerene daleko prema jugu.

Srpski vladar je raspolagao zna~ajnom vojnom silom, koja je ulivala sigurnost,

posebno u sredi{wim oblastima dràve. Ostaje daleko od na{ih saznawa {ta

je uticalo na izbor mo}nog fortifikacionog re{ewa za gra|ewe utvr|ewa koje

je trebalo da brani novozasnovani grad i okolne bogate rudnike.

Svest o tome da Novo Brdo nije ugroèno u vreme kada su gra|ene nove fortifikacije

izgleda da je u decenijama oko sredine 14. veka uticala na odnos

gra|ana prema novopodignutom utvr|ewu. Neki skromni arheolo{ki nalazi na

ograni~enim istraènim povr{inama navode na razmi{qawa u tom pravcu.

234

180 Novakovi} 1893/1998;

Mihaq~i} 1975



among the archaeological finds, since most of the areas within the ramparts of the

Lower Town still remain unsurveyed.

In the second quarter of the 14 th century when, as we have presumed, new fortifications

were built, the analysis of the geopolitical situation did not suggest a

need to build one such large and strong fortress in the middle of the Serbian lands.

During the reign of King and then Emperor Stefan Du{an, the borders were moved

far to the south. The Serbian ruler disposed with a significant armed force which

created the feeling of safety especially in the central regions of the state. It remains

far from our knowledge what influenced the selection of the powerful fortification

solution applied to the construction of the fortress that was to defend the newly

founded town and the surrounding rich mines.

The awareness that Novo Brdo was not threatened at the time when the new

fortifications were built seems to have influenced the relation of the citizens towards

the newly-built fortress in the decades around the middle of the 14 th century. Some

modest archaeological finds in the limited surveyed areas allow for considerations

in this direction. In the area of the hidden road between the main and the external

ramparts of the Castle it was possible to notice an increased creation of a cultural

layer. This would mean that soon after the construction of the fortifications this

space was partially neglected and used for the discarding of waste materials. It

remains an open question to which degree the ramparts and towers used to be

maintained, since during our explorations no reliable findings could be obtained to

this effect. We may presume that the main rampart fence with towers was well maintained,

while the external rampart was to a large degree neglected. This relatively

casual relation towards the town’s fortifications may be seen in the surveyed section

of the Northeast Rampart of the Lower Town. Judging by the discovered remains,

along the interior face of this rampart there were two adjacent structures – Houses

2 and 3. In this case, a very important rule was broken which was followed in fortified

medieval towns where there was an absolute prohibition of resting houses against

the interior side of the ramparts. This was the space for the communication along

the entire rampart fence intended for unhindered movement of the town’s crews.

In the said case, this rule was not respected in the Lower Town, which indirectly suggests

certain neglect of the town’s fortification over a period of relative safety.

A radical change in the geopolitical situation came after a major Christian

defeat in the Battle of Maritsa in the autumn of 1371. The achieved success opened

a possibility for the Ottomans to penetrate into the territories of the Central Balkans.

At first, the aspiration of the Ottomans was to establish their rule in the south

regions of the former Serbian Empire. During that initial period, the central regions

of Serbia were primarily exposed to plundering campaigns. Novo Brdo was certainly

one of the goals of those plunders. Although there are no direct data, we will not be

wrong if we presume that the wealth of the town with its mint and the surrounding

silver mines was very attractive for looting which, in line with the Ottoman customs,

always suggested the directions for their further conquests. 180

In the newly created situation following 1371, the powerful fortifications built

several decades later saw their full use. At the time it was built, the fortress in Novo

Brdo probably did not constitute a dire need for the defence of the town which was

not seriously jeopardised at the time. This need was recognised very quickly and thus

the reconstruction and reinforcement of the partially neglected fortress started. It


Moglo se uo~iti u prostoru skrivenog puta izme|u glavnog i spoqnog bedema

Zamka poja~ano formirawe kulturnog sloja. To bi zna~ilo da je ubrzo nakon gra-

|ewa fortifikacija taj prostor delom zanemaren i kori{}en za odbacivawe

otpadnog materijala. Otvoreno je pitawe u kojoj meri su odràvani bedemi i

kule, budu}i da se o tome tokom na{ih istraìvawa nije moglo do}i do pouzdanih

saznawa. Glavna bedemska ograda sa kulama, moèmo pretpostaviti, dobro

je odràvana, dok je spoqni bedem u dobroj meri bio zapu{ten. Taj relativno

nehatan odnos prema gradskim fortifikacijama uo~ava se na istraènom delu

Severoisto~nog bedema Doweg grada. Uz unutra{we lice ovoga bedema, sude}i

prema otkrivenim ostacima, bila su prislowena dva zdawa – Ku}a 2 i Ku}a 3.

U ovom slu~aju bilo je prekr{eno jedno va`no pravilo, koje je po{tovano u

utvr|enim sredwovekovnim gradovima, gde je postojala apsolutna zabrana prislawawa

ku}a na unutra{wu stranu bedema. To je bio prostor komunikacije

du` cele bedemske ograde, namewen za nesmetano kretawe gradskih posada. U

pomenutom slu~aju u Dowem gradu to pravilo nije po{tovano, {to posredno

ukazuje na izvesno zanemarivawe gradskih fortifikacija u jednom razdobqu

relativne sigurnosti.

Radikalna promena geopoliti~ke situacije nastupila je posle velikog

hri{}anskog poraza u bici na Marici u jesen 1371. godine. Ostvareni uspeh

otvorio je Osmanlijama mogu}nost prodora u oblasti centralnog Balkana. U

prvo vreme te`wa Turaka je bila da uspostave svoju vlast u ju`nim oblastima

nekada{weg Srpskog carstva. Sredi{we oblasti srpske dràve u tom prvom

razdobqu bile su prevashodno izloène pqa~ka{kim pohodima. Na udaru tih

pohoda jedan od ciqeva sigurno je bilo i Novo Brdo. Mada nema neposrednih

podataka, ne}emo pogre{iti ako pretpostavimo da je bogatstvo grada sa kovnicom

i okolnim rudnicima srebra bilo veoma privla~no za pqa~ku, koja je po

osmanskom obi~aju uvek nagove{tavala pravce daqih osvajawa. 180

U novonastaloj situaciji do punog izraàja do{le su mo}ne fortifikacije

gra|ene nekoliko decenija ranije. Utvr|ewe u Novom Brdu, u vreme kada je

gra|eno, verovatno nije predstavqalo preku potrebu za odbranu grada, koji tada

nije bio ozbiqno ugroèn. U novonastaloj situaciji posle 1371. godine gradski

bedemi i kule do{li su do punog izraàja. Ta potreba je veoma brzo uo~ena,

tako da je zapo~eta obnova i oja~avawe ve} delimi~no zapu{tenog utvr|ewa.

Kako je tekao taj proces, koji se uo~ava na istrìvanom delu fortifikacija,

te{ko se moè sagledati u svim pojedinostima. Sasvim sigurno je da su prve

godine osme decenije 14. veka vreme kada su mogli zapo~eti ovi radovi. Ono se

podudaralo sa prelaskom Novog Brda pod vlast kneza Lazara. Koji je bio tempo

pomenutih radova i {ta je tokom narednih decenija dogra|eno, u hronolo{kom

smislu se ne moè pouzdano odrediti. Mogu}e je samo izdvojiti prvu etapu dogradwe

fortifikacija pre upotrebe vatrenog oru`ja i drugu etapu tokom koje

je u~iwen napor da se postoje}e fortifikacije prilagode dejstvovawu prvih

topova.

U toj prvoj etapi, koja bi se mogla datovati u posledwu ~etvrtinu 14. veka i

po~etak 15. veka, svakako pre 1412. godine, odnosno prve turske opsade, kada je

sultan Musa bez uspeha poku{avao da osvoji Novo Brdo, u tom razdobqu, nakon

obnove postoje}ih fortifikacija izvr{ene su i neke dogradwe. Moèmo pretpostaviti

da je u to vreme Glavna kula Zamka oja~ana sa bo~nih strana prizidanim

180 Novakovi} 1893/1998;

Mihaq~i} 1975


236


is difficult to understand in all the details how this process, which can be noticed on

the surveyed part of the fortifications, went. It is quite certain that the first years

of the eighth decade of the 14 th century were the time when these works may have

started. It coincided with Novo Brdo falling under the reign of Prince Lazar. As for

the pace of the said works and what was additionally built in the following decades,

in a chronological sense, this is difficult to determine reliably. It is possible only to

set apart the first stage of the additional fortifications before the use of fire arms

and the second stage during which the efforts were made to adjust the existing fortifications

to the action of the first cannons.

This first stage could be dated back to the last quarter of the 14 th century and

the beginning of the 15 th century, certainly before 1412, that is, before the first

Ottoman siege when Sultan Musa tried unsuccessfully to conquer Novo Brdo. In this

period, after the reconstruction of the existing fortifications, some additions were

also built. We may presume that at the time the Main Tower of the Castle was reinforced

from the lateral sides by the additionally built sloping stone scarps. These

added scarps were founded in the area of the hidden road and their wall mass also

incorporated the remains of the older external rampart. It is unusual that the scarp

reinforcement was not built along the front side of the tower. This may perhaps be

explained by the fact that the access communication passed by the tower at the very

edge of a steep slope and that there was not enough space for one such reinforcement.

With the addition of these scarp reinforcements, the original concept of a

dual rampart on the east side of the Castle was annulled. Judging by all, the remaining

section of the external rampart with the hidden road, between Towers 1 and 2,

was left without any function.

In this same period, the entrance into the Lower Town was also reinforced. In

front of the main South Gate, a new barbican was built with an external gate that

was reached by the east access communication from the Suburb. This small barbican,

with the surface area of not more than 70 m², made it possible to defend more

easily the very South Gate additionally also by the successful actions of the Castle’s

crew from Tower 2 which already in the first phase of the construction was the only

one that had scarp extensions on its ground floor level.

Reinforcements were also noticed on the surveyed Northeast Rampart of the

Lower Town which closed off the fortress towards the most accessible east side. This

wall curtain which was originally built up to the height of 7 m had an addition built

on top of at least 2.5 m and thus after this subsequent construction its height up to

the level of the wall walk was most probably around 10 m which would, including

the crenellated parapet, amount to a total of over 12 m. This intervention was quite

certainly carried out not later than at the beginning of the 15 th century, in any case

before the appearance of siege artillery. Whether the ramparts of the Lower Town

on the west and the south sides were also reinforced on that occasion is anybody’s

guess. Within the scope of the works related to the reinforcement of the fortifications

of the Lower Town, the additions were probably made within the interior of

Tower 7 for which it has remained what they used to look like and what their function

was.

It seems that parallel to these works which we assigned to the first phase of the

reconstruction of the fortifications of Novo Brdo there was also a thorough reconstruction

of the barbican-protechism in front of the Northeast Rampart of the Lower


kosim kamenim eskarpama. Ove dogra|ene eskarpe bile su utemeqene u prostoru

skrivenog puta i u wihovu zidnu masu ukqu~eni su i ostaci starijeg spoqnog

bedema. Neobi~no je da eskarpno oja~awe nije podignuto i uz predwu, frontalnu

stranu kule. Ovo bi se mo`da moglo objasniti ~iwenicom da je uz kulu

prolazila prilazna komunikacija na samom rubu strme padine i da nije bilo

dovoqno prostora za jedno ovakvo oja~awe. Dogradwom ovih eskarpnih oja~awa

poni{tena je prvobitna koncepcija dvojnog bedema na isto~noj strani Zamka.

Preostali deo spoqnog bedema sa skrivenim putem, izme|u Kule 1 i Kule 2

ostao je, po svemu sude}i, izvan funkcije.

U istom ovom razdobqu oja~an je i ulaz u Dowi grad. Ispred Glavne, Ju`ne

kapije izgra|eno je novo predutvr|ewe sa spoqnom kapijom, do koje je dolazila

prilazna isto~na komunikacija iz Podgra|a. Ovo malo predutvr|ewe, povr{ine

ne ve}e od 70 m², omogu}avalo je da se lak{e brani sama Ju`na kapija, pored

ostalog, i uspe{nim dejstvovawem posade Zamka sa Kule 2, koja je ve} u prvoj

fazi gra|ewa jedina imala eskarpna pro{irewa u svom prizemqi{tu.

Oja~awa su uo~ena i na istraènom Severoisto~nom bedemu Doweg grada,

koji je zatvarao utvr|ewe prema najpristupa~nijoj isto~noj strani. Ovo zidno

platno, koje je prvobitno bilo podignuto do visine od 7 m, nadzidano je za jo{

najmawe 2,5 m, tako da mu je posle ove dogradwe visina do ravni {etne staze

dosezala najverovatnije oko 10 m, {to bi, ra~unaju}i i parapet sa zupcima, iznosilo

ukupno preko 12 m. Ova intervencija izvedena je sasvim sigurno najkasnije

po~etkom 15. veka, u svakom slu~aju pre pojave opsadne artiqerije. Da li

su tom prilikom oja~avani i bedemi Doweg grada sa zapadne i ju`ne strane,

Sl. 106. Novo Brdo, Zamak – pogled

iz pti~jeg leta od severa ka jugu

(foto 2016)

Fig. 106. Novo Brdo, Castle –

bird’s view from the north to the south

(photo from 2016)

238

181 Petrovi} 1976, 127–132.

182 Pope 1972, 25–43.


Town. On that occasion, there was a significant change in front of the north exterior

side of Tower 8, where the space of the hidden road in the west continuation

of the protechism was cut through and closed off by the construction of a new gate

that closed the entrance into this barbican and the road towards the sally port in

the Northeast Rampart. As it has already been said, the continuation of the external

rampart along the west wall curtain was not renewed, but rather, as it seems, it

was dismantled.

It is not excluded that at the end of the 14 th century and the beginning of the

next one other things were also reconstructed and added on the ramparts and the

towers of Novo Brdo, but this is difficult to talk about since there is no data. The

following period, which approximately covers the second quarter of the 15 th century

brought new problems to the defenders of Novo Brdo since the existing fortifications

had to be adjusted to the introduction of new fire arms. This process which had

started in the towns of the Adriatic coastal areas already at the end of the 14 th century,

flourished here a little later. 181 It was necessary to include fire arms into the

defence of Novo Brdo, too, primarily in terms of the equipment for the town’s fortification,

as well as to accommodate the whole defence system. The beginning of

this process, which we marked as the second phase in the reconstruction of the fortress,

may have started, if not earlier then certainly after the unsuccessful Ottoman

siege of the town in 1427.

At the time when the Ottomans did conquer Novo Brdo in 1455, as it has

already been stated above, eight cannons and 55 rifles that belonged to the town’s

crew were seized in the conquered town. As our explorations have shown, the main

attention at that time was paid to the strengthening of the east access to the fortress.

There, in the space between Towers 1 and 6, in front of the external rampart,

a spacious platform was created by building an underpinning at the edge of the

moat and by filling, that is, by flattening that entire area. Towards the east, this

underpinning probably ended in a gate that led to the main communication on the

edge of the final section of the moat over which there probably used to be a drawbridge.

Most likely, cannons which defended the easiest access to the fortress from

the direction of the Suburb were arranged on this platform. There is no data about

what their arrangement was and how the crews that served them were protected.

We can only presume, in line with subsequent examples, that there used to be a barrier

made of baskets filled with earth. 182 In order to ensure a direct link with the courtyard

of the Castle, a passage was made in a section of the ramparts between Towers

1 and 6 which was entered from the ground floor room of the North Building. When

all of these works were conducted it is difficult to say now. It remains an open question

whether this platform with the cannons already existed at the time of the

1440–1441 Ottomans’ siege or if it was built following the completion of the war

actions after 1444. Perhaps we are closer to a solution if we presume that these

were the last attempts of the defenders to make Novo Brdo capable of defending

itself from the Ottomans. In this sense, the findings we acquired during the archaeological

surveying are very important. In a layer which can quite reliably be dated

back to the time of the Ottoman siege in 1455, we discovered on the ground floor

of the North Building, that is, in the Large Hall, that had already been in ruins at

the time, a furnace for the melting of lead, next to which we found pieces of cut lead

vessels ready for the melting. Not far from there, in Tower 6, we found several lead


moè se samo pretpostaviti. U okviru radova na oja~avawu fortifikacija Doweg

grada verovatno su izvr{ene u unutra{wosti Kule 7 dogradwe, za koje je ostalo

nejasno kako su izgledale i koja im je bila funkcija.

Istovremeno sa ovim radovima, koje smo svrstali u prvu fazi obnove novobrdskih

fortifikacija, izvr{ena je, izgleda, i temeqna obnova predutvr|ewa

– Protehizme ispred Severoisto~nog bedema Doweg grada. Do zna~ajnije promene

tom prilikom do{lo je ispred severne spoqne strane Kule 8, gde je prostor

skrivenog puta u zapadnom nastavku Protehizme prese~en i zatvoren izgradwom

nove kapije, koja je zatvarala ulaz u ovo predutvr|ewe i put ka poterni u

Severoisti~nom bedemu. Nastavak spoqnog bedema du` zapadnog zidnog platna,

kao {to je ve} re~eno, ovom prilikom nije obnavqan, ve} je, naprotiv, kako izgleda,

bio razgra|ivan.

Nije iskqu~eno da je na bedemima i kulama Novog Brda krajem 14. veka i

po~etkom narednog stole}a jo{ {ta obnavqano i dogra|ivano, ali je o tome te-

{ko govoriti budu}i da nema podataka. Naredno razdobqe, koje okvirno obuhvata

drugu ~etvrtinu 15. veka, donelo je nove probleme braniocima Novog Brda s

obzirom na to da je postoje}e fortifikacije trebalo prilagoditi pojavi novog

vatrenog oru`ja. Taj proces, koji je u gradovima Jadranskog primorja zapo-

~eo jo{ krajem 14. veka, ovde je do{ao do punog izraàja ne{to kasnije. 181 Bilo

je neophodno da se u odbranu Novog Brda ukqu~i i vatreno oru`je, i u tom smislu

opreme gradske fortifikacije, kao i da se prilagodi ceo sistem odbrane.

Po~etak toga procesa, koji smo ozna~ili kao drugu fazu obnove utvr|ewa, mogao

je zapo~eti, ako ne ranije, a ono sigurno posle neuspele turske opsade grada

1427. godine.

U vreme kada su Turci zauzeli Novo Brdo 1455. godine, u osvojenom gradu,

kao {to je ve} ranije navedeno, zapleweno je osam topova i 55 pu{aka koje su

pripadale gradskoj posadi. Kako su pokazala na{a istraìvawa, glavna pa`wa

u tom razdobqu bila je posve}ena oja~avawu isto~nog prilaza utvr|ewu. Tu je na

prostoru izme|u Kule 1 i Kule 6, ispred spoqnog bedema obrazovana prostrana

platforma gra|ewem podzida na rubu rova i nasipawem, odnosno izravnavawem

cele te povr{ine. Ovaj podzid se prema istoku verovatno zavr{avao kapijom u

pravcu glavne komunikacije, na rubu zavr{nog dela rova, preko koga je mogu}e

postojao pokretni most. Na ovoj platformi su najverovatnije bili raspore|eni

topovi, koji su branili najlak{i prilaz utvr|ewu iz pravca Podgra|a. O

tome kakav im je bio raspored i kako su bile za{ti}ene posade koje su ih opsluìvale,

nema podataka. Moè se samo pretpostaviti, prema kasnijim primerima,

da se tu nalazila barijera od sepeta ispuwenih zemqom. 182 Radi neposredne

veze sa dvori{tem Zamka bio je probijen prolaz u delu bedema izme|u

Kule 1 i Kule 6, u koji se ulazilo iz prizemne prostorije Severne gra|evine.

Kada su obavqeni svi ovi radovi, sada je te{ko re}i. Otvoreno je pitawe da li

je ova platforma sa topovima ve} postojala u vreme turske opsade 1440–1441.

godine ili je izgra|ena nakon okon~awa ratnih dejstava posle 1444. godine.

Mo`da smo bliè re{ewu ako pretpostavimo da su to bili posledwi poku{aji

braniteqa da se Novo Brdo osposobi za odbranu od Turaka. U tom smislu veoma

su zna~ajna saznawa do kojih se do{lo u toku arheolo{kih iskopavawa. U

sloju koji se sasvim pouzdano moè datovati u vreme turske opsade grada 1455.

godine u prizemqu Severne gra|evine, odnosno „velike dvorane“, koja je tada ve}

181 Petrovi} 1976, 127–132.

182 Pope 1972, 25–43.

240

183 The analysis was conducted at

the Institute for the Testing of Materials,

Institut IMS a.d., Belgrade.

The original report is at company

“KOTO d.o.o.”, Belgrade.

184 Dini} 1962, 64; ISN II, 197–298;

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 60.


cannonballs and several hundred lead rounds for rifles of the kuka~a type. Also,

beside the north wall of the church we found pieces of lead cast that was of the same

composition as the lead rounds for the rifles. 183 These finds constitute a dramatic

testimony to the attempts of the defenders to provide projectiles for the action of

the fire arms that they had at their disposal.

When it comes to the specimens of the lead cast that came from the roof of the

church, it still remains an open question whether it was the defenders who took the

lead off in their attempt to cast sufficient number of projectiles for the cannonballs

and rifles, which to us seems more probable. However, we can neither reject a supposition

that this was all done after the conquest of the town. There is a well known

Ottoman practice in the conquered lands to take the lead off the roofs of Christian

churches as a form of plunder. The said result of the analysis may also be interpreted

by the fact that this was lead from the mines of Novo Brdo, which was of the same

or a similar composition.

In addition to the space in front of the Castle, during this last period before the

Ottoman conquest of Novo Brdo, the Northeast rampart of the Lower Town was also

reinforced. Along the interior face of this wall curtain, the earlier mentioned Houses

2 and 3 were demolished and in the whole space along the rampart an embankment

was made with the height of 2.5 m to 3 m. This embankment strengthened the

ground floor level of the rampart that was located on the possible line of action of

the Ottoman siege cannons. Despite the fact that this embankment was very solidly

built, with the thickness of over 4 metres in some places, the goal of forming an

embankment on the interior side was to reinforce its ground floor level and to

absorb to a certain degree the action of cannon projectiles. This constitutes one of

the early attempts to strengthened old fortresses before the fire action of siege cannons

which entered their full use precisely around the middle of the 15 th century.

A similar example of reinforcement was also noticed in the case of Tower 8, but

the situation is somewhat more complex there. We got an impression that the filling

of the ground floor started soon after its construction. In the period of one century,

until the middle of the 15 th century, the space in the tower was filled up to the

height of around 2 m, that is, almost to the level of the first floor. This was the layering

of the cultural layer. It seems that there was an intention to strengthen the

ground floor level of the tower by filling it up with waste materials even before the

introduction of siege cannons. It seems that this was the same intention that was

noticed in the case of Towers 2–5 in the Castle, where the lower floors were, most

likely, covered with a fill soon after their construction.

With the above-mentioned additions and reinforcements, Novo Brdo awaited

the Ottoman siege which started in April 1455. Numerous Ottoman army was gathered

and they immediately started with attacks on the town’s fortifications. The

town was battered from siege engines and after the arrival of Sultan Mehmed II, the

siege cannons started with their action, too. Since they found themselves in a hopeless

situation, the defenders of the town surrendered on 1 June 1455. 184 Because of

the bombing, the town’s fortifications must have suffered significant damages. It is

difficult to conclude now what the scope of these damages was, except in two locations

where extensive rebuilding took place. Because of the major importance which

Novo Brdo had for the Ottoman state, the works on the reconstruction probably

started at once using the material that was already in the fortress. In order to do


bila u ru{evinama, otkrivena je pe} za pretapawe olova, uz koju su na|eni delovi

ise~enih olovnih posuda spremnih za pretapawe. Nedaleko odatle, u Kuli

6, na|eno je nekoliko olovnih topovskih kugli i vi{e stotina olovnih zrna za

pu{ke kuka~e. Tako|e kraj severnog zida Crkve na|eni su komadi olovnog liva,

koji je bio istog sastava kao olovna zrna iz pu{ke. 183 Ovi nalazi predstavqaju

dramati~no svedo~anstvo o poku{ajima branioca da obezbede projektile za dejstva

vatrenog oru`ja kojim su raspolagali.

Kada se radi o uzorcima olovnog liva koji poti~u sa krova Crkve, ipak

ostaje otvoreno pitawe da li su olovo skinuli braniteqi u poku{aju da izliju

dovoqno projektila za topove i pu{ke, {to nam se ~ini verovatnijim. Me|utim,

ne moè se odbaciti ni pretpostavka da je to u~iweno posle osvajawa grada.

Poznata je turska praksa da u zaposednutim zemqama kao vid pqa~ke skidaju

olovo sa hri{}anskih hramova. Navedeni rezultat analize moè se protuma~iti

i ~iwenicom da je to bilo olovo iz novobrdskih rudnika, koje je bilo istog

ili sli~nog sastava.

Osim prostora ispred Zamka, u ovom posledwem razdobqu pred tursko osvajawe

Novog Brda utvr|ivan je i Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada. Uz unutra{we

lice ovog zidnog platna poru{ene su ranije pomenite Ku}a 2 i Ku}a 3 i na celom

prostoru uz bedem je obrazovan nasip u visini 2,5 do 3 m. Ovim nasipom

oja~ano je prizemqi{te bedema koji se nalazio na mogu}em pravcu dejstva turskih

opsadnih topova. I pored ~iwenice da je ovaj bedem bio veoma solidno

gra|en, debqine mestimi~no i preko 4 m, formirawe nasipa sa unutra{we

strane imalo je za ciq da mu oja~a prizemqi{te i u izvesnoj meri amortizuje

dejstvo topovskih projektila. Ovo predstavqa jedan od ranih poku{aja da se

stara utvr|ewa oja~aju pred vatrenim dejstvom opsadnih topova, koji upravo

sredinom 15. veka ulaze u punu upotrebu.

Sli~an primer oja~avawa uo~en je i u Kuli 8, ali je ovde situacija ne{to

sloènija. Ima se utisak da je tu zasipawe prizemne etaè zapo~elo ubrzo posle

wene izgradwe. U razdobqu od jednog stole}a, do sredine 15. veka, prostor u

kuli je bio zasut u visini od oko 2 m, odnosno gotovo do ravni prve etaè. U pitawu

je bilo naslojavawe kulturnog sloja. Izgleda da je postojala namera da se

zasipawem otpadnog materijala oja~a prizemqi{te kule i pre pojave opsadnih

topova. U pitawu je, reklo bi se, ista namera koja je uo~ena i kod Kula 2–5 u

Zamku, gde su dowe etaè, po svoj prilici, zasute nasipom ubrzo posle wihove

izgradwe.

Sa pomenutim dogradwama i oja~awima Novo Brdo je do~ekalo tursku opsadu,

koja je zapo~eta u aprilu 1455. godine. Bila je prikupqena brojna turska

vojska, koja je odmah krenula u napade na gradska utvr|ewa. Grad je ga|an iz opsadnih

sprava, a po dolasku sultana Mahmeda II u dejstvo su stupili i opsadni

topovi. Budu}i da su se na{li u beznade`noj situaciji, branioci su grad predali

1. juna 1455. godine. 184 Usled bombardovawa, gradske fortifikacije su

sigurno pretrpele znatna o{te}ewa. Koga obima su bila ta o{te}ewa, sada je

te{ko zakqu~iti, osim na dve lokacije, gde su izvr{ena obimna prezi|ivawa.

Zbog velikog zna~aja koji je za Osmansku dràvu imalo Novo Brdo, radovi na

obnovi su verovatno odmah zapo~eti, uz kori{}ewe gradiva koje se u samom utvr-

|ewu nalazilo. Pri tome, razgra|ivani su i neki objekti. Tako su u Zamku poru{eni

delovi Crkve, zatim parnog kupatila, kao i zidovi Severne gra|evine,

183 Analiza vr{ena u Institutu

za ispitivawe materijama a.d. Beograd.

Originalni izve{taj u preduze}u

„KOTO d.o.o.“, Beograd.

184 Dini} 1962, 64; ISN II, 197–298;

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004, 60.

242


this, some structures were dismantled. Thus, in the Castle, parts of the church were

demolished, then those of the Steam Bath, as well as the walls of the North Building

which were already in ruins by then. In the Lower Town, as we could conclude by

the installed spolia, a church which used to have a relief wattle decoration of the

Moravan style was destroyed.

In the Castle, the whole northeast corner of Tower 6 was rebuilt and on this

occasion it also obtained an exterior reinforcement founded in the space of the former

hidden road. In the Lower Town, judging by all, during the siege the corner

Tower 7 was demolished to a significant degree. Parts of its southwest and southeast

sides were first rebuilt almost in their entirety from the level of the ground and then

they were enclosed. After these reconstructions, the whole former fortress of Novo

Brdo got a primarily military role and all access to Christians was prohibited there.

However, the Ottomans did not use this whole fortified space. There are no traces

showing that the Ottoman crew ever stayed at the former Castle. Over a shorter

period of time, at the turn of the 15 th into the 16 th century, in the repaired ruins of

the church, there used to be a millet granary.

After the fall of the Serbian Despotate, in line with its new role of a fortress in

the interior of the conquered land, Novo Brdo received an appropriate crew. At

first, this crew together with assisting workers consisted of 86 persons. But, already

at the end of the 15 th century, there was a permanent military crew which together

with a mustahfizes, a dizdar and a kethüda had 49 members. 185 It seems that this

number did not change during the 16 th century and around the middle of the 17 th

century it went down to 20. 186 In this period the fortifications of Novo Brdo lost

their former importance and they fell into the state of major neglect as it was the

case with other fortresses far in the background of the Empire. In 1685, the fortress

was in such a crumbly state that the Janissaries crew of 40 men lived in the Suburb. 187

After the Austro-Turkish war (1683–1699), the fortifications in Novo Brdo lost all

of their military and strategic importance and they were finally abandoned and left

to the devastating forces of humans and the nature.

185 Zirojevi} 1974, 135–137.


187 Kosti} 1922, 141.

188 Popovi} 1993, 169–185.

189 Popovi} 1989, 71–72.

190 Popovi} 1999, 302–306.

PLACE OF NOVO BRDO FORTRESS

IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF FORTIFICATIONS IN MEDIEVAL SERBIA

The medieval fortresses on the territory of the Serbian lands at the time when the

state of the Nemanides was being created mostly constituted the Byzantine heritage

of the 11 th and the 12 th centuries. These were fortresses with irregular ground plan,

of the castle type, built by the rule in strategically important inaccessible places that

provided the best conditions for the defence. Small in terms of the space, they mostly

served for the placement of a military crew and perhaps also for giving shelter to

the surrounding population in case of a danger. 188 During the 13 th century and even

in the first decades of the following one, there were no proper urban settlements or

fortified towns. The only exception in this sense were the Serbian littoral towns and

the conquered Byzantine urban centres in the south. 189

Little is known about the construction of fortresses in the state of the Nemanides.

It is obvious that they did not play a significant role in that period, especially

as far as the central territories of the state are concerned. Some of them were even

abandoned at the time, as was the case with Ras fortress. 190 The fortresses in the

border regions certainly had greater significance, since they were important strong-


koji su tada ve} bili u ru{evinama. U Dowem gradu, kako se moglo zakqu~iti po

ugra|enim spolijama, poru{ena je jedna crkva, koja je imala reqefni pleterni

ukras moravskog stila.

U Zamku je prezidan ceo severoisto~ni ugao Kule 6, koji je tom prilikom

dobio i spoqno oja~awe utemeqeno u prostoru nekada{weg skrivenog puta. U

Dowem gradu je, po svemu sude}i, u toku opsade bila u zna~ajnoj meri poru{ena

ugaona Kula 7. Woj su od nivoa tla gotovo u celini prezidani, a potom i obzidani

delovi jugozapadne i jugoisto~ne strane. Posle ovih obnova celo nekada{we

utvr|ewe Novog Brda dobilo je prevashodno vojnu namenu i tu je bio zabrawen

pristup hri{}anima. Me|utim, Turci nisu koristili ceo taj fortificirani

prostor. Nema tragova toga da je turska posada ikada boravila u nekada{wem

Zamku. U jednom kra}em razdobqu, na prelazu iz 15. u 16. vek, tu se u prepravqenim

ru{evinama Crkve nalazio ambar za proso.

Posle pada Srpske despotovine Novo Brdo je u skladu sa svojom novom ulogom

tvr|ave u unutra{wosti osvojene zemqe dobilo i odgovaraju}u posadu. U

prvo vreme ta posada je, sa pomo}nim radnicima, brojala 86 qudi. Ve} krajem

15. veka ustalila se vojna posada, koja je, sa mustahfizom, dizdarom i }ehajom,

brojala 49 ~lanova. 185 Taj broj se, izgleda, nije mewao tokom 16. veka, da bi sredinom

17. veka spao na 20. 186 Novobrdske fortifikacije su u tom razdobqu izgubile

svoj nekada{wi zna~aj, pa su pale u stawe te{ke zapu{tenosti, kao {to

je to bio slu~aj i sa drugim utvr|ewima daleko u pozadini carstva. Godine

1685. utvr|ewe je u tolikoj meri bilo oronulo da je jani~arska posada od 40

qudi stanovala u Podgra|u. 187 Posle austro-turskog rata (1683–1699) utvr|ewa

u Novom Brdu izgubila su svaki vojnostrate{ki zna~aj i bila su kona~no napu-

{tena i prepu{tena razornim silama qudi i prirode.

MESTO NOVOBRDSKOG UTVR\EWA

U RAZVOJU FORTIFIKACIJA SREDWOVEKOVNE SRBIJE

Sredwovekovna utvr|ewa na podru~ju srpskih zemaqa u vreme nastanka dràve

Nemawi}a predstavqala su uglavnom vizantijsko nasle|e 11–12. veka. To su bila

utvr|ewa nepravilnih osnova, tipa kastela, po pravilu gra|ena na strate{ki

zna~ajnim nepristupa~nim mestima, koja su pruàla najboqe uslove za odbranu.

Prostorno mala, ona su naj~e{}e sluìla za sme{taj vojne posade, a mo`da i

za zbeg okolnog stanovni{tva u slu~aju opasnosti. 188 Tokom 13. veka, pa i u prvim

decenijama narednog stole}a, nije bilo pravih urbanih naseobina niti utvr-

|enih naseqa. Izuzetke u tom smislu predstavqali su samo srpski primorski

gradovi i osvojena vizantijska urbana sredi{ta na jugu. 189

O izgradwi utvr|ewa u dràvi Nemawi}a zna se veoma malo. O~igledno je

da u tom razdobqu ona nisu imala zna~ajnu ulogu, posebno kada su u pitawu sredi{we

oblasti dràve. Neka su u to vreme ~ak i napu{tena, kakav je slu~aj bio

sa tvr|avom Ras. 190 Ve}i zna~aj sigurno su imala utvr|ewa u grani~nim oblastima,

gde su bila u ulozi va`nih upori{ta odbrane dràve. Od posledwih decenija

13. veka, pa sve do druge polovine 14. stole}a pod vlast srpskog vladara

do{le su prostrane vizantijske oblasti na jugu, kao i deo ranijih ugarskih

poseda na severu. Na tim podru~jima zaposednuta su brojna utvr|ewa, koja su

ukqu~ena u sistem odbrane tekovina osvajawa. Otvoreno je pitawe, za koje nema

pouzdanih podataka, da li su i u kojoj meri pod srpskom vla{}u zate~ena

185 Zirojevi} 1974, 135–137.


187 Kosti} 1922, 141.

188 Popovi} 1993, 169–185.

189 Popovi} 1989, 71–72.

190 Popovi} 1999, 302–306.

244

191 Popovi} 2006, 84.

192 Popovi} 1996, 67–87 =

Popovi} 2000, 7–30.

193 Popovi} 2012, 196.


holds for the defence of the state. From the last decades of the 13 th century to the

second half of the 14 th century, spacious Byzantine territories in the south, as well

as a part of the former Hungarian possessions in the north came under the reign of

a Serbian ruler. Numerous fortresses were captured in these territories and they

were incorporated into the defence system, as a result of the conquests. It remains

an open question for which there is no reliable data whether and to which degree

these captured fortresses were additionally built and reinforced under the Serbian

rule. Judging by all, there were no extensive fortification works. During a short-lived

Serbian rule in Belgrade, in the fourth decade of the 14 th century, the ramparts of

the suburb were additionally built and they linked the castle on the hillock with the

riverbank of the Sava. 191 There were probably similar works in the south, too. It is

quite certain that the ramparts of Skopje were reinforced and had additions built

during the first half of the 14 th century. This may also be presumed for a number of

other fortresses on which there are almost no written testimonies. It has remained

recorded that the main tower in Serres was built during the Serbian rule. There is

also a piece of data saying that around the middle of the 14 th century, the Serbs carried

out extensive fortification works in Veria, but nothing more reliable is known

about these works. What may be drawn as a general conclusion is that all of these

works were conducted in the spirit of the traditional experiences of the Byzantine

military architecture. 192

The building of new fortresses in the Serbian lands constituted a very rare

phenomenon in the period which started with the reign of King Stefan Uro{ II

(1284–1321) and ended with the Christian defeat at the Maritsa and the extinguishing

of the Nemanides dynasty in 1371. During this almost entire century, the

geopolitical situation in the central regions of the state did not suggest a need for

the development of military architecture, so there were no builders capable of keeping

up with the improvements in fortifications and the defence systems of fortresses.

If we put aside the building of smaller hill fortresses, of the castle type, according

to our findings only two new fortresses were built in this period – Magli~ki zamak

(Magli~ Castle) and the urban fortifications of the newly founded town of Novo Brdo

which is, however, characterised by a very good selection of fortification solutions.

The new Magli~ Castle constituted an example of a fortress the ground plan of

which was skilfully accommodated to the existing relief. The ramparts and the

towers were positioned in line with the needs related to an efficient defence. Towards

the only accessible side, there was a protruding Main Tower in front of which

a spacious and deep moat was cut into the rocks. The shape of the Main Tower with

obliquely cut angles was also very well adjusted to its prominent position, that is, to

the fact that the action of siege engines was possible only from that direction. The

other towers, with an approximately square ground plan, were arranged at regular

intervals in order to enable a uniformed defence from the less accessible sides. It has

also been noticed that towards the south Magli~ was unusually strongly fortified.

There, within the shortest rampart, at very small mutual distances, as many as three

powerful towers were built. This phenomenon, which does not have any related

analogies in the fortifications of the time, is for the time being difficult to explain. 193

It remains an open question whether there were any paragons according to

which the Magli~ Castle was built, since that was the first new fortress built during

the reign of the Nemanides. After the wars with Byzantium and even later during


utvr|ewa dogra|ivana i oja~avana. To, po svemu sude}i, nisu bili obimniji

fortifikacioni radovi. Za vreme kratkotrajne srpske vlasti u Beogradu, u ~etvrtoj

deceniji 14. veka, dogra|eni su bedemi Podgra|a, koji su povezali kastel

na bregu sa obalom Save. 191 Sli~nih radova verovatno je bilo i na jugu. Sasvim

je sigurno da su bedemi Skopqa tokom prve polovine 14. veka oja~avani i dogra|ivani.

To se moè pretpostaviti i za ~itav niz drugih utvr|ewa, o ~emu gotovo

da i nema pisanih svedo~anstava. Ostalo je zabeleèno da je pod srpskom

vla{}u u Seru podignuta Glavna kula. Tako|e postoji podatak da su Srbi u Veriji

sredinom 14. veka izvodili velike fortifikacione radove, ali se o tim

radovima ni{ta pouzdanije ne zna. Ono {to se kao op{ti zakqu~ak moè izvesti

jeste da su svi ti radovi izvo|eni u duhu tradicionalnih iskustava vizantijske

vojne arhitekture. 192

Gra|ewe novih utvr|ewa u srpskim zemqama predstavqalo je veoma retku pojavu

u razdobqu koje je zapo~eto vladavinom kraqa Stefana Uro{a II (1284–1321),

a okon~ano hri{}anskim porazom na Marici i ga{ewem dinastije Nemawi}a

1371. godine. Tokom tog, gotovo ~itavog jednog stole}a geopoliti~ka situacija

u sredi{wim oblastima dràve nije ukazivala na potrebu za razvojem vojnog

graditeqstva, tako da nije bilo ni neimara sposobnih da prate usavr{avawa

fortifikacija i sistema odbrane utvr|ewa. Ukoliko iskqu~imo gra|ewe mawih

brdskih utvrda, tipa kastela ili zamka, prema na{im saznawima u tom razdobqu

gra|ena su samo dva nova utvr|ewa – Magli~ki zamak i urbane fortifikacije

novoosnovanog grada Novog Brda – koja odlikuje, me|utim, veoma dobar

izbor fortifikacionih re{ewa.

Novi Magli~ki zamak predstavqao je primer utvr|ewa ~ija je osnova bila

znala~ki prilago|ena zate~enom reqefu. Bedemi i kule postavqeni su u skladu

sa potrebama efikasne odbrane. Prema jedinoj pristupa~noj strani bila je isturena

Glavna kula, ispred koje je u stenama use~en prostran i dubok rov. Oblik

Glavne kule, sa koso zase~enim uglovima, bio je tako|e dobro prilago|en istaknutom

poloàju, odnosno ~iwenici da su jedino iz toga pravca bila mogu}a

dejstva opsadnih sprava. Ostale kule, pribli`no kvadratnih osnova, bile su

raspore|ene na pravilnim rastojawima kako bi se omogu}ila ravnomerna odbrana

sa teè pristupa~nih strana. Uo~eno je, isto tako, da je Magli~ prema jugu

bio neobi~no jako utvr|en. Tu su u okviru najkra}eg bedema na malim me|usobnim

rastojawima podignute ~ak tri sna`ne kule. Ovu pojavu, za koju me|u onovremenim

fortifikacijama nema bliìh analogija, za sada je te{ko objasniti. 193

Otvoreno je pitawe da li su postojali uzori prema kojima je gra|en Magli~ki

zamak, budu}i da je to bilo prvo novo utvr|ewe podignuto u vreme vladavine

Nemawi}a. Posle ratova sa Vizantijom, pa i kasnije, tokom 13. veka, u srpskim

zemqama samo pojedina starija utvr|ewa, poput Jele~a i Zve~ana, ostala

su u sistemu odbrane, a takvih primera je bilo, kao {to smo ve} istakli, i u

grani~nim oblastima. 194 O gra|ewu novih utvr|ewa u ovom razdobqu nema podataka

u sa~uvanoj istorijskoj gra|i, a na to ne ukazuju ni raspoloìvi arheolo{ki

nalazi.

Nove fortifikacije Magli~kog zamka, posmatrane u celini i u odnosnu na

zastupqena konstruktivna re{ewa, bliè su starijim uzorima vizantijskog vojnog

graditeqstva nego tada savremenim ostvarewima evropske odbrambene arhitekture.

U tom smislu, magli~ke bedeme i kule prvenstveno odlikuju kvalitetna

191 Popovi} 2006, 84.

192 Popovi} 1996, 67–87 =

Popovi} 2000, 7–30.

193 Popovi} 2012, 196.

194 Popovi} 1985, 11–32.

246

194 Popovi} 1985, 11–32.

195 Popovi} 2012, 196–197 and on.


the 13 th century, only some of the older fortresses in Serbia, such as Jele~ and Zve~an,

remained within the defence system and, as we have already pointed out, there

were such examples also in the border areas. 194 As for the building of new fortresses

in this period, there is no data in the preserved historic materials and this is also

not suggested by the available archaeological finds.

If observed as a whole and in relation to the applied structural solutions, the

new fortifications of Magli~ Castle are closer to the older paragons of the Byzantine

military architecture than to the contemporary creations of the European defensive

architecture. In those terms ramparts and towers of Magli~ are primarily characterised

by good quality construction and skilful application of good fortification

solutions, but not by any innovations in terms of the improvement in the defence

efficiency. This is understandable when it comes to smaller hill fortresses in the difficult

to access positions where simpler fortification solutions were applied which

entailed only the basic rampart fence reinforced by a certain number of towers, as

was the case in Magli~. 195

The ramparts and towers of Magli~, including also the large water cistern, were

built, as is believed, at the turn of the 13 th to the 14 th century. Two or three decades

later within the scope of the new ramparts, a small church of Saint George was built,

then a new solidly built edifice of the Hall, as well as two “palaces,” along several

smaller auxiliary structures made of wooden materials. With these interventions

that were made by Archbishop Danilo II (1324–1337), the fortress of Magli~ was

finally given the shape, thus getting all the features of a castle as a model of a fortified

residential habitation which did not differ significantly by its basic concept

and contents from the similar European structures of the age.

It is not known who the master builders who constructed the new fortifications

of Magli~ in the first years of the 14 th century were or where they came from. It is

quite certain that this was not done by local builders who, quite certainly, did not

have the knowledge or the experience in building new fortresses. According to what

was achieved, it may be concluded that the master builders of Magli~ were familiar

with the military architecture of the Roman Empire (Byzantium). This would mean

that they could have arrived from the Greek lands, as was often the case when it

came to the construction or painting of new churches. However, we could neither

exclude the involvement of masons from the Serbian littoral lands or from Italy

who were no strangers to the Byzantine architectural traditions.

The second new fortress in the central Serbian lands was the urban fortification

of Novo Brdo which is on this occasion the subject of our particular interest.

As it has already been said before, at the time when Novo Brdo was founded, at the

turn of the 13 th into the 14 th century, there were no significant urban settlements

in Serbia and therefore there was no need to undertake anything in terms of their

defence. Observed more broadly, this was the period when almost no attention in

the state of the Nemanides was paid to the development of military architecture.

The founding of Novo Brdo as an urban settlement – the future mining and economic

centre of the state, constituted a completely new phenomenon for medieval

Serbia. The fast growth of the urban settlement and the building of the fortifications

that would defend it were the processes that took place concurrently. Within only

several decades, a medieval town rose on the terrain that had not been inhabited

before. One gets an impression that already in that earliest period it was clearly


gradwa i znala~ka primena dobrih fortifikacionih re{ewa, ali ne i inovacije

u smislu poboq{awa efikasnosti odbrane. To je razumqivo kada su u pitawu

mawa brdska utvr|ewa na teè pristupa~nim poloàjima, gde su primewivana

jednostavnija fortifikaciona re{ewa, koja su podrazumevala samo osnovnu

bedemsku ogradu, oja~anu odre|enim brojem kula, kao {to je to bio slu~aj i u

Magli~u. 195

Magli~ki bedemi i kule, ukqu~uju}i i veliku cisternu za vodu, gra|eni su,

kako se smatra, na prelazu iz 13. u 14. vek. Dve ili tri decenije kasnije u okviru

novih bedema podignuta je mala crkva Svetog \or|a, zatim novo solidno gra-

|eno zdawe Dvorane, kao i dve „palate“, uz nekoliko mawih pomo}nih objekata

od drvene gra|e. Ovim intervencijama, koje su bile delo arhiepiskopa Danila

II (1324–1337), magli~ko utvr|ewe je kona~no uobli~eno, dobiv{i sve odlike

zamka kao modela utvr|enog rezidencijalnog stanovawa, koji se po svojoj osnovnoj

koncepciji i sadràjima nije bitno razlikovao od sli~nih onovremenih

evropskih zdawa.

Nije poznato ko su bili neimari koji su gradili nove magli~ke fortifikacije

u prvim godinama 14. veka, niti odakle su poticali. Sasvim je sigurno

da to nije bilo delo lokalnih graditeqa, koji, sasvim sigurno, nisu raspolagali

znawima niti iskustvima gra|ewa novih utvr|ewa. Prema onome {to je

ostvareno, moè se zakqu~iti da je magli~kim neimarima bila bliska vojna

arhitektura Romejskog carstva. To bi zna~ilo da su mogli do}i iz gr~kih zemaqa,

kao {to je to bio ~est slu~aj kada je u pitawu bilo gra|ewe i oslikavawe

novih hramova. Ne bi se, me|utim, moglo iskqu~iti ni u~e{}e graditeqa iz

srpskog Pomorja ili Italije, kojima vizantijske graditeqske tradicije nisu

bile strane.

Drugo novo utvr|ewe u sredi{wim srpskim zemqama bila je novobrdska

urbana fortifikacija, koja je ovom prilikom predmet na{eg posebnog interesovawa.

U vreme kada je zasnovano Novo Brdo, na prelazu iz 13. u 14. vek, u Srbiji

nije bilo zna~ajnijih gradskih naseobina, kao {to je ve} ranije re~eno, te

stoga nije postojala ni potreba da se bilo {ta preduzima u smislu wihove odbrane.

[ire posmatrano, bilo je to razdobqe kada se u dràvi Nemawi}a razvoju

vojnog graditeqstva nije poklawala gotovo nikakva pa`wa.

Zasnivawe Novog Brda kao gradskog naseqa – budu}eg rudarskog i privrednog

sredi{ta dràve – za sredwovekovnu Srbiju predstavqalo je sasvim novu pojavu.

Brzi rast urbane naseobine i gra|ewe fortifikacija, koje }e je braniti,

predstavqali su procese koji su se istovremeno odvijali. Na zate~enom terenu,

koji ranije nije bio naseqen, za samo nekoliko decenija nikao je sredwovekovni

grad. Ima se utisak da je ve} u tom najranijem razdobqu bilo jasno odre-

|eno gde }e se nalaziti fortificirani deo grada, a gde Podgra|e, odnosno deo

urbane naseobine koji se slobodno {irio na raspoloìvim terenima.

Za podizawe utvr|enog dela grada odabran je deo koji je prema odlikama

svoga reqefa bio najpogodniji za gra|ewe fortifikacija. Na osnovu analize

o~uvanih ostataka bedema i kula moglo se jasno utvrditi da je pre pristupa

gra|ewu u celini bio osmi{qen plan novih fortifikacija. Zaravweni vrh brega

bio je namewen za podizawe Zamka – sredi{we ta~ke odbrane, kojoj je, pored

osnovne uloge rezidencijalnog stanovawa, bila namewena i funkcija citadele,

odnosno u slu~aju opsade upori{ta posledwe odbrane. Zapadna padina brega

195 Popovi} 2012, 196–197 i daqe.

248


determined where the fortified part of the town was going to be and where the suburb,

that is, a part of the urban settlement which expanded freely across the available

terrains.

For the purpose of building the fortified part of the town, a section of the terrain

which according to the features of its relief was most suitable for the building

of fortifications was selected. On the basis of an analysis of the preserved remains of

the ramparts and towers, it could be clearly established that before the beginning of

the construction, the plan of the new fortifications was realised in its entirety. The

flattened top of the hill was earmarked for the building of the Castle – the central

point of the defence which was, in addition to the basic purpose of residential habitation,

also given the function of a citadel, that is, in case of a siege – the stronghold

of the last line of defence. The west slope of the hill was intended for the fortified

section of the urban settlement. That area surrounded by ramparts that were linked

with the Castle was envisaged as a relatively spacious part of the fortress with a fanshaped

ground plan that would be marked as the Lower Town. The initial concept

was attained in its entirety without subsequent additions and modifications, with

the exception of the supplement where the north and the south corners of the

Lower Town were shaped as indented towers.

If observed in their entirety, the fortifications of Novo Brdo were built in line

with a very precise plan with evenly distributed defence elements, which relates in

particular to the ramparts and the towers of the Castle. This well imagined regular

ground plan was integrated with the features of the relief into a unique and harmonious

ensemble (fig. 109). In front of the ramparts, towards the northeast side, the

only more easily accessible one, there was a wide and relatively deep moat dug into

the rocky massif. There was also a slightly shallower moat on the west side in front

of the ramparts of the Lower Town. On this side, the access to the moat seemed to

have been particularly defended also with an earth rampart with palisades. The

analysis of the ground plan of Novo Brdo’s Castle unambiguously shows that in his

original concept the master builder had in his mind circle as an ideal shape, along

the parameter of which there would be towers distributed at an equal distance.

Further explorations of the ground plan lead to a conclusion that the master builder

most probably had a direct insight into the topography of the terrain and clear findings

on the spatial capabilities of the micro-location. This led him to reshape the

originally conceived form of a circle into an almost regular ellipsis. The axes of this

ellipsis coincide with the axes of a circle, but are significantly reduced in order to

adjust the shape of the fortification to the spatially limited rocky plateau better.

Guided by the presumed concept of the master builder, we tried to grasp his

architectural solution through scaling and thus we established that when preparing

the ground plan he used the basic 10 feet (3.0 m) module. In this way it seems that

the diameter of the imagined circle was probably 14 modules (140 feet or 42.0 m),

while the projected ellipse was 10 modules (100 feet or 30.0 m) along the longer

axis and 8 modules (24.0 m) along the shorter axis. The ramparts were traced and

the towers, three each in the east and in the west sectors, were distributed along the

perimeter of the ellipse, thus almost fitting almost into the scope of an ideal circle.

The east sector is dominated by the last defence tower (Tower 1) and the protruding

Tower 6 which defended the access to the keep and the Castle’s main gate. By scaling

them, it was established that their size was located within the scope of a circle with


bila je predvi|ena za utvr|eni deo gradskog naseqa. Taj prostor, opasan bedemima,

koji su bili povezani sa Zamkom, zami{qen je kao relativno prostran deo

utvr|ewa, lepezaste osnove, koji }e biti ozna~avan kao Dowi grad. Po~etna zamisao

u celini je ostvarena bez naknadnih dogradwi i prepravki, sa izuzetkom

dopune, gde su severni i ju`ni ugao Doweg grada oblikovani kao uvu~ene kule.

Posmatrane u celini, fortifikacije Novog Brda gra|ene su prema vrlo

preciznom planu, sa ravnomerno raspore|enim elementima odbrane, {to se

posebno odnosi na bedeme i kule Zamka. Ta dobro zami{qena pravilna osnova

spojena je sa odlikama reqefa u jedinstvenu i harmoni~nu celinu (sl. 109).

Prema severoisto~noj, jedinoj lak{e pristupa~noj strani, ispred bedema utvr-

|ewa prokopan je u stenovitom masivu {irok i relativno dubok rov. Ne{to

pli}i rov postojao je i na zapadnoj strani ispred bedema Doweg grada. Na ovoj

strani je prilaz rovu, izgleda, bio posebno brawen i zemqanim bedemom sa palisadama.

Analiza plana Zamka Novog Brda nedvosmisleno pokazuje da je graditeq

u prvobitnoj zamisli imao u vidu krug kao idealan oblik, po ~ijem bi

obodu bile ravnomerno raspore|ene kule. Daqa istraìvawa plana upu}uju na

Sl. 107. Novo Brdo,

zami{qeni izgled Zamka

sredinom 14. veka

(prema podacima i zamislima autora,

digitalna rekonstrukcija I. Bjeli})

Fig. 107. Novo Brdo,

imagined appearance of the Castle

around the middle of the 14 th century

(according to the data and

the concepts of the authors,

digital reconstruction I. Bjeli})

250

196 Evgenidu 1997.

197 Maneti, Bollen 2001.

198 Kronig 1994, 91–107;

Maneti, Bollen 2001, 316–323.


the diameter of 4 modules (40 feet), while all other towers have the size of 3 modules

(30 feet).

The additional fact that in the Castle’s ground plan designed in this manner the

axes of the main defence tower, Tower 6, and the gate meet in the centre of the ellipse

confirms that, regardless of his origin, the master builder was directly acquainted

with the location and the topography of the terrain. This certainly allowed him to

distribute the fortification structures. Furthermore, as he obviously had the purpose

and the contents of the fortified space in mind, he also distributed the buildings

within the fortification on the basis of a plan, which all suggests his high degree of

skilfulness and education.

The position of the main South Gate was very well chosen. In order to get from

the Suburb, that is, from the easiest access to the fortress to the gate of the fortress,

one had to cross the moat where there was a wooden bridge, probably a drawbridge,

and then to pass by the Main Tower and the part of the east rampart of the Castle.

This enabled an efficient control and a possibility of defending the access to the

fortress. On this road, any possible attacker would be constantly exposed to the

action of the defenders on its right side and not on its left one, where the shield was

by the rule carried.

With the shape of its ground plan and the defence elements, skilfully fitted into

the features of the relief, the fortress of Novo Brdo does not have any closer analogies

in the near surroundings or more broadly. In the Greek regions of the Balkans 196

and in neighbouring Bulgaria, the fortresses of the time had the characteristics of

the older Byzantine military architecture. This particularly refers to the plans of the

fortresses the irregular ground plans of which were adjusted to the shapes of the

relief while the distribution of the towers that was subjected to the encountered

terrain. It seems to us that there are somewhat closer parallels with the fortifications

on the territory of Italy where it is possible to notice the aspiration towards a more

regular ground plan and a more even distribution of the defence elements. These

are primarily tower, which almost by the rule had square and rectangular ground

plans and which were often open towards the interior defended space. 197 This certain

similarity between the fortifications of Novo Brdo and the Italian examples is

especially noticeable when it comes to the very position of the fortress to which the

plan with the distribution of the towers was accommodated. In this sense, perhaps we

may be allowed the liberty to mention the mysterious Castel del Monte in south Italy.

With its position, the regular ground plan and the even distribution of towers, the

Castle of Novo Brdo very much reminds of the said fortress built by Emperor Frederick

II around the middle of the 13 th century, the real purpose of which has not

been reliably clarified even to the present days. 198 In addition to the general impression,

this is the only similarity between these two fortresses. In making a comparison

to the other defence details applied to the fortresses within the Italian

Peninsula of the times, it would be useful to point out some close parallels when it

comes to the phenomenon of dual ramparts, as well as the shape of the towers in

the lower zones. Owing to the insufficient degree of preservation of the towers of

Novo Brdo, it is not possible to make comparisons now with any potential paragons

when it comes to the last storey, the crenellated top and the roofs.

Novo Brdo fortress, which we believe was built during the second quarter of

the 14 th century, corresponds to the final epoch of the fortifications built on the


zakqu~ak da je neimar, najverovatnije imao neposredan uvid u topografiju terena

i jasna saznawa o prostornim mogu}nostima mikrolokacije. To je uticalo

na to da prvobitno osmi{qenu formu kruga preoblikuje u skoro pravilnu

elipsu, ~ije se osovine podudaraju sa osovinama kruga, ali su znatno umawene,

kako bi oblik utvr|ewa {to boqe prilagodio nevelikom stenovitom platou.

Rukovode}i se pretpostavqenom zamisli graditeqa, poku{ali smo da razmeravawem

proniknemo u wegovo re{ewe, te smo ustanovili da je pri izradi

plana koristio osnovni modul od 10 stopa (3,0 m). Tako se ~ini da je pre~nik zami{qenog

kruga verovatno iznosio 14 modula (140 stopa, ili 42,0 m), dok je projektovana

elipsa po duòj osovini merila 10 modula (100 stopa, ili 30,0 m), a

po kra}oj 8 modula (24,0 m). Po obodu elipse su trasirani bedemi i raspore|ene

kule, i to po tri u isto~nom i tri u zapadnom sektoru, tako da se skoro uklapaju

u opseg idealnog kruga. U isto~nom sektoru su dominantne kula posledwe odbrane

(Kula 1) i isturena Kula 6, koja je branila prilaz Donònu i glavnoj kapiji

Zamka. Razmeravawem je utvr|eno da je wihova veli~ina u opsegu kruga pre~nika

4 modula (40 stopa), dok su sve ostale kule veli~ine 3 modula (30 stopa).

Sl. 108. Novo Brdo,

zami{qeni izgled isto~nog prilaza

Zamku sredinom 15. veka

(prema podacima i zamislima autora,

digitalna rekonstrukcija I. Bjeli})

Fig. 108. Novo Brdo,

imagined appearance of the east access

to the Castle around the middle

of the 15 th century

(according to the data and

the concepts of the authors,

digital reconstruction I. Bjeli})

252

199 Petrovi} 1976, 127–133;

Deroko 1961.

200 Bereti} 1955, 21–24, plan 4.


basis of the principles related to the cold weapons warfare. In those terms, some

minor reinforcements of the fortifications were carried out during the last decades

of the 14 th century which did not impact the basic defence concept of Novo Brdo.

The first emergence of cannons as defence artillery in its early period had almost

no influence on the systems of the fortresses’ defence. 199 This is the situation that

can be noticed in the case of Novo Brdo as well. It was only during the first decades

of the 15 th century, when siege artillery also started to be used, that there were

attempts to adjust the older fortresses to the new manner of warfare. This process

was clearly noticed in the case of the fortress of Novo Brdo, too. During the fourth

and the fifth decades of the 15 th century, the northeast section of the fortress was

reinforced, since it was the most accessible and the first to be exposed to an attack.

On that side within the area of the Suburb, there were also excellent positions

which attackers could use for the placing of their siege artillery. Because of this, the

existing rampart of the Lower Town, between Towers 6 and 8, was strengthened

with an earth embankment on the interior side in order to prevent the making of

breaches. At the same time, there was a better organised defence of the access to

the fortress from the direction of the Suburb by creating a platform, east of Tower

6, from which the defence artillery could act. Most likely, all eight cannons which

the defenders of Novo Brdo had in 1455 were placed there.

It remains an open question when the fire arms were introduced into the

defence of Novo Brdo. In a broader sense this could be the entire first half of the

15 th century. They were probably first used for the defence of the town during the

Ottoman siege in 1440–1441. There is no data that during this siege the attacker

used siege cannons. At that time the Ottoman army still did not have efficient siege

artillery. Fifteen years later, the situation was radically changed. The Ottoman Turks

then had at their disposal powerful siege artillery which played the key role during

the conquest of Constantinople in 1453. Two years later, the new siege weapon was

also used when conquering Novo Brdo. After a brief bombardment with cannons,

that projected balls with the diameter of 50 cm – 60 cm, the defenders of Novo Brdo

surrendered the town. Even with the well founded fortress, as well as the solidly built

ramparts and towers, the fortifications of Novo Brdo were not resistant enough to

the action of the fire arms. One century earlier, the urban fortress of Novo Brdo

constituted a unique phenomenon and the first achievement of this kind in the

central areas of medieval Serbia. One gets an impression that it was built at the

time when the Serbian setting still did not fully develop awareness of the importance

of strong fortresses for the defence of the state. Also, we got the feeling that

in the first decades of its existence, the fortress of Novo Brdo represented a novelty

the significance of which was not appreciated to a sufficient degree.

In our considerations, we still have as an open question who the builders of

Novo Brdo fortress were and where they came from. From the analysis of the preserved

fortifications and especially from the spatial solutions, it is quite clear that

these were not people from the local setting. Also, by insight into what was built, it

is difficult to presume, as has already been pointed out, that the master builders

came from the countries belonging to the Byzantine cultural circle. Also, we could

perhaps exclude the influence of Dubrovnik where the urban fortifications during the

first half of the 14 th century lagged behind the solutions applied when building the

Castle in Novo Brdo. 200 Bearing all of this in mind, it seems to us that the closest


Dodatna ~iwenica da se u ovako projektovanom planu Zamka u sredi{tu

elipse susti~u osovine Glavne kule odbrane, Kule 6 i Glavne kapije potvr|uje

da je neimar, bez obzira na poreklo, pre svega bio neposredno upoznat sa lokacijom

i topografijom terena, {to mu je svakako omogu}ilo da planski rasporedi

fortifikacijske objekte. Daqe, kako je o~igledno imao u vidu namenu i

sadràj utvr|enog prostora, planski je rasporedio i gra|evine unutar wega,

{to sve upu}uje na wegovu u~enost i obrazovawe.

Poloàj Glavne, Ju`ne kapije bio je veoma dobro izabran. Da bi se od Podgra|a,

odnosno najlak{eg prilaza utvr|ewu moglo sti}i do kapije utvr|ewa,

morao se pre}i rov, gde je postojao drveni, verovatno pokretni most, a zatim

i}i pored Glavne kule i dela Isto~nog bedema Zamka. To je omogu}avalo efikasnu

kontrolu i mogu}nost odbrane prilaza utvr|ewu. Eventualni napada~ je

na tom putu bio stalno izloèn dejstvu branilaca sa svoje desne strane, a ne

leve, gde se po pravilu nosio {tit.

Utvr|ewe Novog Brda oblikom svoje osnove i elementima odbrane, znala~ki

uklopqene u odlike reqefa, nema srodnijih analogija u blièm okruèwu, a

ni {ire. U gr~kim oblastima Balkana 196 i susednoj Bugarskoj onovremena utvr-

|ewa nose odlike starije vizantijske vojne arhitekture. To se posebno odnosi

na planove utvr|ewa ~ije su nepravilne osnove prilago|ene oblicima reqefa,

sa rasporedom kula koji je tome podre|en. Ne{to bliè paralele ~ini nam se

da postoje sa fortifikacijama na podru~ju Italije, gde se uo~ava te`wa ka pravilnijem

planu i ravnomernom rasporedu elemenata odbrane. U pitawu su na

prvom mestu kule, gotovo po pravilu kvadratnih i pravougaonih osnova, koje su

~esto otvorene prema unutra{wem brawenom prostoru. 197 Izvesna sli~nost

novobrdskih fortifikacija sa italijanskim primerima uo~qiva je posebno

kada je u pitawu sam poloàj utvr|ewa, kome je prilago|en plan sa rasporedom

kula. U tom smislu, neka nam bude dozvoqeno da pomenemo zagonetni Castel del

Monte u ju`noj Italiji. Svojim poloàjem, pravilnom osnovom i ravnomernim

rasporedom kula, novobrdski Zamak veoma podse}a na pomenuto utvr|ewe cara

Fridriha II, gra|eno sredinom 13. veka, ~ija stvarna namena ni do danas nije

pouzdano razja{wena. 198 Osim op{teg utiska, to je i jedina sli~nost izme|u ova

dva utvr|ewa. U pore|ewu sa ostalim detaqima odbrane kod onovremenih utvr-

|ewa u unutra{wosti Apeninskog poluostrva, vaqa ista}i bliske paralele kada

je u pitawu pojava dvojnih bedema, kao i oblik kula u dowim zonama. Usled

nedovoqnog stepena o~uvanosti novobrdskih kula, sada nisu mogu}a pore|ewa

sa eventualnim uzorima kada su u pitawu posledwa etaà, kruni{te sa zupcima

i krovovi.

Utvr|ewe Novog Brda, za koje smatramo da je podignuto tokom druge ~etvrtine

14. veka, odgovara zavr{noj epohi fortifikacija koje su gra|ene na principima

ratovawa hladnim oru`jem. U tom smislu, vr{ena su tokom posledwih

decenija 14. veka i izvesna mawa oja~awa fortifikacija koja nisu uticala na

osnovnu koncepciju odbrane Novog Brda. Prva pojava topova kao odbrambene

artiqerije u wenom ranom razdobqu bila je gotovo bez uticaja na sisteme odbrane

utvr|ewa. 199 To je pojava koja se uo~ava i u Novom Brdu. Tek tokom prvih

decenija 15. veka, kada ulazi u upotrebu i opsadna artiqerija, nastaju poku{aji

prilago|avawa starijih utvr|ewa novom na~inu ratovawa. Taj proces je veoma

jasno uo~en i kod utvr|ewa Novog Brda. Tokom ~etvrte i pete decenije 15. veka

196 Evgenidu 1997.

197 Maneti, Bollen 2001.

198 Kronig 1994, 91–107;

Maneti, Bollen 2001, 316–323.

199 Petrovi} 1976, 127–133;

Deroko 1961.

254

201 Popovi} 2018, 175–190.

202 Popovi} 1989b, 72–73.

203 Kova~evi} 1966, 137–141;

Kova~evi} 1980, 13–28;

Bo{kovi} 1980, 7–11.

204 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 162–176.

205 Vulovi} 1966; Vulovi} 1981, 19–32.

206 Popovi} 2006, 85–130.

207 Simi}, Vukadinovi} 2018.

208 Popovi} 2013.


supposition to the truth would be the one according to which the builders of the

fortress in Novo Brdo came to Serbia from the Italian Peninsula or more closely

said from South Italy. In addition to some similar fortification solutions, this would

also be impacted by the analysis of the ties between Serbia and not only the Adriatic

littoral areas, but also the regions farther to the west. The developed ties between

Kotor, “the town of the Serbian king,” and south Italian towns are well known. This

was the road along which influences flowed towards the central Serbian lands

where the key role, quite certainly, was played primarily by the citizens of Kotor.

Among the first inhabitants of Novo Brdo were Kotor merchants who undoubtedly

constituted an important linking point between the newly-founded town and the

Littoral areas, South Italy and the Mediterranean at large. Perhaps this was also the

road that brought the master builders of the fortifications of the newly-founded

town. An indirect testimony to such a possibility could also be the earlier expressed

conclusion that the added Steam Bath in the Castle was made by master builders

using similar creations in Puglia as their paragon. 201

Several decades after the construction of Novo Brdo, during the second half of

the 14 th century, a faster development of fortifications in the Serbian lands started.

As opposed to the customs and needs of the previous epochs, the new fortresses

were now built not only in difficult to access places, but also in strategically important

spots in the lowland areas. An important factor that appeared here were new

towns, that is, urban centres in the case of which the defence system also had to

incorporate the civilian settlement or its most significant part. Another important

phenomenon in this period also impacted the development of the Serbian towns.

On account of the general feeling of insecurity caused by internal conflicts and

more and more frequent Ottoman raids, there was a need to place the ruler’s or the

nobleman’s court within a fortified town, which had not been common in the past.

It is also an interesting fact that even the main ruler’s endowments of Moravan

Serbia, monasteries Ravanica and Resava, were turned into powerful fortresses. All

of these circumstances directly influenced the need to strengthen the defence systems

of the towns, while finding new and more complex fortification solutions. This

process which took place in the Moravan areas of the renewed Serbian state, thanks

to the results of the latest surveys, may be followed in the examples of the most important

fortresses built over several decades, up until the final Ottoman conquest

around the middle of the 15 th century. 202

The process of a dynamic development of the Serbian military architecture

started, as it seems, soon after the Battle of Maritsa in 1371 and this was happening

in the state of Prince Lazar. The beginning of this endeavour is reflected in the

fortresses in Kru{evac 203 and Stala}, 204 as well as in the ramparts of Monastery

Ravanica. 205 Further stages in the development may be seen in the fortifications of

Belgrade, 206 Resava 207 and then also Smederevo, 208 where the Serbian military

architecture realised its best creations. The beginnings of this development were

marked by the searching, judging by all accounts, of the local master builders for

appropriate fortification solutions that may be followed in the examples of Kru{evac

and Stala}. Both of these fortresses were originally conceived only with a large

rampart which in Kru{evac was reinforced by a certain number of relatively small

rectangular towers, while in Stala} there was only one tower and it was main, donjon

tower or the keep. In the following stages, this original system was added upon


oja~avan je severoisto~ni deo utrv|ewa, koji je bio najpristupa~niji i prvi

izloèn napadu. Na toj strani u prostoru Podgra|a postojali su i odli~ni poloàji

koje su napada~i mogli da koriste za postavqawe opsadne artiqerije.

Usled toga, postoje}i bedem Doweg grada, izme|u Kule 6 i Kule 8, oja~an je zemqanim

nasipom sa unutra{we strane kako bi se spre~ilo probijawe bre{a. U

isto vreme organizovana je boqa odbrana prilaza utvr|ewu iz pravca Podgra-

|a obrazovawem platforme, isto~no od Kule 6, sa koje je mogla da dejstvuje odbrambena

artiqerija. Tu su, po svoj prilici, bili postavqeni svih osam topova,

koliko su ih branioci Novog Brda imali 1455. godine.

Otvoreno je pitawe kada je vatreno oru`je uvedeno u odbranu Novog Brda.

U {irem smislu, to je mogla biti cela prva polovina 15. veka. Prvi put je verovatno

upotrebqeno za odbranu grada u vreme turske opsade 1440–1441. godine.

Nema podataka o tome da su prilikom te opsade napada~i dejstvovali opsadnim

topovima. Osmanska vojska u to vreme jo{ uvek nije raspolagala efikasnom opsadnom

artiqerijom. Petnaest godina kasnije situacija je bila radikalno

promewena. Turci su tada raspolagali mo}nom opsadnom artiqerijom, koja je

imala kqu~nu ulogu prilikom zauzimawa Konstantinopoqa 1453. godine. Dve

godine kasnije novo opsadno oru`je upotrebqeno je i pri osvajawu Novog Brda.

Posle kra}eg bombardovawa topovima, koji su izbacivali kugle pre~nika

50–60 cm, branioci Novog Brda su predali grad. I pored dobro zasnovanog

utvr|ewa, kao i solidno gra|enih bedema i kula, novobrdske fortifikacije

nisu bile otporne na dejstva vatrenog oru`ja. Jedno stole}e ranije gradsko

utvr|ewe Novog Brda predstavqalo je jedinstvenu pojavu i prvo ostvarewe te

vrste u sredi{wim oblastima sredwovekovne Srbije. Ima se utisak da je gra-

|eno u vremenu kada u srpskoj sredini jo{ uvek nije u punoj meri stasala svest

o zna~aju jakih utvr|ewa za odbranu dràve. Drugim re~ima, u prvim decenijama

svoga postojawa utvr|ewe Novog Brda predstavqalo je novinu, ~iji zna~aj

nije bio u dovoqnoj meri shva}en.

U na{im razmatrawima ostalo je otvoreno pitawe ko su bili graditeqi

utvr|ewa Novog Brda i odakle su poticali. Iz analize sa~uvanih fortifikacija

i naro~ito prostornih re{ewa, sasvim je jasno da to nisu bili qudi iz

doma}e sredine. Tako|e uvidom u ono {to je izgra|eno te{ko se moè pretpostaviti,

kao {to je ve} istaknuto, da bi to bili neimari iz zemaqa vizantijskog

kulturnog kruga. Jednako bi se mo`da mogao iskqu~iti i uticaj Dubrovnika,

gde su urbane fortifikacije tokom prve polovine 14. veka zaostajale za re{ewima

koja su primewena pri gra|ewu novobrdskog Zamka. 200 Imaju}i sve to u

vidu, ~ini nam se da bi najblià istini ostala pretpostavka da su graditeqi

utvr|ewa Novog Brda u Srbiju stigli sa Apeninskog poluostrva ili, bliè re-

~eno, iz ju`ne Italije. Na to bi, osim nekih sli~nih fortifikacionih re{ewa,

uticala i analiza veza sredwovekovne Srbije ne samo sa Jadranskim primorjem

ve} i sa oblastima daqe prema zapadu. Poznate su razvijene veze Kotora,

„grada srpskog kraqa“, sa ju`noitalijanskim gradovima. To je put kojim su strujali

uticaji prema sredi{wim srpskim zemqama, gde su kqu~nu ulogu, sasvim

sigurno, imali na prvom mestu Kotorani. Me|u prvim naseqenicima Novog

Brda bili su kotorski trgovci, koji su, bez sumwe, predstavqali va`nu kop~u

novoosnovanog grada sa Primorjem, ju`nom Italijom i Mediteranom uop{te.

Mo`da je to bio put kojim su stigli i graditeqi fortifikacija novozasnovanog 200 Bereti} 1955, 21–24, plan 4.

256

209 Popovi} 1989, 80–81, fig. 1.

210 Ibid., fig. 4.


and improved. In the first case, Kru{evac, the northeast corner of the fortress was

reinforced by separating a special small segment of the defended space with the

keep and the relevant ramparts which was towards the rest of the fortress surrounded

by an enclosure moat, with a scarp above which there was a low external

rampart and a counterscarp. 209 It was obviously an attempt to create a specially

defended stronghold of the last line of defence. As it seems, in one also subsequent

stage an external rampart of modest dimensions was being built in front of the

main rampart fence, but it remains an open question whether that rampart was

eventually finished. A similar endeavour may also be seen in Stala} where the south

section of the basic enclosure with the main keep was detached by a new rampart

into a separate unit. As opposed to Kru{evac, in this case there was obviously an

intention that in addition to the last line of defence stronghold there was also space

for residential habitation which by its function resembled a modest version of a castle.

When building Monastery Ravanica, too, it is obvious that there were some

uncertainties as to how to protect the endowment and the sepulchral church of

Prince Lazar. The initial idea was, without any doubt, to build only a keep, or better

said, a pyrgos surrounded by a low external rampart. In the following stages, there

were additions built which in some details negated one another and then in the

final phase the monastery complex was surrounded by a rampart with rectangular

towers in front of which, as it appears, the construction of a low external rampart

towards the more accessible side started, but there is no reliable data as to whether

it was ever completely finished. 210

If observed in their entirety, the new fortresses built during the reign of Prince

Lazar reflect the first important steps in the development of the Serbian military

architecture. In fortification terms these were modest creations where the concept

of the whole system of defence was not prepared in advance, which is suggested by

the additional constructions that were close in terms of the time. The ramparts and

the towers which had a relatively modest volume in comparison to the then development

of fortifications were, without any doubt, the creations of local master builders.

It remains an open question what the reason was that in those attempts there was

no significant relying on the examples of the solidly built fortresses in the central

regions of Serbia, primarily the urban fortifications of Novo Brdo. It needs to be said

that some ideas could have been taken over from Novo Brdo fortifications, but in a

significantly more modest form.

This, we could say, “autochthon” course in the development of the Serbian military

architecture continued in the following period that started with the first years

of the 15 th century, after almost two decades of stagnation. New Upper Town in Belgrade

was originally conceived as a spacious fortress with a relatively regular rectangular

ground plan with dual ramparts and an enclosed moat. Within the scope of

the main rampart fence, the thickness of which was 2.10 m or 7 feet, there was originally

a small number of towers distributed along the ramparts. The lower external

rampart towards the moat did not have the usual regular stone scarp, but rather an

irregular bellied one, similar to the scarp in front of the keep in Kru{evac. Observed

as a whole, the original fortifications of Belgrade’s Upper Town were very well conceived

in terms of the space, but they were relatively weak in terms of the defence

efficiency, which applies in particular to the relevant number of towers. However,

while the construction of new Belgrade ramparts was still going on, it seems that


grada. Kao posredno svedo~anstvo takve mogu}nosti mogao bi da govori i ranije

iskazani zakqu~ak da su dogra|eno parno kupatilo u Zamku gradili majstori

po uzoru na sli~na ostvarewa u Apuliji. 201

Nekoliko decenija posle izgradwe Novog Brda, tokom druge polovine 14.

veka, zapo~iwe brì razvoj fortifikacija u srpskim zemqama. Za razliku od

obi~aja i potreba prethodnih epoha, sada se nova utvr|ewa ne podiù samo na

te{ko pristupa~nim mestima ve} i na strate{ki va`nim poloàjima u ravnijim

predelima. Tu se kao bitan ~inilac pojavquju i prvi gradovi, odnosno

urbana sredi{ta, kod kojih je u sistem odbrane moralo da bude ukqu~eno i civilno

naseqe ili wegov najzna~ajniji deo. Jo{ jedna zna~ajna pojava u ovom

razdobqu uticala je na razvoj srpskih gradova. Usled op{te nesigurnosti izazvane

unutra{wim sukobima i sve ~e{}im turskim prodorima, ukazala se potreba

da se vladarski i vlasteoski dvor smeste u okvire utvr|enog grada, {to

ranije nije bilo uobi~ajeno. Zanimqiva je i ~iwenica da se i glavne vladarske

zadu`bine Moravske Srbije – manastiri Ravanica i Resava – pretvaraju u sna-

`ne tvr|ave. Sve ove okolnosti neposredno su uticale na potrebu za ja~awem

sistema odbrane gradova, uz iznalaèwe novih i sloènijih fortifikacionih

re{ewa. Taj proces, koji se odvijao u moravskim oblastima obnovqene srpske

dràve, zahvaquju}i rezultatima novijih istraìvawa, moè se pratiti na

primerima najzna~ajnijih utvr|ewa, gra|enih u toku vi{e decenija, sve do kona~nog

turskog osvajawa sredinom 15. stole}a. 202

Proces dinami~nog razvoja srpske vojne arhitekture zapo~eo je, kako izgleda,

ubrzo posle Mari~ke bitke 1371. godine, i to u dràvi kneza Lazara. Po-

~etak toga poduhvata odslikavaju tvr|ave u Kru{evcu 203 i Stala}u, 204 kao i bedemi

manastira Ravanice. 205 Daqe etape razvoja odslikavaju fortifikacije

Beograda, 206 Resave, 207 a potom i Smedereva, 208 gde je srpska vojna arhitektura

ostvarila svoja najboqa dela. Po~eci toga razvoja bili su obeleèni tragawima,

po svemu sude}i doma}ih graditeqa, za odgovaraju}im fortifikacionim

re{ewima, koja se mogu pratiti na primerima Kru{evca i Stala}a. Obe ove

tvr|ave prvobitno su bile zami{qene samo sa obimnim bedemom, koji je u Kru-

{evcu bio oja~an sa odre|enim brojem relativno malih pravougaonih kula, a

u Stala}u samo jednom, i to glavnom, donòn kulom. U narednim etapama taj

prvobitni sistem bio je dogra|ivan i poboq{avan. U prvom slu~aju, kod Kru-

{evca, severoisto~ni ugao tvr|ave je bio oja~an izdvajawem posebnog malog dela

brawenog prostora, sa donònom i odgovaraju}im bedemima, koji je prema

ostalom delu utvr|ewa bio opasan obzidanim rovom, sa eskarpom, nad kojom je

bio nizak spoqni bedem, i kontraeskarpom. 209 Bio je to o~igledno poku{aj da

se obrazuje i posebno braweno upori{te posledwe odbrane. U jednoj tako|e poznijoj

etapi, kako izgleda, gra|en je ispred glavne bedemske ograde i spoqni

bedem skromnih dimenzija, ali je otvoreno pitawe da li je taj bedem u celosti

i bio izgra|en. Sli~an poduhvat uo~ava se i u Stala}u, gde je ju`ni deo osnovnog

obzi|a sa glavnom, donòn kulom i novim bedemom izdvojen u posebnu celinu.

Za razliku od Kru{evca, u ovom slu~aju je o~igledno postojala namera da

se, osim upori{ta posledwe odbrane, obezbedi i prostor za rezidencijalno

stanovawe, koji bi po funkciji nalikovao skromnoj verziji zamka. I prilikom

gra|ewa manastira Ravanice o~igledno je da su postojale nedoumice u vezi s

tim kako za{tititi zadu`binu i grobni hram kneza Lazara. Po~etna ideja je,

201 Popovi} 2018, 175–190.

202 Popovi} 1989b, 72–73.

203 Kova~evi} 1966, 137–141;

Kova~evi} 1980, 13–28;

Bo{kovi} 1980, 7–11.

204 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 162–176.

205 Vulovi} 1966; Vulovi} 1981, 19–32.

206 Popovi} 2006, 85–130.

207 Simi}, Vukadinovi} 2018.

208 Popovi} 2013.

209 Popovi} 1989, 80–81, sl. 1.

258


the weaknesses that accompanied the previous development of the Serbian fortifications

were noticed and hence there were significant modifications in this regard.

It was precisely around the end of the first decade and the beginning of the second

decade of the 15 th century that looking up to the older fortifications of the

town of Novo Brdo became more pronounced when building new fortifications. The

paragons of the defence solutions that had been mostly neglected during the previous

several decades got their full expression during the construction of the fortress

of Monastery Resava (fig. 110). As the explorations have shown, this monastery

fortress was built in line with a plan prepared by the master builders in advance, as

Sl. 109. Zamak Novo Brdo,

{ema konstrukcije

Fig. 109. Novo Brdo Castle,

construction scheme


bez sumwe, bila da se podigne samo donòn ili, boqe re}i, pirg, opasan niskim

spoqnim bedemom. U narednim etapama vr{ene su dogradwe, koje su se u pojedinim

detaqima negirale, da bi u finalnoj fazi manastirski kompleks bio

opasan bedemom, sa pravougaonim kulama, ispred koga je, izgleda, zapo~eta i

izgradwa niskog spoqnog bedema, prema pristupa~nijoj strani, za koji nema

pouzdanih podataka da je u celini i bio podignut. 210

Posmatrana u celini, nova utvr|ewa gra|ena u doba kneza Lazara odslikavaju

prve zna~ajnije korake u razvoju srpske vojne arhitekture. U fortifikacionom

smislu, to su bila skromna ostvarewa bez unapred zami{qenog celovitog

sistema odbrane, na {ta ukazuju vremenski bliske poznije dogradwe. Bedemi

i kule u odnosu na onovremeni razvoj fortifikacija, relativno skromnog volumena,

delo su, bez sumwe, doma}ih graditeqa. Ostaje otvoreno pitawe {ta je

bio razlog da se u tim tragawima nije zna~ajnije oslawalo na primere solidno

gra|enih utvr|ewa u sredi{wim oblastima Srbije, i to na prvom mestu urbanih

fortifikacija Novog Brda. Vaqa re}i da su neke ideje mogle biti preuzete

sa novobrdskih fortifikacija, ali u znatno skromnijoj formi.

I u narednom periodu, koji je nastupio u prvim godinama 15. veka, posle

gotovo dve decenije zastoja, nastavqen je taj, moglo bi se re}i „autohtoni“ tok

razvoja srpskog vojnog graditeqstva. Novi Gorwi grad u Beogradu bio je prvobitno

zami{qen kao prostrano utvr|ewe, relativno pravilne pravougaone osnove,

sa dvojnim bedemima i obzidanim rovom. U okviru glavne bedemske ograde, ~ija

je debqina iznosila 2,1 m ili 7 stopa, prvobitno je bio raspore|en relativno

mali broj kula. Niì spoqni bedem prema rovu nije imao uobi~ajenu pravilnu

kamenu eskarpu, ve} nepravilnu trbu{astu, sli~nu onoj ispred kru{eva~kog

donòna. Posmatrane u celini, prvobitne beogradske gorwogradske fortifikacije

bile su prostorno dobro zami{qene, ali relativno slabe u smislu odbrambene

efikasnosti, {to se posebno odnosi na odgovaraju}i broj kula. Me|utim,

jo{ dok je trajala gradwa novih beogradskih bedema, izgleda da su uo~ene

slabosti koje su pratile prethodni razvoj srpskih fortifikacija, te je u tom

smislu do{lo do zna~ajnih promena.

Upravo na prelazu iz prve u drugu deceniju 15. veka kod gra|ewa novih fortifikacija

u prvi plan dolazi ugledawe na starije fortifikacije grada Novog

Brda. Uzori odbrambenih re{ewa koji su tokom prethodnih nekoliko decenija

bili dobrim delom zanemareni do{li su do punog izraàja prilikom gra|ewa

utvr|ewa manastira Resave (sl. 110). Kako su istraìvawa pokazala, ovo manastirsko

utvr|ewe sagra|eno je prema unapred pripremqenom planu neimara, kao

{to su upravo pokazala i istraìvawa fortifikacija Novog Brda. Uporednom

analizom je utvr|eno da se sli~nost ovih fortifikacija ogleda pre svega u wihovom

planu. O~igledno je da su u oba slu~aja graditeqi nastojali da idealnu

formu kruga na najboqi na~in prilagode topografiji postoje}eg terena i da u

skladu sa wim trasiraju bedeme i oblikuju braweni prostor, u okviru koga su

planski locirali kule, kao va`ne fortifikacijske objekte.

Tako je analizom plana Zamka Novog Brda zakqu~eno da je graditeq trasirao

bedeme u obliku skoro pravilne elipse, na stenovitoj zaravni, te da je u okviru

wih locirao {est kula na pribli`no jednakim rastojawima od oko 8 m. Tri kule

je predvideo u isto~nom sektoru, a druge tri u zapadnom sektoru. Plan manastirskog

utvr|ewa Resave pokazuje da je idealni kru`ni plan i u ovom slu~aju

210 Isto, sl. 4.

260

211 Simi}, Vukadinovi} 2018,

225 and fig. 109.


has been shown by the explorations of the fortifications of Novo Brdo. A comparative

analysis has established that the similarity between these fortifications is reflected

primarily in their ground plan. It is obvious that in both cases the builders

tried to adjust the ideal form of a circle to the topography of the existing terrain in

the best way possible and that in line with it they laid down the route of the ramparts

and shaped up the defended space within which they located towers, as

important fortifications structures, in line with the plan.

Thus, through an analysis of the ground plan of the Castle of Novo Brdo, it was

concluded that the master builder laid down the routes of the ramparts in the shape

of an almost regular ellipse, on a rocky flattened area, and that within these ramparts

he distributed six towers at approximately equal distances of around 8 m. He

conceived three towers in the east sector, while the other three were in the west sector.

The plan of the monastery fortress of Resava shows that the ideal circular plan,

in this case, too, was brought down to an irregular ellipsoid form in which two towers

each were distributed in each quarter of an ideal circle, 211 which together with

the main defence tower and two towers by the gate made up a total of 11 towers

(fig. 110). As the fortified space of Monastery Resava (80 m × 100 m) by its surface

area is around 13 times bigger than the Castle of Novo Brdo (20 m × 30 m), it is

understandable that a proportionately larger number of towers have been envisaged

there. In making this comparison, it is much more important to bear in mind

the fact that the scope of the defended space of Novo Brdo’s Castle was 90 m and that

of the monastery fortress 310 m, and that therefore its 11 towers were distributed

at a distance of around 15 m.

When it comes to the main rampart fence, it is possible to notice that in both

cases they have the same width which goes from 3.1 m to 3.4 m, which would be

around 11 feet. With the reconstruction of the towers in Novo Brdo’s Castle we

came indirectly to the possible height of the ramparts which in our opinion would be

around 10.5 m or 35 feet. The ramparts of Monastery Resava had somewhat greater

heights, around 12 m or 40 feet.

The access to the ramparts was possible only from the towers, both in Novo

Brdo and in Resava, taking into consideration that no remains of built staircases or

other possible wooden structures leading to the ramparts have been found. This

enabled the defenders to have continuous movement and defence along them. In

the Castle of Despot \ura| Brankovi} in the town of Smederevo, built at a somewhat

later date, there is only one built staircase that was used to get to the access

rampart from where it was also possible to have circular movement.

As regards the towers, the differences are apparent in the shape of their ground

plans, since those in Novo Brdo have a square shape, while the towers in Resava

have a rectangular shape, which we believe came out of the desire of the builders

to increase their defence power, trying to protrude them more from the plane of the

rampart. The average size of the towers in Novo Brdo is 27 ft × 27 ft (around 8.2 m

× 8.4 m), while that of those in Resava is around 30 ft × 40 ft (on an average 9 m

× 12 m). However, regardless of these differences in their respective sizes, it is

important to point out that in the first construction phase the towers of Monastery

Resava, as the explorations have shown, oversailed the wall walks of the ramparts

only with one of their floors, which we reasonably presume to have been the case

in the Castle of Novo Brdo as well. If this supposition of ours is right, then in that


Sl. 110. Manastir Resava,

komparativna analiza

Fig. 110. Resava Monastery,

comparative analysis

tako|e sveden na nepravilnu elipsoidnu formu, u kojoj su po dve kule raspore-

|ene u svakoj ~etvrtini idealnog kruga, 211 {to sa glavnom kulom odbrane i

dvema uz kapiju ~ini ukupno 11 kula (sl. 110). Kako je utvr|eni prostor manastira

Resave (80 × 100 m) po povr{ini oko 13 puta ve}i od Zamka Novog Brda

(20 × 30 m), razumqivo je da je u wemu predvi|en i srazmerno ve}i broj kula.

U ovom pore|ewu od ve}eg zna~aja je ~iwenica da opseg brawenog prostora Zamka

211 Simi}, Vukadinovi} 2018,

225 i sl. 109.

262

212 Ibid., 233.

213 Popovi} 2016, 75.

214 Kova~evi} 1980, 15, fig. 1.

215 Popovi} 1989 v, 74;

Simi} 2010, 70.

216 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 27, 31–33.

217 Popovi} 2007, 276, fig. 7.


case the towers of Novo Brdo would be around 40 ft to 41 ft high up to the final

platform, while those of Resava are around 53 feet. 212 All of this may be interpreted

by the desire of the ktetor, as well as the attempts of the builders, to enhance and

improve up to a point the previously achieved concept of defence and the defence

solutions applied in Novo Brdo.

All the towers of the monastery fortress in Resava were originally founded in

such a way that they were open with their entire height towards the interior of the

courtyard, as opposed to the towers of Novo Brdo that were closed in the lower zone

up to the height of about two storeys which, as we have already pointed out, may

be interpreted by the fact that the builder wanted to reinforce them at the ground

floor level against the action of siege engines and later make them capable to resist

an artillery attack. In Resava, however, it has been observed that the ground floors

of the majority of the towers were walled-in later and filled with earth. Towers 6

and 8 were exempted from this endeavour, since there had sally ports in them. It

may be presumed that this subsequent intervention was done in line with the

paragon of Novo Brdo.

A major similarity between these two fortresses is particularly reflected in the

application of a two-degree defence achieved through the construction of an external

rampart in front of the main fortifications. The appearance of this external wall

curtain in Novo Brdo, as the first line of defence, during the second quarter of the

14 th century, constitutes the oldest example of this kind in the defence architecture

of medieval Serbia. 213 As a new and an important defence element it impacted the

subsequent fortification works in Serbia during the second half of the 14 th century,

when it started to be applied, but only in a limited scope at first.

Thus, in the last quarter of the 14 th century, the external rampart was built in

front of the citadel in Kru{evac in line with the “Big Town,” 214 which is understandable

if we bear in mind that the citadel, as it has been already said above, was created

by partitioning the fortified broader space. 215 In its lower section it had an oblique

scarp, while the upper section was vertical and it ended in a crenellated parapet. It

seems that there also used to be an external rampart in front of the main rampart

fence in Kru{evac, which would be suggested by its sporadically revealed remains.

In Stala}, the dual ramparts existed only around the towers of the main defence

and the gate of the “Big Town”. 216 According to the revealed remains it could be

concluded that the external rampart by the main defence tower had the width of

around 1.7 m and that its height, from the level of the hidden road to the wall walk,

was around 2.2 m. 217 In Ravanica, the original external rampart had the width of

1.5 m to 1.8 m.

As it has already been said, the direct impact of the two-degree defence and the

introduction of an external rampart as the first line of defence, applied in Novo

Brdo, are reflected most obviously in the endowment of Despot Stefan Lazarevi} –

Monastery Resava. The construction of an external rampart in front of the main

rampart fence was certainly an extensive architectural enterprise. According to the

remains revealed in Novo Brdo so far, we may presume that its length was around

170 m and that it mostly followed the routes of the ramparts and the walls of the

towers, as much as this was allowed by the topography of the terrain. Its route is at

a different distance from the main fortifications and this one goes from 1.3 m by

the main defence tower to 2.7 m (9 feet).


Novog Brda iznosi 90 m, a manastirskog utvr|ewa 310 m, te je wegovih 11 kula

raspore|eno na rastojawu od oko 15 m.

Kada je u pitawu glavna bedemska ograda, u oba slu~aja se uo~ava da one imaju

istu {irinu, koja se kre}e od 3,1 do 3,4 m, {to bi iznosilo oko 11 stopa. Rekonstrukcijom

kula novobrdskog Zamka do{li smo posredno i do mogu}e visine

bedema, koja bi, po na{em mi{qewu, iznosila oko 10,5 m ili 35 stopa. Bedemi

manastira Resave su ne{to ve}ih visina, oko 12 m ili 40 stopa.

Pristup bedemima bio je mogu} samo iz kula, kako u Novom Brdu, tako i u

Resavi, budu}i da nisu na|eni ostaci zidanih stepeni{ta niti drugih mogu-

}ih drvenih konstrukcija za izlaz na wih. To je braniocima omogu}avalo kontinualno

kretawe i odbranu du` wih. U ne{to poznijem Zamku despota \ur|a

Brankovi}a u Smederevskom gradu postoji samo jedno zidano stepeni{te kojim

se stupalo na ulazni bedem, odakle je tako|e bilo omogu}eno kru`no kretawe.

U pogledu kula, razlike su o~igledne u obliku wihovih osnova, budu}i da

su one u Novom Brdu kvadratnog oblika, a kule u Resavi pravougaonog, {to je,

verujemo, proisteklo iz èqe graditeqa da pove}a wihovu odbrambenu mo}, nastoje}i

da ih vi{e isturi iz ravni bedema. Prose~na veli~ina kula u Novom

Brdu iznosi 27 × 27 stopa (oko 8,2 × 8,4 m), dok je onih u Resavi oko 30 × 40 stopa

(prose~no 9 × 12 m). Me|utim, bez obzira na ove razlike u gabaritu, zna~ajno

je ista}i da su kule manastira Resave, kako su istraìvawa pokazala, u prvoj

graditeqskoj etapi samo jednom svojom etaòm nadvi{avale {etne staze bedema,

{to osnovano pretpostavqamo da je bio slu~aj i u Zamku Novog Brda. Ako je

ova na{a pretpostavka ta~na, novobrdske kule bi u tom slu~aju bile visoke do

zavr{ne platforme oko 40 do 41 stope, a kule u Resavi oko 53 stope. 212 Sve ovo se

moè tuma~iti èqom ktitora, a i nastojawem graditeqa, da prethodno ostvarenu

koncepciju odbrane i odbrambena re{ewa primewena u Novom Brdu donekle

unapredi i poboq{a.

Sve kule manastirskog utvr|ewa u Resavi prvobitno su bile zasnovane tako

da su celom svojom visinom otvorene prema unutra{wosti dvori{ta, za razliku

od novobrdskih, koje su u dowoj zoni zatvorene u visini od oko dve etaè,

{to se, kao {to smo ve} istakli, moè tuma~iti ~iwenicom da je graditeq èleo

da ih oja~a u prizemqi{tu protiv dejstva opsadnih sprava, a kasnije osposobi

da odole artiqerijskom napadu. U resavskom utvr|ewu, me|utim, uo~eno je

da su prizemne etaè ve}ine kula poznije zazidane i ispuwene zemqom. Kula 6

i Kula 8 bile su izuzete iz ovog poduhvata, budu}i da su u wima postojale poterne.

Moè se pretpostaviti da je ova naknadna intervencija izvedena po

ugledu na Novo Brdo.

Velika sli~nost pomenuta dva utvr|ewa ogleda se posebno u pojavi dvostepene

odbrane, ostvarene izgradwom spoqnog bedema ispred glavnih fortifikacija.

Pojava ovog spoqnog zidnog platna u Novom Brdu kao prve linije odbrane,

tokom druge ~etvrtine 14. veka, predstavqa najstariji primer te vrste u odbrambenoj

arhitekturi sredwovekovne Srbije. 213 Kao novi i zna~ajan element odbrane,

uticao je na poznije fortifikacijske radove u Srbiji tokom druge polovine

14. veka, kada je po~eo da se primewuje, i to prvo samo u ograni~enom obimu.

Tako je u posledwoj ~etvrtini 14. veka spoqni bedem izgra|en ispred citadele

u Kru{evcu, i to prema „Velikom gradu“, 214 {to je razumqivo ako se ima u

vidu da je citadela, kao {to je ve} napred re~eno, nastala pregradwom utvr|enog

212 Isto, 233.

213 Popovi} 2016, 75.

214 Kova~evi} 1980, 15, sl. 1.

264

218 Simi}, Vukadinovi} 2018, 173.

219 Ibid., 133, 181.

220 Popovi} 2006, 114–115, fig. 59.

221 Ibid., 113.


In the case of the fortress of Monastery Resava, the external rampart followed

the routes of the main fortifications consistently and thus its length is as much as

453 m. The external rampart is on an average around 2.4 m, that is, around 8 feet

(1.8 m to 2.8 m) away from the main fortifications. Thanks to the preserved remains

of the external rampart in Resava it could be concluded that it had an oblique

lower section – the scarp, which extends from the bottom of the moat to the level

of the hidden road. This contributed to the fact that it has a rather even height of

around 5.0 m (17 feet). By measuring, it was established that it deviates from the

vertical by 8.50° to 10°. The vertical section of the rampart rises from the level of

the hidden road, it has the height of 1.8 m and the width of 1.8 m and there was a

crenellated parapet on top of it. 218

Although significantly more poorly preserved, the external rampart in Novo

Brdo confirms that it had an equal structure and that it was, undoubtedly, a direct

paragon for the master builder of the fortifications of Resava. Its oblique section has

different heights and goes from 2.5 m to 5.0 m (17 feet), while the deviations from

the vertical go from 10° to 17°, which is understandable if we take into consideration

that it was built on a rock. It is not possible to speak reliably about its vertical

section, which unquestionably used to exist, taking into account that it has not been

fully surveyed. Under an assumption that it was around 9 feet wide, as was the case

in Resava, we managed through a graphic reconstruction to establish that the height

of its vertical section from the space of the hidden road was around 1.5 m.

The similarity between Novo Brdo and Resava fortress is also reflected in the

position of the gate between two towers, which is generally a rare case in the Serbian

military architecture in which only one nearby tower was used for the defence of

the entrance almost by the rule. Thus, the gate of the Castle in Novo Brdo is positioned

between Towers 3 and 4, in the shortest rampart that has the length of 5.95 m,

while the gate in Resava is also located between two towers, within a rampart that

is 7.2 m long. 219 Such defence of the entrance was repeated only in the Upper Town

of Belgrade’s fortress, where next to the South Gate another tower was subsequently

added on the other side. 220 As opposed to the gates within the main rampart, little

is known about the exterior gates at the lower front rampart. The gate within the

external rampart in Resava was, judging by all, destroyed in its entirety, while the

future archaeological explorations in Novo Brdo could provide some new data in

this regard. A rare example of a gate in the external rampart has been preserved in

the complex of the east entrance into Belgrade’s Upper Town, which would chronologically

correspond to the time when Resava’s fortress was built. 221

A comparative analysis of these fortifications confirms a direct influence of

Novo Brdo primarily on the ground plan and the defence concept of Monastery

Resava, as well as direct similarities in almost all of the fortification structures

(ramparts, towers, external rampart), with those in Resava having slightly bigger

dimensions, they were more massive and had greater heights.

At the same time when the new fortress was built in Resava, the works on the

construction of the urban fortifications of Belgrade continued. The changes in the

development of the Serbian military architecture that came about under the influence

of the paragon of Novo Brdo, noticed during the construction of the fortress in

Resava, can also be recognised in some later-date stages of fortifying Belgrade. In that

period, the newly built fortress of the Upper Town was reinforced by adding massive


{ireg prostora. 215 U svom dowem delu imao je zako{enu eskarpu, dok je gorwi

deo bio vertikalan i nadvi{en parapetom sa zupcima. Spoqni bedem postojao

je, izgleda, i ispred glavne kru{eva~ke bedemske ograde, na {ta bi ukazivali

wegovi sporadi~no otkriveni ostaci.

U Stala}u dvojni bedemi su postojali samo oko kule glavne odbrane i kapija

„Velikog grada“. 216 Prema otkrivenim ostacima moglo se zakqu~iti da je

spoqni bedem kod glavne kule odbrane bio {irine oko 1,7 m, kao i da je wegova

visina od nivoa skrivenog puta do {etne staze iznosila oko 2,2 m. 217 U Ravanici

je prvobitni spoqni bedem imao {irinu od 1,5 do 1,8 m.

Kako je ve} re~eno, neposredni uticaj dvostepene odbrane i uvo|ewe spoqnog

bedema kao prve linije odbrane primewen u Novom Brdu, najo~itije se ogleda

u zadu`bini despota Stefana Lazarevi}a – u manastiru Resavi. Izgradwa

spoqnog bedema ispred glavne bedemske ograde bila je svakako zama{an graditeqski

poduhvat. Prema do sada otkrivenim ostacima u Novom Brdu moèmo

pretpostaviti da je duìna spoqnog bedema iznosila oko 170 m i da je u najve-

}oj meri pratio trase bedema i zidova kula, koliko je to omogu}avala topografija

terena. Wegova trasa je na razli~itoj udaqenosti od glavnih fortifikacija

i kre}e se od 1,3 m kod Glavne kule odbrane do 2,7 m (9 stopa).

U slu~aju utvr|ewa manastira Resave spoqni bedem je dosledno pratio trase

glavnih fortifikacija, te wegova duìna iznosi ~ak 453 m. Od wih je udaqen

prose~no oko 2,4 m, odnosno oko 8 stopa (1,8 do 2,8 m). Zahvaquju}i o~uvanim

ostacima spoqnog bedema u Resavi, moglo se zakqu~iti da je imao zako{eni

dowi deo – eskarpu, koja se proteè od dna rova do nivoa skrivenog puta. To je

doprinelo tome da je ona prili~no ujedna~ene visine, oko 5 m (17 stopa). Merewem

je utvr|eno da od vertikale odstupa za 8,5° do 10°. Od nivoa skrivenog puta

uzdiè se vertikalni deo bedema, visine 1,8 m i {irine 1,8 m, na kome se nalazio

parapet sa zupcima. 218

Iako znatno slabije o~uvan, spoqni bedem u Novom Brdu potvr|uje da je

bio jednake konstrukcije i da je, bez sumwe, bio neposredni uzor graditequ resavskih

fortifikacija. Wegov zako{eni deo je razli~itih visina i kre}e se

od 2,5 do 5 m (17 stopa), a odstupawa od vertikale su od 10° do 17°, {to je razumqivo

ako se zna da je podignut na steni. O wegovom vertikalnom delu, koji je, nesumwivo,

postojao, ne moè se pouzdano govoriti s obzirom na to da nije u celosti

istraèn. Pod pretpostavkom da je {irine oko 9 stopa, kao {to je slu~aj

u Resavi, grafi~kom rekonstrukcijom smo utvrdili da bi visina wegovog vertikalnog

dela iz prostora skrivenog puta iznosila oko 1,5 m.

Sli~nost izme|u Novog Brda i resavskog utvr|ewa ogleda se i u poloàju

kapije izme|u dve kule, {to je ina~e redak slu~aj u srpskom vojnom graditeqstvu,

kome je za odbranu ulaza gotovo po pravilu sluìla samo jedna obli`wa

kula. Tako je kapija Zamka u Novom Brdu sme{tena izme|u Kule 3 i Kule 4, i to

u najkra}em bedemu, duìne 5,95 m, a kapija u Resavi tako|e izme|u dve kule, u

bedemu duìne 7,2 m. 219 Ovakva odbrana ulaza ponovqena je jo{ jedino u Gorwem

gradu Beogradske tvr|ave, gde je uz Ju`nu kapiju naknadno dogra|ena kula

i sa druge strane. 220 Za razliku od kapija u okviru glavnog bedema, nedovoqno se

zna o spoqnim kapijama na nièm, predwem bedemu. Kapija u okviru resavskog

spoqnog bedema, po svemu sude}i, u celosti je uni{tena, dok bi budu}a arheolo{ka

istraìvawa u Novom Brdu u tom smislu mogla da daju neke nove podatke.

215 Popovi} 1989v, 74; Simi} 2010, 70.

216 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 27, 31–33.

217 Popovi} 2007, 276, sl. 7.

218 Simi}, Vukadinovi} 2018, 173.

219 Isto, 133, 181.

220 Popovi} 2006, 114–115, sl. 59

266

222 Popovi} 2008, 98.

223 Ibid., 99, fig. 7.

224 Popovi} 2006, 112, fig. 57.

225 Popovi} 2013.


rectangular towers. 222 Following the examples of Resava and Novo Brdo, the new

northeast rampart of the Lower Town was reinforced with four of the same rectangular

towers distributed at regular distances. These towers, as well as the added towers

of the Upper Town, were built massively and they had the same dimensions. On the

front side they all had the width of around 9 m, that is, 30 feet, which coincides with

the front of the towers in Resava and is close to the analogies from Novo Brdo. 223

There are noticeable parallels also with some other details concerning the fortifications.

During these works, in the course of the second or the third decade of the 15 th

century, the old wall curtain of the West Suburb was reinforced with the addition of

an external rampart with an oblique stone scarp which repeated the older solution

from Novo Brdo or perhaps it is better to say, the concurrent paragon from Resava. 224

The abrupt turn that happened in the development of the Serbian military

architecture at the end of the second and the beginning of the third decade of the

15 th century is difficult to explain reliably owing to the lack of original testimonies.

However, it may still be presumed that the key role in all of this was played by

Despot Stefan. It was precisely in this period that the Serbian ruler stayed in Novo

Brdo on several occasions and there he could personally see the good fortification

solutions applied to the fortress of this town. As a well-read and educated person,

he certainly understood the advantages of a well conceived and wholesome defence

plan. It is obvious that these fortifications were the role model for the building of the

strong enclosure that was not only to defend Stefan’s endowment and his sepulchral

church, but also to be a powerful defence stronghold in the middle of the country

with attempts to enhance and empower certain solutions applied to the fortifications

in Novo Brdo. As we have already pointed out, the same was done in the case of the

continuation of the works at the fortification of Belgrade.

Based on the paragons from Novo Brdo and the experiences acquired during

the construction of Belgrade and Resava, the building of Smederevo started at the

end of the third decade of the 15 th century. This new fortress constituted the last

big and the best creation of the Serbian medieval military architecture. It was built

with great efforts with the aim to replace lost Belgrade which was in 1427, after the

death of Despot Stefan, handed over to the Hungarians in line with an earlier treaty.

An earlier uninhabited position at the confluence of the Jezava into the Danube

was selected for the new seat of Serbia and this specific position predetermined the

triangular shape of the town’s ground plan. There, in the first stage between 1428

and 1430, a castle was built with a ruler’s court, originally conceived as an independent

fortress. Right after that, during the fourth decade of the 15 th century, the space

between the Danube and the Jezava was surrounded by ramparts and this space was

intended for the construction of an urban settlement. 225

Smederevo’s castle with a triangular ground plan had a double rampart towards

the land side and it was reinforced with four protruding rectangular towers. The

space in front of the Castle designated for the urban settlement was also surrounded

by double ramparts. The main attention there was paid to the south wall curtain which

defended the town from the land, the accessible side. This rampart was reinforced

with 11 powerful towers placed at equal distances in front of which there was an

external rampart with positions for cannons and a wide moat filled with water. In

front of the fortified part of the town, there was a spacious suburb which, judging

by all, was fortified with ditches and palisades.


Redak primer kapije na spoqnom bedemu o~uvan je u kompleksu isto~nnog ulaza

u beogradski Gorwi grad, koji bi hronolo{ki odgovarao vremenu gra|ewa resavskog

utvr|ewa. 221

Uporedna analiza ovih fortifikacija potvr|uje direktan uticaj Novog

Brda pre svega na plan i odbrambenu koncepciju manastira Resave, kao i neposredne

sli~nosti u gotovo svim fortifikacijskim objektima (bedemi, kule,

spoqni bedem), pri ~emu su oni u Resavi ne{to znatnijih dimenzija, masivniji

i ve}ih visina.

U isto vreme dok je gra|eno novo resavsko utvr|ewe, nastavqeni su i radovi

na gra|ewu urbanih fortifikacija Beograda. Promene u razvoju srpskog vojnog

graditeqstva, koje su nastale pod uticajem ugledawa na Novo Brdo, uo~ene prilikom

gra|ewa tvr|ave u Resavi, tako|e se mogu prepoznati i na poznijim etapama

utvr|ivawa Beograda. U tom razdobqu novopodignuto utvr|ewe Gorweg grada

oja~ano je dogradwom masivnih pravougaonih kula. 222 Po uzoru na Resavu i Novo

Brdo, zasnovan je i novi Severoisto~ni bedem Doweg grada, oja~an sa ~etiri

iste pravougaone kule, raspore|ene na pravilnim rastojawima. Ove kule, kao i

dogra|ene gorwogradske, bile su masivno gra|ene i jednakih dimenzija. Sve su

sa predwe strane imale {irinu od oko 9 m, odnosno 30 stopa, {to je podudarno

sa frontom resavskih kula, a blisko novobrdskim analogijama. 223 Uo~qive

paralele postoje i sa nekim drugim detaqima fortifikacija. Staro zidno

platno Zapadnog podgra|a u vreme ovih radova, tokom druge ili tre}e decenije

15. veka, oja~ano je dogradwom spoqnog bedema sa kosom kamenom eskarpom,

~ime se ponavqa starije novobrdsko re{ewe ili, mo`da boqe re}i, istovremeni

uzor iz Resave. 224

Nagli zaokret do koga je do{lo u razvoju srpskog vojnog graditeqstva na prelazu

iz druge u tre}u deceniju 15. veka te{ko je pouzdano objasniti usled nedostatka

izvornih svedo~anstava. Me|utim, ipak se moè pretpostaviti da je u

tome kqu~nu ulogu imao despot Stefan. Upravo u tome razdobqu srpski vladar je

u vi{e navrata boravio u Novom Brdu, gde je li~no mogao da se upozna sa dobrim

fortifikacionim re{ewima utvr|ewa ovoga grada. Kao u~en i obrazovan, svakako

je razumeo prednosti dobro osmi{qenog i celovitog plana odbrane. O~igledno

je da su ova re{ewa bila uzor za gra|ewe jakog obzi|a, koje je trebalo ne

samo da brani Stefanovu zadu`binu i grobni hram ve} i da bude jako odbrambeno

upori{te u sredi{tu dràve, uz nastojawe da se odre|ena re{ewa novobrdskih

fortifikacija unaprede i osnaè. Isti slu~aj je bio, kao {to smo ve}

istakli, sa nastavkom rada na fortificirawu Beograda.

Na uzorima iz Novog Brda i iskustvima ste~enim pri gra|ewu Beograda i

Resave krajem tre}e decenije 15. veka zapo~eto je podizawe Smedereva. Ovo novo

utvr|ewe predstavqalo je posledwe veliko i najboqe ostvarewe srpskog sredwovekovnog

vojnog graditeqstva. Gra|eno je uz velike napore sa ciqem da zameni

izgubqeni Beograd, koji je 1427. godine, posle smrti despota Stefana prema

ranijem ugovoru predat Ma|arima. Za novo sredi{te Srbije izabran je ranije

nenaseqen poloàj na u{}u Jezave u Dunav, koji je predodredio trougaoni oblik 221 Isto, 113.

osnove grada. Tu je u prvoj etapi izme|u 1428. i 1430. godine podignut Zamak 222 Popovi} 2008, 98.

sa vladarskim dvorom, prvobitno zami{qen kao samostalno utvr|ewe. Odmah 223 Isto, 99, sl. 7.

nakon toga, tokom ~etvrte decenije 15. veka, bedemima je bio opasan prostor

224 Popovi} 2006, 112, sl. 57.

izme|u Dunava i Jezave, namewen za izgradwu gradskog naseqa. 225 225 Popovi} 2013.

268


The Serbian fortresses built in the second half of the 14 th century and later,

during the first half of the 15 th century, were based on the traditional principles of

cold-arms warfare. At that time, when the first cannons appeared, artillery still did

not have any major significance for the defence systems of towns. It was only in the

first decades of the 15 th century that the process of adjusting to the new arms started

in the European fortresses and this was done by arranging the positions for the placement

of defence cannons. 226 This novelty was accepted very quickly in the Serbian

military architecture. A whole sequence of cannon openings were made during the

building of the castle in Smederevo. 227 Towards the accessible, land side, there were

arranged positions for around 20 cannons. These were smaller cannons – bombardellas,

which projected stone spheres with the diameter of 8 cm to 10 cm. The same

defence system was applied a little later in front of Smederevo’s south rampart as

well. Parallel to the construction of Smederevo, there were also first attempts to introduce

defence artillery into the defence system of Novo Brdo. It was a first attempt

to adjust Serbian fortresses to the introduction of the new fire arm, which did not

lag behind the similar interventions applied in the other European fortresses.

The first successful attempts to adjust the old fortresses of the earlier epoch to

the introduction of the new fire arm were, unfortunately, very limited in terms of

the time. This development in line with the needs of the new times was abruptly

terminated by the Ottoman conquest of Novo Brdo in 1455 and then also by the fall

of Smederevo in 1459. In its conquering campaign towards the centre of Europe,

the Ottoman state did not have the need to deal more seriously with the modernisation

of the fortresses coming from the previous epoch. Far from the north battlegrounds,

the old fortresses in the Serbian lands of the Central Balkans were left

obsolete and neglected. Even the rare fortresses in which there were Ottoman crews

were not renewed or additionally built. In the meantime, in Europe, a completely

new type of bastion artillery fortresses was being created.

226 Toy 1955, 236–237.

227 Popovi} 2013, 58, fig. 34.


Smederevski zamak, trougaone osnove, prema kopnenoj strani imao je dvostruki

bedem, oja~an sa ~etiri isturene pravougaone kule. Prostor ispred

Zamka odre|en za gradsko naseqe bio je tako|e opasan dvostrukim bedemima. Tu

je glavna pa`wa bila posve}ena ju`nom zidnom platnu, koje je grad branilo sa

kopnene pristupa~ne strane. Ovaj bedem bio je oja~an sa 11 jakih kula, postavqenih

na jednakim rastojawima, ispred kojih se nalazio spoqni bedem, sa poloàjima

za topove, i {irok rov, ispuwen vodom. Ispred utvr|enog dela grada

nalazilo se prostrano Podgra|e, koje je, po svemu sude}i, bilo utvr|eno opkopima

i palisadama.

Srpska utvr|ewa gra|ena u drugoj polovini 14. veka i kasnije, tokom prve

polovine 15. veka, bila su zasnovana na tradicionalnim principima ratovawa

hladnim oru`jem. U to vreme, kada se pojavquju prvi topovi, artiqerija jo{

uvek nije imala ve}i zna~aj za sistem odbrane gradova. Tek u prvim decenijama

15. veka kod evropskih utvr|ewa zapo~iwe proces prilago|avawa novom oru`ju

ure|ivawem poloàja za postavqawe odbrambenih topova. 226 U srpskom vojnom

graditeqatvu ova novina je bila vrlo brzo prihva}ena. Prilikom podizawa

Zamka u Smederevu izgra|en je ~itav niz topovskih otvora. 227 Prema pristupa~noj

kopnenoj strani bili su ure|eni poloàji za oko 20 topova. U pitawu su

bili mawi topovi – bombardele, koji su izbacivali kamene kugle, pre~nika 8

do 10 cm. Isti sistem odbrane bio je primewen ne{to kasnije i pred ju`nim

smederevskim bedemom. U isto vreme sa gra|ewem Smedereva izvr{eni su i

prvi poku{aju da se u sistem odbrane Novog Brda uvede odbrambena artiqerija.

Bio je to prvi poku{aj da se srpska utvr|ewa prilagode pojavi novog vatrenog

oru`ja, a taj poku{aj nije zaostajao za sli~nim intervencijama kod drugih

evropskih utvr|ewa.

Prvi uspe{ni poku{aji da se stara utvr|ewa prethodne epohe prilagode

pojavi novog vatrenog oru`ja bili su, naàlost, vremenski veoma ograni~eni.

Taj razvoj u skladu sa potrebama novog vremena bio je naglo okon~an turskim

zaposedawem Novog Brda 1455. godine, a zatim i padom Smedereva 1459. godine.

Osmanska dràva u svom osvaja~kom pohodu ka sredi{tu Evrope nije imala potrebe

da se ozbiqnije bavi modernizacijom utvr|ewa prethodne epohe. Daleko

od severnih rati{ta stara utvr|ewa u srpskim zemqama centralnog Balkana

ostala su zastarela i zapu{tena. Ni retka utvr|ewa u kojima su bile turske posade

nisu obnavqana niti dogra|ivana. Za to vreme u Evropi je nastajao sasvim

novi tip bastionih artiqerijskih tvr|ava.

226 Toy 1955, 236–237.

227 Popovi} 2013, 58, sl. 34.

270

Bibliografija / Bibliography

Bo{kovi} 1939 – \. Bo{kovi}, Novo Brdo [La forteresse de Novo Brdo], Godi{wak Muzeja

ju`ne Srbije I (1939), 161–167.

Bo{kovi} 1974 – \. Bo{kovi}, Arheolo{ka istraìvawa Novog Brda, u: Velika arheolo{ka

nalazi{ta u Srbiji, Beograd 1974, 99–114.

Bo{kovi} 1980 – \. Bo{kovi}, Mesto Kru{evca u sistemu utvr|enih gradova sredwovekovne

Srbije [La ville de Kru{evac dans le système des villes fortifiées de la Serbie médiévale],

Starinar XXX (1980), 7–11.

Brokijer 1950 – B. de la Brokijer, Putovawe preko mora [Le voyage d’Outremer], Beograd

1950.

Vulovi} 1966 – B. Vulovi}, Ravanica [Ravanica], Saop{tewa VII (1966).

Vulovi} 1981 – B. Vulovi}, Arhitektura Ravanice, u: Manastir Ravanica, spomenica

o {estoj stogodi{wici, Beograd 1981, 19–32.

Deroko 1950 – A. Deroko, Sredwovekovni gradovi u Srbiji, Crnoj Gori i Makedoniji,

Beograd 1950.

Deroko 1961 – A. Deroko, Najstarije vatreno oru`je u Srbiji, Glas SANU 246 (1961).

Dimitrijevi} 1967 – S. Dimitrijevi}, Srpski sredwovekovni novac na|en u toku iskopavawa

na Novom Brdu [Les monnaies médiévales serbes trouvées au cours des escavations

à Novo Brdo], Zbornik Narodnog muzeja u Beogradu 5 (1967), 271–308.

Dini} 1954–1955 – M. Dini}, Novo Brdo [Novo Brdo], Starinar V–VI (1954–1955),

247–249.

Dini} 1962 – M. Dini}, Za istoriju rudarstva u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji i Bosni, II

[Contributions à l’histoire de l’industrie minière dans la Serbie et la Bosnie du Moyen Âge, II],

Beograd 1962.

\uri} 1975 – V. J. \uri}, Srpski dràvni sabori u Pe}i i crkveno graditeqstvo [Les

assemblées d’État serbes à Pe} et l’architecture religieuse], u: O knezu Lazar [Le prince Lazar],

Nau~ni skup u Kru{evcu 1971, Beograd 1975, 105–122.

@itije despota Stefana 1989 – Konstantin Filozof, Povest o pismenima i @itije

despota Stefana Lazarevi}a, prir. G. Jovanovi}, Beograd 1989.


Zadu`bine Kosova 1987 – Zadu`bine Kosova, spomenici i znamewa srpskog naroda, ur. A.

Jevti}, Beograd 1987.

Zapisi i natpisi – Stari srpski zapisi i natpisi, I–VI, sakupio i priredio Q. Stojanovi},

Beograd 1986 (reprint).

Zdravkovi} 1953–1954 – I. Zdravkovi}, O Novom Brdu (raspored mahala u tursko doba)

[Traditions de Novo Brdo], Glasnik Etnografskog instituta SAN II–III (1953–1954),

809–812.

Zdravkovi} 1958 – I. Zdravkovi}, Iskopavawa na Novom Brdu 1955. godine – rad na

konzervaciji tvr|ave i „Sa{ke crkve“ [Les fouilles à Novo Brdo en 1955], Starinar

VII–VIII (1958), 341–348.

Zdravkovi} 1958a – I. Zdravkovi}, Otkopavawe crkve Sv. Nikole na Novom Brdu 1956.

godine [Travaux de déblaiement de l’église de St. Nicolas à Novo Brdo en 1956], Starinar

VII–VIII (1958), 349–357.

Zdravkovi} 1959 – I. Zdravkovi}, Arheolo{ko-konzervatorski radovi na Novom Brdu

u 1957. godini [Recherches archéologiques et de conservation à Novo Brdo en 1957],

Starinar IX–X (1959), 320–322.

Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955 – I. Zdravkovi}, D. Jovanovi}, Novo Brdo – radovi

izvr{eni 1952 godine [Novo Brdo – Travaux executés en 1952], Starinar V–VI

(1954–1955), 251–264.

Zdravkovi}, Jovanovi} 1954–1955a – I. Zdravkovi}, D. Jovanovi}, Novo Brdo – radovi

izvr{eni 1954 godine [Novo Brdo – Travaux executés en 1954], Starinar V–VI

(1954–1955), 275–282.

Ze~evi} 2006 – E. Ze~evi}, Nakit Novog Brda [Jewelry from Novo Brdo], Beograd 2006.

Zirojevi} 1974 – O. Zirojevi}, Tursko vojno ure|ewe u Srbiji 1459–1683 [L’organisation

militaire turque en Serbie 1459–1683], Beograd 1974.

Zirojevi} 1990 – O. Zirojevi}, Kroz Novobrdske mahale 1664/65, Miscellanea – Me{ovita

gra|a XX (1990), 7–14.

Ivani{evi} 2001 – V. Ivani{evi}, Nov~arstvo sredwovekovne Srbije [Serbian medieval

coinage], Beograd 2001.

Ivani{evi}, Radi} 2004 – V. Ivani{evi}, V. Radi}, Kovnica srpskog sredwovekovnog

novca u Novom Brdu [Serbian medieval mint at Novo Brdo], u: V. Jovanovi}, S. ]irkovi},

E. Ze~evi}, V. Ivani{evi}, V. Radi}, Novo Brdo [Novo Brdo], Beograd 2004, 222–242.

ISN II – Istorija srpskog naroda, II, ur. J. Kali}, Beograd 1982.

Jankovi} 1983 – M. Jankovi}, Lipqanska episkopija i Gra~ani~ka mitropolija [The

Lipljan Bishopric and the Metropolitanate of Gra~anica], Istorijski ~asopis XXIX–XXX

(1983), 27–37.

Jankovi} 1985 – M. Jankovi}, Episkopije i mitropolije srpske crkve u sredwem veku,

Beograd 1985.

Ja~ov 1986 – M. Ja~ov, Spisi Kongregacije za propagandu vere u Rimu o Srbima (1622–1644)

[Les documents de la Sacrée Congrégation de Propaganda Fide à Rome concernant les Serbes

(1622–1644)], Beograd 1986.

Jire~ek, Radoni} 1978 – K. Jire~ek, N. Radoni}, Istorija Srba, II, Beograd 1978.

Jovanovi} i dr. 2004 – V. Jovanovi}, Novo Brdo sredwovekovni grad [Novo Brdo

Mediaeval Fortress], u: V. Jovanovi}, S. ]irkovi}, E. Ze~evi}, V. Ivani{evi}, V. Radi},

Novo Brdo [Novo Brdo], Beograd 2004, 10–161.

Kova~evi} 1966 – M. Kova~evi}, Sredwovekovna tvr|ava Kru{evac [La forteresse de

Kru{evac], Starinar XVII (1966), 137–141.

272


Kova~evi} 1980 – M. Kova~evi}, Profana arhitektura sredwovekovnog Kru{evca

[L’architecture profane médiévale de Kru{evac – résultats des recherches], Starinar XXX

(1980), 13–28.

Kova~evi} 2001 – M. Kova~evi}, Izra~unavawe broja stanovnika sredwovekovnog grada

Novog Brda, u: Naseqa i stanovni{tvo oblasti Brankovi}a 1455. godine, ur. M. Macura,

Beograd 2001, 271–274.

Koji}-Kova~evi} 2010 – D. Koji}-Kova~evi}, Sredwovjekovna Srebrenica XIV–XV vijek

[Medieval Srebrenica XIV–XV century], Beograd 2010.

Konstantin iz Ostrovice 1986 – Konstantin Mihailovi} iz Ostrovice, Jani~arove

uspomene ili turska hronika, prev. i prir. \. @ivanovi}, Beograd 1986.

Kora} 1954–1956 – V. Kora}, Novo Brdo – radovi izvr{eni 1953 godine [Novo Brdo –

Travaux executés en 1953], Starinar V–VI (1954–1955), 265–274.

Kora} 1987 – V. Kora}, Izvori moravske arhitekture [Les origines de l’architecture de

l’École de Morava], u: Izme|u Vizantije i Zapada [Entre Byzance et l’Occident], Beograd

1987, 131–144.

Kosti} 1922 – K. Kosti}, Na{i novi gradovi na jugu, Beograd 1922.

Qubinkovi}, Qubinkovi} 1961 – M. Qubinkovi}, R. Qubinkovi}, Novo Brdo. Katedrala

[Novo Brdo. Cathédrale], Starinar XII (1961), 286–287.

Milo{evi} 1997 – G. Milo{evi}, Stanovawe u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji [Housing in medieval

Serbia], Beograd 1997.

Mihaq~i} 1975 – R. Mihaq~i}, Kraj srpskog carstva [La fin de l’empire serbe], Beograd

1975.

Nikoli} 1998 – S. Nikoli}, Prizren od sredweg veka do savremenog doba – urbanisti~koarhitektonski

razvoj, Prizren 1998.

Novakovi} 1879 – S. Novakovi}, Novo Brdo i Vrawsko Pomoravqe, Godi{wica Nikole

ûpi}a III (1879), 263–355.

Novakovi} 1893/1998 – S. Novakovi}, Srbi i Turci XIV i XV veka, Beograd 1893 (reprint

1998).

Popovi} 1989 – M. Popovi}, Novo Brdo, saznawa i mogu}nosti, Glasnik Srpskog arheolo{kog

dru{tva 5 (1989), 51–55.

Popovi} 1989a – M. Popovi}, Razgovor sa dr Mirjanom Qubinkovi}, Glasnik Srpskog

arheolo{kog dru{tva 5 (1989), 142–144.

Popovi} 1989b – M. Popovi}, Utvr|ewa Moravske Srbije, u: Sveti knez Lazar. Spomenica

o {estoj stogodi{wici Kosovskog boja, Beograd 1989, 71–87.

Popovi} 2000 – M. Popovi}, Tvr|ave u oblastima srpsko-vizantijskih sukoba tokom

14. veka [Les forteresses dans les régions des conflits byzantinoserbes au XIV e siècle], Novopazarski

zbornik 24 (2000), 7–30.

Popovi} 2006 – M. Popovi}, Zamak u srpskim zemqama poznog sredweg veka [The Castle

in Late Medieval Serbian Lands], Zbornik radova Vizantolo{kog instituta 43 (2006),

189–201.

Popovi} 2008 – M. Popovi}, Nova saznawa o gorwogradskom jugoisto~nom bedemu [New

finds about Upper City Southeastern Ramparts], Nasle|e IX (2008), 89–103.

Popovi} 2011 – M. Popovi}, @ivot u sredwovekovnom gradu, u: M. Popovi}, M. Timotijevi},

M. Ristovi}, Istorija privatnog ìvota u Srba, od sredweg veka do savremenog

doba, Beograd 2011, 45–75.

Popovi} 2013 – M. Popovi}, Smederevski grad [Smederevo Fortress], Beograd 2013.


Popovi} 2015 – M. Popovi}, Manastir Studenica – arheolo{ka otkri}a [The monastery

of Studenica: archaeological discoveries], Beograd 2015.

Popovi} 2016 – M. Popovi}, Citadela grada Novog Brda, Glasnik Dru{tva konzervatora

Srbije 40 (2016), 74–80.

Popovi} 2019 – M. Popovi}, Latinske crkve sredwovekovnog grada Novog Brda [Latin

churches in medieval city of Novo Brdo], Ni{ i Vizantija XVII, ur. M. Rakocija, Ni{

2019, 245–256.

Popovi} 2019a – M. Popovi}, Sa{ka crkva u Novom Brdu – Santa Maria de Nuovomonte

[The Saxon church in Novo Brdo – Santa Maria de Nuovomonte], Starinar LXIX (2019),

319–348.

Popovi}, Biki} 2004 – M. Popovi}, V. Biki}, Kompleks sredwovekovne mitropolije u

Beogradu [The complex of the medieval mitropolitan church in Belgrade], Beograd 2004.

Popovi}, Biki} 2017 – M. Popovi}, V. Biki}, Ostaci jedne sredwovekovne ostave iz

Novog Brda [Remains of a medieval hoard from Novo Brdo], Zbornik Narodnog muzeja u

Beogradu 23 (2017), 387–407.

Popovi}, Bjeli} 2018 – M. Popovi}, I. Bjeli}, Crkva Svetog Nikole, katedrala grada

Novog Brda [St. Nicholas Church, the Orthodox cathedral of the Town of Novo Brdo], Beograd

2018.

Radojkovi} 1969 – B. Radojkovi}, Nakit kod Srba od XII do kraja XVIII veka [Jewellery with

the Serbs (XII–XVIII century)], Beograd 1969.

Radoj~i} 1962 – N. Radoj~i}, Zakon o rudnicima despota Stefana Lazarevi}a [Das Bergrecht

des Despoten Stephan Lazarevi}], Beograd 1962.

Raki} 2007 – Z. Raki}, Crkva svetog Jovana Prete~e u Crkolezu, Beograd 2007.

Rodoslovi i letopisi – Q. Stojanovi}, Stari srpski rodoslovi i letopisi, Beograd –

Sr. Karlovci 1927.

Savi} 1954–1955 – M. Savi}, [qaki{ta na Novom Brdu i Ka~ikolu [Les scories de Novo

Brdo et de Ka~ikolo], Starinar V–VI (1954–1955), 283–294.

Samarxi}, Jakovqev 2016 – S. Samarxi}, G. Jakovqev, Crkva u citadeli Novog Brda –

transpozicija freske iz proskomidije, Glasnik Dru{tva konzervatora Srbije 40 (2016),

81–84.

Simi} 1991 – G. Simi}, Palata Goluba~kog grada [Le palais de la forteresse de Golubac],

Saop{tewa XXII–XXIII (1991–1992), 77–102.

Simi} 2010 – G. Simi}, Donòn kule u fortifikaciji sredwovekovnih gradova [Keeps in

the Fortification of Mediaeval Towns], Beograd 2010.

Simi}, Vukadinovi} 2018 – G. Simi}, S. Vukadinovi}, Utvr|ewe manastira Resave – od

zamisli do ostvarewa [Fortification of the Resava Monastery – from the vizion to the creation],

Beograd 2018.

Spomenici srpski 1892 – Spomenici srpski, sakupio K. Jire~ek, Spomenik SKA XI

(1892).

Spomeni~ko nasle|e Srbije – Spomeni~ko nasle|e Srbije – Nepokretna kulturna dobra

od izuzetnog i velikog zna~aja, Beograd 2007².

Stara srpska pisma 1868 – Stara srpska pisma iz ruskog manastira Sv. Pantelejmona

u Svetoj Gori, pribrao arhim. Leonid, Glasnik SUD XXIV (1868), 271–275, br. 12.

Stari srpski hrisovuqi – Stari srpski hrisovuqi, akti, biografije i dr., pribrao

Q. Stojanovi}, Spomenik SKA III (1890).

Stojanovi} 1929 – Q. Stojanovi}, Stare srpske poveqe i pisma, I/1, Beograd – Sr. Karlovci

1929.

274


Stojanovi} 1934 – Q. Stojanovi}, Stare srpske poveqe i pisma, I/2, Beograd – Sr. Karlovci

1934.

Todi} 1999 – B. Todi}, Gra~anica. Slikarstvo, Beograd 1999.

]irkovi} 1997 – S. ]irkovi}, Katoli~ke parohije u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji, u: Rabotnici,

vojnici i duhovnici, Beograd 1997, 240–251.

]irkovi}, Koji}-Kova~evi}, ]uk 2002 – S. ]irkovi}, D. Koji}-Kova~evi}, R. ]uk,

Staro srpsko rudarstvo, Beograd 2002.

]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1959 – M. ]orovi}-Qubinkovi}, Arheolo{ka iskopavawa na

Novom Brdu u toku 1957. godine [Fouilles archéologiques à Novo Brdo en 1957], Starinar

IX–X (1959), 323–332.

]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1962 – M. ]orovi}-Qubinkovi}, Srpska sredwovekovna gle|osana

keramika (sredwovekovna keramika sa Novog Brda) [La céramique serbe émaillée du

Moyen Âge (La céramique de Novo Brdo)], Zbornik Narodnog muzeja u Beogradu III (1962),

165–186.

]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1967 – M. ]orovi}-Qubinkovi}, Arheolo{ki i istorijski zna-

~aj nalaza srpskog sredwovekovnog novca na Novom Brdu [Les monnaies serbes de Novo

Brdo], Zbornik Narodnog muzeja u Beogradu V (1967), 261–268.

]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1972 – M. ]orovi}-Qubinkovi}, Zna~aj Novog Brda u Srbiji

Lazarevi}a i Brankovi}a [Le rôle de Novo Brdo dans l’état des familles Lazarevi} et Brankovi}],

u: Moravska {kola i weno doba [L’École de Morava et son temps], ur. V. J. \uri}, Beograd

1972, 123–138.

Filipovi} 1954 – N. Filipovi}, Iz istorije Novog Brda u drugoj polovini XV i

prvoj polovini XVI vijeka, Godi{wak Istorijskog dru{tva BiH VI (1954), 63–83.

Cviji} 1911 – J. Cviji}, Osnove za geografiju i geologiju Makedonije i Stare Srbije,

kwiga tre}a, Beograd 1911.

ânak-Medi} 1989 – M. ânak-Medi}, Arhitektura Nemawinog doba [L’architecture de

l’époque de Nemanja] II, Beograd 1989.

êr{kov 1958 – E. êr{kov, „Sa{ka crkva“ kod Novog Brda [“Église de Sas” près de Novo

Brdo], Starinar VII–VIII (1958), 338–340.

[krivani} 1974 – G. [krivani}, Putevi u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji [The Roads in Medieval

Serbia], Beograd 1974.

[uput 1984 – M. [uput, Srpska arhitektura u doba turske vlasti 1459–1690

[L’architecture serbe pendant la domination ottomane 1459–1690], Beograd 1984.

[uput 1991 – M. [uput, Spomenici srpskog sredwovekovnog graditeqstva, XVI– XVII vek,

Beograd 1991.

* * *

Belli d’Elia 1987 – P. Belli d’Elia, Pouilles romanes, La nuit des Temps 68, Sainte-Marie de

la Pierre-qui-Vire 1987.

Bereti} 1955 – L. Bereti}, Utvr|enja grada Dubrovnika, Dubrovnik 1955 (reprint 1989).

Bo{kovi} 1962 – \. Bo{kovi}, Stari Bar, Beograd 1962.

Caskey 1999 – J. Caskey, Steam and Sanitas in the Domestic Realm, Baths and Bathing in

Southern Italy in the Middle Ages, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 58/2

(1999), 170–195.

]ur~i} 2010 – S. ]ur~i}, Architecture in the Balkans, from Diocletian to Suleyman Magnificent,

Yale University Press, New Haven – London 2010.


Evgenidu 1997 – D. Evgenidu, Kastra makedonias ke Trakis, Athens 1997.

Evlija êlebi – Evlija êlebi, Putopis, odlomci o jugoslovenskim zemljama, preveo H. [abanovi},

Sarajevo 1979.

Gogi} 2016 – M. Gogi}, Rimokatoli~ka ùpa u Novom Brdu u kasnom srednjem vijeku [The

roman catholic parich of Novo Brdo in late-medieval period], Radovi Zavoda za povjesne znanosti

HAZU u Zadru 58 (2016), 1–25.

Kronig 1994 – W. Kronig, Castel del Monte. Der Bau Friedrich II’, in: Intellectual life at the

Court of Frederick II Hohenstaufen, ed. W. Tronzo, Washington DC 1994, 91–107.

Ljubinkovi}, M. 1969 – M. Ljubinkovi}, Novo Brdo – srednjovekovni grad, Arheolo{ki pregled

11 (1969), 228–229.

Ljubinkovi}, M.iR.1959 – M. Ljubinkovi}, R. Ljubinkovi}, Novo Brdo – Katedrala, Arheolo{ki

pregled 1 (1959), 170–176.

Ljubinkovi}, M. i R. 1960 – M. Ljubinkovi}, R. Ljubinkovi}, Novo Brdo – Naselje, Arheolo{ki

pregled 2 (1960), 160–162.

Ljubinkovi}, M. i R. 1962 – M. Ljubinkovi}, R. Ljubinkovi}, Katedrala i Sa{ka crkva, Novo

Brdo, Arheolo{ki pregled 4 (1962), 264–269.

Maneti, Bollen 2001 – C. Maneti, M. Bollen, Castles in Italy, Cologne 2001.

Mini}, Vukadin 2007 – D. Mini}, O. Vukadin, Srednjovekovni Stala} [Medieval Stala}], Beograd

2007.

Petrovi} 1966 – \. Petrovi}, Neki podaci o izradi topovskih kugli u Srbiji i Bosni u XV i XVI

veku, Vesnik Vojnog muzeja 11–12 (1966), 162–180.

Petrovi} 1976 – \. Petrovi}, Dubrova~ko oru`je u XIV veku [Medieval arms and armor in

Balkans in 14 th century], Beograd 1976.

Pope 1972 – D. Pope, Gans, London – New York – Sydney – Toronto 1972 4 .

Popovi} 1985 – M. Popovi}, Defensive Systems in the Eastern Part of Yugoslavia, Balcanoslavica

11–12 (1985), 11–32.

Popovi} 1993 – M. Popovi}, Les forteresses du système défensif byzantin en Serbie au

XI e –XII e siècle, Starinar XLII/1991 (1993), 169–185.

Popovi} 1996 – M. Popovi}, Les forteresses dans les régions des conflits byzantinoserbes au

XIV e siècle, in: Byzantium and Serbia in the 14 th century, ed. N. Oikonomides, Athens 1996,

67–87.

Popovi} 1999 – M. Popovi}, Tvr|ava Ras [The fortress of Ras], Beograd 1999.

Popovi} 2006 – M. Popovi}, Les funérailles du ktitor: aspect archéologique, in: Proceedings

of the 21 st International Congress of Byzantine Studies, I, London 2006, 99–130.

Popovi} 2007 – M. Popovi}, Kapije srednjovekovnog Stala}a [The Gates of Medieval Stala}],

u: D. Mini}, O. Vukadin, Srednjovekovni Stala}, Beograd 2007, 268–273.

Popovi} 2012 – M. Popovi}, Magli~ki zamak [Magli~ Castle], Beograd 2012.

Popovi} 2016 et al. – M. Popovi}, S. Marjanovi}-Du{ani}, D. Popovi}, Life in the Towns and

Cities, in: Daily life in Medieval Serbia, Belgrade 2016, 32–60.

Popovi} 2016a – M. Popovi}, From the Roman Castel to the Serbian Medieval City, in:

Processes of byzantinisation and serbian archaeology, ed. V. Biki}, Belgrade 2016, 53–66.

Popovi} 2016b – M. Popovi}, The cosmopolitan milieu of serbien towns, in: Processes of

byzantinisation and serbian archaeology, ed. V. Biki}, Belgrade 2016, 151–157.

Popovi} 2018 – M. Popovi}, The bathing chamber in the castle of Novo Brdo, Starinar

LXVIII (2018), 175–190.

276


Pribakovi} 1958 – D. Pribakovi}, Iskopavanje na tvr|avi Novo Brdo u 1957. godini [Les

fouilles de la forteresse à Novo Brdo en 1957], Vesnik Vojnog muzeja 5 (1958), 253–265.

Ra~ki 1880 – F. Ra~ki, Izve{taj barskog nadbiskupa Marina Bizzi-a o svom putovanju god.

1610. po Arbana{koj i Staroj Srbiji, Starine JAZU XX (188), 50–156.

Radovanovi} 1928 – V. Radovanovi}, Novo Brdo, u: Narodna enciklopedija srpsko-hrvatskoslovena~ka,

III, ur. S. Stanojevi}, Beograd 1928, 170–174.

Sijari} 2014 – M. Sijari}, Hladno oru`je iz Bosne i Hercegovine u arheologiji razvijenog i kasnog

srednjeg vijeka [Cold-steel Weapons from Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Archaeology of the

High and Late Mediaeval Periods], Sarajevo 2014.

Toy 1955 – S. Toy, History of fortifications from 3000 BC to 1700 AD, London 1955.

Zdravkovi} 1956 – I. Zdravkovi}, Arheolo{ko-konzervatorski radovi na Novom Brdu [Les

travaux archéologiques et de conservation accomplis de 1952 à 1956 sur Novo Brdo], Glasnik

muzeja Kosova i Metohije I (1956), 331–345.

Zdravkovi}, Simi} 1956 – I. Zdravkovi}, M. Simi}, Manje crkvene gra|evine i zgrade turskog

doba na Novom Brdu i okolini, Glasnik Muzeja Kosova i Metohije I (1956), 245–274.

Prilozi/Appendices

278

Gordana Simi}

Slobodan Radovanovi}

Protection Methods and Techniques

of the Novo Brdo Castle

1 The expert team of the Contractor was

led by civil engineer Zlatan Tomi}

with architect Slobodan Radovanovi}.

The team also included architect Milisav

Vukovi}, archaeologist \or|e Milosavljevi},

civil engineer Stefan Milosavac

and other associates.

2 The Contractor engaged Marko Popovi},

PhD, archaeologist – scientific advisor

of the Institute of Archaeology in Belgrade

(retired) and architect Gordana Simi}, M.Sc.,

conservator – advisor at the Institute

for the Protection of Cultural

Monuments of Serbia (retired).

3 The representative of the Office

for Southeast Europe, Sini{a [e{um,

informed us that he was familiar with

the project and that he forwarded it to

the Institute for the Protection of

Cultural Monuments of Serbia in Belgrade,

as well as the Ministry of Culture and

Information of the Republic of Serbia.

The same office submitted a request to the

Ministry of Culture, in order to get the

Decision to approve the Project of the

Reconstruction of Novo Brdo fortress

(100/2015 of 10. 7. 2015) on the basis

of which the Institute of Archaeology of

Kosovo from Pri{tina issued a Work permit

for the conducting of explorations and

conservation works on Novo Brdo fortress

(8213-03 of 10. 7. 2015).

THE IMPORTANCE OF NOVO BRDO, AS THE FIRST COMPLEX URBAN STRUCture

in medieval Serbia, which incorporated a fortified town with a Castle and an

imposing mining settlement, was known to the expert and scientific public already

in the last century. It was precisely for this reason that the first explorations and

conservation works were started in 1952 with the aim and the desire of the experts

to make sure that these were systematic activities which, unfortunately, did not

happen. Such a demanding and extensive work kept being interrupted on several

occasions and then finally from 1969 no interventions were taken.

It was only after almost five decades that an interest in Novo Brdo was shown

again and this was done through the engagement of the local community the initiative

of which was supported by the world public. Thus in 2014, using the funds of

the European Union, the development of the project Revitalisation of Novo Brdo was

financed and this was commissioned to “Omega inènjering” office from Dubrovnik,

while the designer-in-chief was architect @eljko Pekovi}, PhD. After the publishing

of a tender for the contractor, Company for the construction, renewal and reconstruction

of buildings “KOTO d.o.o.” from Belgrade was engaged. Taking into account

the importance of this project, the difficulties related to its implementation, the

monitoring and the accounting of works, the Contractor set up its expert team, 1

which was joined, as stipulated in the tender, by an archaeologist and an architect

with at least 20 years of experience in the protection of monument heritage. 2

The conducting of the works at the protection of Novo Brdo was funded by the

European Union, while the project implementation was granted to the UNESCO, that

is, to the Regional Bureau for Science and Culture in Europe with the seat in Venice

– the office for South-East Europe with the seat in Sarajevo, the task of which was

to provide the necessary consents and permits for the conducting of the works, as

well as to monitor their implementation. 3 In line with the approved project, the works

were conducted in 2015 and 2016 4 when they were interrupted and, unfortunately,

this time they were not continued either.

279

Gordana Simi}

Slobodan Radovanovi}

Metode i tehnike za[tite

zamka Novog Brda

ZNAÂJ NOVOG BRDA, KAO PRVE SLO@ENE GRADSKE STRUKTURE U SREDwovekovnoj

Srbiji, koja je obuhvatala utvr|eni grad sa Zamkom i impozantno

rudarsko naseqe, bio je poznat stru~noj i nau~noj javnosti jo{ u pro{lom veku.

Upravo zbog toga su prva istraìvawa i konzervatorski radovi zapo~eti 1952.

godine, sa namerom i èqom istraìva~a da oni budu sistematski, {to se, na-

àlost, nije ostvarilo. Ovako zahtevan i opseàn rad je u vi{e navrata prekidan

i, kona~no, od 1969. godine nisu preduzimane nikakve intervencije.

Tek posle skoro pet decenija ponovo je iskazan interes za Novo Brdo, i to

angaòvawem lokalne zajednice, ~iju je inicijativu podràla svetska javnost.

Tako je 2014. godine sredstvima Evropske unije finansirana izrada projekta

Revitalizacija Novog Brda, koja je poverena birou „Omega inèwering“ iz Dubrovnika,

a glavni i odgovorni projektant je bio dr arhitekta @eqko Pekovi}.

Po raspisanom tenderu za izvo|ewe radova angaòvano je Privredno dru{tvo

za izgradwu, obnavqawe i rekonstrukciju gra|evinskih objekata „KOTO d.o.o.“

iz Beograda. Imaju}i u vidu zna~aj ovog projekta, teìnu izvo|ewa, pra}ewa i

obra~una radova, izvo|a~ je formirao svoj stru~ni tim, 1 kome je prikqu~io,

kako je u tenderu traèno, arheologa i arhitektu sa najmawe dvadeset godina

iskustva u za{titi spomeni~kog nasle|a. 2

Izvo|ewe radova na za{titi Novog Brda finansirala je Evropska unija, a

implementaciju projekta je poverila Unesku, odnosno Regionalnom birou za

nauku i kulturu sa sedi{tem u Veneciji – Kancelarija za jugoisto~nu Evropu

sa sedi{tem u Sarajevu, ~iji je zadatak bio da obezbedi potrebne saglasnosti i

dozvole za izvo|ewe radova, kao i da prati wihovu realizaciju. 3 Prema odobrenom

projektu radovi su izvo|eni 2015. i 2016. godine, 4 kada su prekinuti i,

naàlost, ni ovog puta nisu nastavqeni.

Zate~eno stawe Novog Brda bilo je o~ekivano lo{e, ali ne u onolikoj meri

u kojoj su wegove fortifikacije bile zaru{ene i zasute ogromnim koli~inama

{uta i obru{enog materijala. Do novobrdskih fortifikacija vodila je samo

1 Stru~ni tim izvo|a~a radova predvodio

je gra|evinski inèwer Zlatan Tomi} sa

arhitektom Slobodanom Radovanovi}em,

a u timu su u~estvovali arhitekta

Milisav Vukovi}, arheolog \or|e

Milosavqevi}, gra|evinski tehni~ar

Stefan Milosavac i drugi saradnici.

2 Izvo|a~ radova je angaòvao

dr Marka Popovi}a, arheologa –

nau~nog savetnika Arheolo{kog

instituta u Beogradu (u penziji),

i mr arhitektu Gordanu Simi},

konzervatora – savetnika u Republi~kom

zavodu za za{titu spomenika kulture

(u penziji).

3 Predstavnik Kancelarija za

jugoisto~nu Evropu Sini{a [e{um

informisao nas je da je sa projektom

upoznao nadle`ne i dostavio ga

Republi~kom zavodu za za{titu

spomenika kulture u Beogradu, kao i

Ministarstvu kulture i informisawa

Republike Srbije. Ista kancelarija je

podnela zahtev Ministarstvu kulture,

kako bi dobio Odluku da se Projekat

obnove Novobrdske tvr|ave odobrava

(100/2015 od 10. 7. 2015), na osnovu

koje je Arheolo{ki institut Kosova

iz Pri{tine izdao Radnu dozvolu

za izvo|ewe istraìvawa i konzervatorskih

radova na tvr|avi Novo Brdo

(8213-03 od 10. 7. 2015).

280

4 The explorations and the conservation

and restoration works in 2015 lasted for

around four months (exactly 133 work

days, from 13 July to 15 November 2015),

as well as those in 2016 (125 work days,

from 15 May to 27 October 2016).

5 Before its burying, the probe was cleared

of vegetation, the walls in it were cleaned

and photographed, and also there was

comparison made with the documentation

from 1957.


The state in which Novo Brdo was found was expectedly bad, but not to the degree

in which its fortifications were collapsed and covered in huge quantities of debris

and toppled material. Only a narrow pedestrian path led to the fortifications of Novo

Brdo, while it was not possible to enter the Castle, since the gate was covered with

materials almost up to the beginning of the portal’s arch, as was also found by the

explorers who worked here around the middle of the last century. The interior of

the Castle was filled with debris and earth almost to the preserved heights of the

rampart mass of around 5 m to 6 m, on top of which there was tall vegetation. The

exterior faces of the ramparts and towers could be seen only partially within the

mass of the collapsed building material and it was possible to access the remains of

the fortification only over this material.

Such state of the monument required a serious and complex organisation of

the works and in all of this it was concluded that the excavations and archaeological

surveying had to be carried out in parallel with conservation works in order to build

the excavated construction material – the stone in and not store it at some distant

deposit sites. This approach was completely justified, although it was clear that it

was also bringing difficulties that would have to be solved during the works.

The preparatory works were very complex and demanding, too. First of all it was

necessary to provide an access to the fortress for the machinery for the purpose of

bringing in the materials and taking away the excavated earth. The access road was

laid out on the east side of the fortress, where there used to be the original communication,

leading to the main – South Gate of the Lower Town. The visible remains of

the gate’s threshold were covered in small-sized mortar debris in order to protect it

from the machinery, while an archaeological probe from 1957 made on its interior

side was filled with earth. 5 Two roads were laid out from the gate of the Lower Town.

The first one – leading to the gate of the Castle, where the access was covered with

material in order to provide an entrance and the supplying of the materials, and

another one – cut through the piles of debris to the foot of the Castle, that would

be used for the removal of the deposited quantity of earth coming from the excavations.

It was planned that after the completion of the conservation works these fills

would be removed and thus the historic communications would be freed.

Taking into account the specific location of the monument complex and its distance

from the urban settlements, it was necessary to ensure its stable electricity

and water supply. For this reason, an overhead power line was installed with a connection

to the closest sub-station, while water was provided by multiple re-pumping

from the tank in the settlement, all the way to the tank under the Castle and further

towards the points at the construction site where that water was required. In the

space between Towers 2 and 3, a larger plateau was created and this was the place

for the site’s office and the temporary storage of tools and equipment, as well as the

place for the storing of the aggregate and the making of mortar for the construction.

It was an obligation of the Contractor to place information boards at the construction

site in three languages (Serbian, Albanian and English).

For the purpose of the conducting of conservation works, it was necessary to

install steel pipe scaffolding, both next to the exterior faces of the ramparts and

towers of the Castle, and in its interior, which entailed a prior removal of the collapsed

material. For this reason, the piled up material on the exterior side was removed

first and this was done in the north, east, south and partially in the west sections,


uzana pe{a~ka staza, a ulaz u Zamak nije bio mogu}, jer je kapija bila zasuta skoro

do po~etka luka portala, kako su je nekada zatekli i istraìva~i polovinom

pro{log veka. Unutra{wost Zamka bila je zasuta {utom i zemqom skoro do

o~uvanih visina mase bedema od oko 5 do 6 m, na kojoj je iznikla visoka vegetacija.

Spoqna lica bedema i kula samo su se delimi~no videla u masi obru-

{enog gradiva, preko koga se jedino moglo pri}i ostacima fortifikacije.

Ovakvo stawe spomenika zahtevalo je ozbiqnu i sloènu organizaciju radova,

pri ~emu je zakqu~eno da se iskopavawa i arheolo{ka istraìvawa moraju

izvoditi paralelno sa konzervatorskim radovima, kako bi se iskopani gra|evinski

materijal – kamen ugra|ivao, a ne skladi{tio na udaqenim deponijama.

Ovaj pristup je bio potpuno opravdan, mada je bilo jasno da nosi i zna~ajne

pote{ko}e, koje }e morati da se re{avaju tokom radova.

Veoma sloèni i zahtevni su bili i pripremni radovi. Pre svega, trebalo

je obezbediti prilaz mehanizacije utvr|ewu za dopremu materijala i odvoz

iskopane zemqe. Prilazni put je trasiran sa isto~ne strane utvr|ewa, gde je

nekada postojala prvobitna komunikacija, sve do Glavne – Ju`ne kapije Doweg

grada. Vidqivi ostaci praga kapije zasuti su sitnim malternim {utom kako bi

se za{titili od mehanizacije, a arheolo{ka sonda iz 1957. godine sa unutra-

{we strane je zatrpana. 5 Od kapije Doweg grada trasirana su dva puta. Prvi –

do kapije Zamka, gde je privremeno nasut prilaz, kako bi se obezbedio ulaz i

doprema materijala i drugi – koji je prose~en kroz nasipe {uta do podno`ja

Zamka, kojim bi se uklawale deponovane koli~ine zemqe od iskopavawa. Planirano

je da se ovi nasipi nakon okon~awa konzervatorskih radova uklone i

time oslobode istorijske komunikacije.

Imaju}i u vidu specifi~nu lokaciju spomeni~kog kompleksa i wegovu udaqenost

od urbanih naseqa, neophodno je bilo da se obezbedi wegovo stabilno

snabdevawe elektri~nom energijom i vodom. Stoga je postavqen dalekovod povezan

sa najbliìm trafoom, a voda je obezbe|ena vi{estrukim prepumpavawem

iz rezervoara u nasequ, sve do rezervoara ispod Zamka i daqe ka potrebnim mestima

na gradili{tu. Na prostoru izme|u Kula 2 i 3 formiran je ve}i plato,

na kome je postavqena gradili{na kancelarija, privremeni magacin alata i

opreme, kao i mesto za deponovawe agregata i spravqawe maltera za zidawe.

Obaveza izvo|a~a radova bila je da postavi informativne table o gradili{tu

na tri jezika (srpskom, albanskom i engleskom).

Za izvo|ewe konzervatorskih radova trebalo je montirati ~eli~nu cevastu

skelu, kako uz spoqna lica bedema i kula Zamka, tako i u wegovoj unutra{wosti,

{to je podrazumevalo prethodno uklawawe obru{enog materijala. Zato se pristupilo

prvo uklawawu nagomilanog gradiva sa spoqne strane, i to u severnom,

isto~nom, ju`nom i delom u zapadnom sektoru, ~ija je visina iznosila ~ak do

5 m. Tom prilikom je ukloweno oko 4.000 m³ materijala, ru~no i uz pomo} mehanizacije,

pri ~emu je odvajan kamen za zidawa i deponovan na gradili{tu, a

zemqa odvezena na deponije van utvr|ewa. Prilikom ovih radova otkriveni su

ostaci spoqnog bedema oko Zamka, {to je bilo o~ekivano, budu}i da su ga raniji

istraìva~i uo~ili tokom pro{log veka. 6 Wegovo postojawe, a posebno konzervacija

wegovih ostataka, nije bila obuhva}ena projektom. Iako je ukazivano na

zna~aj pojave spoqnog bedema, kao va`nog elementa odbrane, i potrebu wegove za-

{tite i prezentacije, nisu izvedene bilo kakve konzervatorske intervencije.

4 Istraìvawa i konzervatorsko-

-restauratorski radovi u 2015. godini

trajali su oko 4 meseca (ta~no 133

radna dana, od 13. 7. do 15. 11. 2015),

kao i u 2016. godini (125 radnih dana,

od 15. 5. do 27. 10. 2016).

5 Pre zatrpavawa sonda je o~i{}ena od

vegetacije, o~i{}eni su i fotografisani

zidovi u woj, a izvr{eno je i pore|ewe

sa dokumentacijom iz 1957. godine.


276, 277.

282


a

b

Sl. 1. Novo Brdo – Zamak: a) u toku izvo|ewa radova; b) posle okon~awa radova

Fig. 1. Novo Brdo – Castle: a) during the conducting of the works; b) after the cessation of the works


Sli~na situacija je bila i unutar Zamka, gde je visina slojeva obru{enog

kamena i gra|evinskog {uta iznosila od 5,5 do 6 m. Pod stalnim nadzorom arheologa

ru~no je iskopano oko 3.000 m³ materijala, pri ~emu je tako|e odvajan

kamen za ugradwu, dok su zemqa i {ut deponovani ispred kapije Zamka i poznije

odvezeni. Montaà skele unutar Zamka zavisila je od samog procesa uklawawa

zasutog materijala i arheolo{kih istraìvawa, tako da se odvijala sukcesivno

u onim zonama u kojima su bila oslobo|ena lica bedema. Neretko je postavqana

i na niìm slojevima nasipa, kako bi se zapo~elo izvo|ewe konzervatorskih

radova, te je usled arheolo{kih istraìvawa i spu{tawa tla unutar Zamka morala

da se u dowoj zoni nastavqa. Poznije je i u svim kulama postavqena skela

zbog potrebe radova.

Usvojena organizacija, karakter i redosled izvo|ewa pripremnih radova

nametali su pa`qivu montaù skele, posebno imaju}i u vidu specifi~nost lokacije

i klimatske uslove. Skela unutar Zamka morala je biti povezana mostovima

sa skelom oko spoqa{wih zidova bedema i kula. Zbog velike nadmorske

visine, skoro 1100 m, i izuzetno jakih vetrova, skela je u nekoliko navrata, tokom

jesewih meseci, dodatno oja~avana. Prema vaè}im propisima, pre kori-

{}ewa je pregledana i uzemqena.

Prilikom iskopavawa u Zamku su otkriveni ostaci brojnih gra|evina, {to

se i o~ekivalo. Jednu od wih, gra|evinu levo od ulaza u Zamak, koju nazivamo

Zapadnom gra|evinom, otkrili su istraìva~i polovinom pro{log veka, 7 a tokom

iskopavawa 2015. godine konstatovani su i ostaci jo{ dva objekta – Ju`na

gra|evina desno od kapije, kao i Severna gra|evina – dvorana, izme|u Kule 6 i

Kule 1, zatim Crkva sa ostacima ìvopisa, malo parno kupatilo i dve cisterne

za vodu sa upojnim bunarima. Naàlost, Projekat revitalizacije Novog Brda

nije predvideo da }e se prilikom ovih radova unutar Zamka svakako nai}i na

ostatke i drugih gra|evina, {to je ina~e moralo biti o~ekivano, te je wegova

unutra{wost pretpostavqena kao ravna povr{ina. Zato konzervacija i prezentacija

mogu}ih gra|evina nije bila predmet projekta, niti su za te radove

predvi|ena potrebna sredstva.

Teì{te projekta bilo je fokusirano na obnovu lica zidova bedema i kula,

i to do wihovih o~uvanih masa, {to je sa konzervatorskog stanovi{ta bio

potpuno opravdan pristup, budu}i da nije bilo materijalnih podataka za wihovu

celovitiju obnovu. Time se nastojalo da se jasno prezentuje gabarit, ali i

da se donekle istakne volumen Zamka. To je podrazumevalo da se lica zidova

obnove postoje}im kamenom, izdvojenim prilikom uklawawa obru{enog gradiva,

u istoj tehnici i slogu, sa ispunom nedostaju}e mase zidova, uz izvo|ewe

uglova blokovima tamnocrvene bre~e. Me|utim, wena nabavka predstavqala je

veliki problem. Iako podru~je Novog Brda obiluje naslagama bre~e, bilo je

veoma te{ko obezbediti odgovaraju}e dozvole, kao i radnu snagu za weno va|ewe,

a potom klesawe i kontinualno dopremawe na gradili{te. Tako su dopremani

blokovi bre~e dimenzija pribli`nih originalima, a na licu mesta je

morala da se radi zavr{na obrada neposredno pre ugradwe.

Projektom revitalizacije bilo je predvi|eno da se sva zidawa vr{e kre~nim

malterom, sa minimalnim dodatkom belog cementa. Zato se pre po~etka radova

pristupilo uzimawu uzoraka originalnih maltera iz zidanih struktura Zamka.

U akreditovanoj laboratoriji u Beogradu ura|ene su analize minerolo{ko- 7 Isto, 281.

284


276, 277.

7 Ibid., 281.


the height of which went to as much as 5 m. Around 4000 m³ of material was removed

on this occasion, either manually or using the machinery, and in this the

stone used for the construction was separated and stored at the construction site,

while the earth was driven away to the dump sites outside the fortress. During these

works, remains of the external rampart around the Castle were revealed, which was

expected, taking into account that the former explorers had noticed it already during

the previous century. 6 Its existence and especially the conservation of its remains

were not covered by the Project. Although the significance of the revealed external

rampart, as an important defence element, was continuously emphasised, as well as

the need to protect it and ensure its presentation, no conservation interventions

were carried out.

A similar situation was taking place within the Castle, too, where the height of

the layers of toppled stone and the construction debris went from 5.5 m to 6.0 m.

Under the continuous supervision of archaeologists, around 3000 m³ of materials

were excavated manually and while doing this the stone for subsequent building into

the structures was also separated, while the earth and the debris were deposited in

front of the Castle’s gate and later they were taken away by vehicles. The assembly

of the scaffolding within the Castle depended on the process of the removal of the

fill material and the archaeological surveying, so that it was done successively in

those zones in which the faces of the ramparts had been freed. The scaffolding was

also often installed at the lower layers of the fill in order to start the conducting of

conservation works and on account of the archaeological surveying and the settlement

of the ground within the Castle, it had to be continued in the lower zone. Later,

for the purpose of the works, the scaffolding was also installed in all of the towers.

The adopted organisation, the character and the sequence of conducting the preparatory

works involved a careful assembly of the scaffolding, especially taking into

account the specificity of the location and the climate conditions. The scaffolding

within the Castle had to be linked by bridges with the scaffolding around the exterior

walls of the ramparts and the towers. Because of the high altitude, almost 1100 m, and

exceptionally strong winds, the scaffolding was additionally reinforced on several

occasions, during the autumn months. According to the relevant regulations, before

its use it was thoroughly examined and grounded.

During the excavations in the Castle, remains of numerous buildings were revealed,

which was expected. One of them, a building to the left from the entrance

into the Castle, which we call the West Building, was revealed by the explorers around

the middle of the previous century, 7 while during the 2015 excavations the remains

of two more buildings were found – the South Building to the right from the gate, as

well as the North Building – the Hall, between Tower 6 and Tower 1, then a church

with remains of wall paintings, a small steam bath and two water cisterns with filter

wells. Unfortunately, the Novo Brdo Revitalisation Project did not foresee that during

these works within the Castle remains of other buildings would certainly also be

found, which had to be expected, and thus its interior was presumed to be a flat

surface. For this reason, the conservation and presentation of any possible buildings

was not the subject of the Project, nor had the funds necessary for these works

been allocated.

The focus of the Project was on the reconstruction of the faces of the ramparts’

and towers’ walls and this was foreseen to be done to the level of their preserved


Sl. 2. Zamak, u toku radova

na obnovi lica bedema i kula

Fig. 2. Castle, during the works

on the restoration of the face of

the ramparts and the towers

-petrografskog sastava maltera za zidawe kroz makroskopski izgled stene i

mikroskopski nalaz, HRD analize, kao i analize fizi~kih svojstava maltera.

Ispitivawa su ura|ena na tri uzorka 8 i pokazala su da je vezivo kalcijum-karbonat

(kre~), a da se odnos veziva i agregata kre}e u razmeri od 25% : 75% do

40% : 60%. Dobijeni iznosi su zapreminski i uobi~ajeni za kre~ne maltere.

Nije utvr|eno prisustvo mineralnih dodataka. Uzorci maltera za zidawa kula

i bedema uzeti iz unutra{wosti Zamka 9 beleìli su iste rezultate, {to je i

bilo o~ekivano, kako u pogledu sastava, krupno}e agregata, tako i u zapreminskom

odnosu agregata i veziva. Dobijeni rezultati zapreminske mase i upijawa

vode karakteristi~ni su za kre~ne maltere.

Originalni malter kojima su fugovana lica bedema i kula tako|e je kalcijum-karbonatni,

a analize su pokazale da je odnos veziva i agregata 40% : 60%,

pri ~emu preovladavaju zrna krupno}e do 4 mm, i to kvarca, kvarcita i {kriqca.

Uzorci maltera 10 sadrè i krupne ulomke kamena sive boje. U ovom slu~aju

zanimqivo je da rezultati pritisne ~vrsto}e pokazuju neujedna~enost, {to je

posledica pojave ne{to ve}eg zrna agregata. Dobijena vrednost ~vrsto}e uzorka

kre}e se u granicama kao kod prethodnih analiza, a to je oko 5 MPa.

Isti sastavi maltera kori{}eni su za zidawe i fugovawe gra|evina unutar

Zamka. Jedino se razlika uo~ila u malom parnom kupatilu. Analiza uzorka

maltera iz wega 11 pokazuje da je izveden u dva sloja, pri ~emu sastav prvog

odgovara ranije opisanim analizama, dok je zavr{ni malter spravqen sa ne-

{to ve}im zrnima opeke i sa minimalnim procentom komadi}a organskih materija

(ugqa, trske i slame). I u ovom slu~aju vezivo je karbonatnog sastava, a

wegovo prisustvo je oko 50% u odnosu na agregat. Imaju}i u vidu namenu gra|evine

– parno kupatilo, nedvosmisleno se vidi da je drugi sloj maltera sa dodatkom

opeke trebalo da zadovoqi hidrostati~ke potrebe, kao i da ima ve}u

~vrsto}u na pritisak.

8 Izve{taj o ispitivawu Br. KIA

0004/15-GP, Institut za ispitivawe

materijala a.d. Beograd, Centralna

laboratorija za ispitivawe materijala,

Laboratorija za kamen i agregat,

mart 2015. godine.






oktobar 2015. godine.


0037/15-GP, Izve{taj o ispitivawu

Br. KIA 0038/15-GP Institut za

ispitivawe materijala a.d. Beograd,

Centralna laboratorija za ispitivawe

materijala, Laboratorija za kamen

i agregat, oktobar 2015. godine.






decembar 2015. godine.

286

8 Report on the testing no. KIA 0004/15-GP,

IMS Institute a.d. Belgrade, Materials

Testing Central Laboratory, Laboratory

for Stone and Aggregate, March 2015.



Testing Central Laboratory, Laboratory for

Stone and Aggregate, October 2015.


Report on the testing no. KIA 0038/15-GP,



Stone and Aggregate, October 2015.

11 Report on the testing no. KIA 0077/15-

GP, IMS Institute a.d. Belgrade, Materials


Stone and Aggregate, December 2015.


masses, which from the conservation point of view was a completely justified

approach, taking into account that there had been no material data for their more

comprehensive reconstruction. With this it was attempted to present the dimensions

clearly, as well as to emphasise up to a point the volume of the Castle. This

meant that the wall faces should be reconstructed using the existing stone, separated

during the removal of the collapsed material, applying the same technique and the

bond, with the fill of the missing wall mass, while also building the corners using

blocks of dark red breccia. However, its acquisition constituted a great problem.

Although the area around Novo Brdo disposes with ample deposits of breccia, it was

very difficult to obtain the appropriate permits, as well as to engage the labour force

for its quarrying, and then chiselling and continuous supplying to the construction

site. Thus, we ensured supply of breccia blocks with the dimensions that were similar

to those of the originals and then the final processing had to be done on the spot

before the building into its appropriate place.

The revitalisation project stipulated that all the construction was to be done

using lime mortar with a minimal addition of white cement. This is why before the

beginning of the works, we first took samples of the original mortars from the wall

structures of the Castle. The analyses of mineralogical and petrographic compositions

of the mortar used for the construction were done at an accredited laboratory in

Belgrade using for the purpose the macroscopic appearance of the rock and the

microscopic finding, the HRD analyses, as well as the analyses of the physical properties

of the mortar. The testing was done on three samples 8 and they showed that

the binder was calcium carbonate (lime), while the ratio between the binder and the

aggregate went at the scale from 25% : 75% to 40% : 60%. The obtained amounts are

common for lime mortars in terms of their volume. It was not established that there

was presence of any mineral additions. The samples of the mortar for the building

of the towers and ramparts, taken from the interior of the Castle 9 showed the same

results, which was to be expected, both in terms of their composition, the size of

the aggregate, and the volumetric ratio between the aggregate and the binder. The

obtained results for the volumetric mass density and the absorption of water are

characteristic for lime mortars.

The original mortar that was used to point the faces of the ramparts and towers

is also made of calcium carbonate, while the analyses showed that the ratio between

the binder and the aggregate is 40% : 60%, with the predominance of grains the size

of which is up to 4 mm, and these are quartz, quartzite and shale. The mortar samples

10 also contain larger fragments of gray-coloured rock. In this case, it is interesting

that the results of the compressive strength show unevenness which is a consequence

of the somewhat larger grains of the aggregate. The obtained value of the

strength goes within the limits established by the previous analyses, and this is

around 5 MPa.

The same compositions of mortar were used for the construction and for the

pointing of the buildings within the Castle. The only difference that was noted was

at the small steam bath. The analysis of the mortar samples from there 11 showed

that it was done in two layers, with the first layer corresponding to the analyses

described above, while the finishing mortar was made using somewhat larger brick

grains and a minimal percentage of small fragments of organic matters (coal, reeds

and straw). In this case, too, the binder is of the carbonate composition and it is


U skladu sa rezultatima analiza originalnih maltera, vi{e probnih uzoraka

na licu mesta i u dogovoru sa projektantom, odlu~eno je da se malter spravqa

u zapreminskom odnosu veziva i agregata 1 : 3, pri ~emu bi se koristio lokalni

re~ni pesak i agregat iz kamenoloma Glama kod Gwilana, granulacije

0–4 mm, uz minimalni dodatak do 10% belog cementa. Tako je za zidawe lica

bedema i kula odlu~eno da malter bude spravqan od re~nog peska i agregata iz

kamenoloma u odnosu 1 : 2, dok je za ispunu, odnosno masu zida trebalo koristiti

agregat krupnije granulacije. Malter za fugovawe trebalo je spravqati po

istoj recepturi, ali sa agregatom sitnije granulacije.

Zidawe lica zidova bedema i kula izvedeno je skoro u celosti postoje}im kamenom,

u kre~nom malteru opisanog sastava, a u slogu prema originalnim ostacima.

Pri tome je bilo va`no da se u novoozidana lica ugradi kamen odgovaraju}ih

dimenzija, kao i da se prilikom ugradwe obezbede i „veza~i“ za povezivawe

wihovih lica sa o~uvanom masom zida. Imaju}i u vidu da nedostaju velike povr{ine

lica zidova, kao i ~iwenicu da }e u gorwim zonama dubine zidawa do

o~uvanih masa iznositi preko 2 m, izvo|a~ radova je opravdano predloìo

ugradwu odgovaraju}ih ankera, kako bi se obezbedila neophodna veza izme|u

postoje}e mase i novoozidane strukture, {to projektant tada nije prihvatio.

Tako su sva lica bedema i kula ozidana u opisanoj tehnici, sa ugradwom

ugaonih blokova bre~e na kulama, koji su naizmeni~no postavqani po duìni.

Zidawe je vr{eno obostrano, u kampadama du` celog obima utvr|ewa, uz odgovaraju}u

negu i za{titu zidova. Mawa o{te}ewa u licima zidova sanirana su na

isti na~in, kao i ona u unutra{wim zidovima kula. U kulama su sva mesta greda

me|uspratnih konstrukcija obra|ena i oblikovana prema zate~enim ostacima,

pri ~emu su na mestu naleù}ih greda u licu zidova ugra|ene hrastove grede,

dimenzija prema autenti~nim otiscima i za{ti}ena odgovaraju}im premazom.

Sl. 3. Zamak, unutra{wost Kule 1

sa obnovqenim prozorom

Fig. 3. Castle, interior of Tower 1

with the restored window

288

Sl. 4. Zamak,

obrada kruna bedema i kula

Fig. 4. Castle, finishing of the crowns

of the ramparts and the towers


present at around 50% in comparison to the aggregate. Bearing in mind the purpose

of the building – steam bath, it may unambiguously be seen that the second

layer of mortar with the addition of bricks was to meet the hydrostatic needs, as

well as to provide higher strength in case of pressure.

In line with the results of the analyses of the original mortars, after several test

samples on the spot and in agreement with the design engineer, it was decided to prepare

the mortar at the volumetric ratio between the binder and the aggregate of 1:3.

In this, the local river sand and the aggregate from Glama quarry near Gnjilane, with

the granulation of 0–4 mm, was to be used with a minimal addition of up to 10% of

white cement. In this way, for the building of the face of the ramparts and towers it

was decided to use the mortar that would be made of river sand and aggregate from

the quarry at the ratio of 1:2, while the aggregate of coarser granulation should be

used for the fill, that is, for the wall mass. The mortar for the pointing was to be

prepared using the same recipe, but with the aggregate of finer granulation.

The building of the faces of the walls of the ramparts and towers was done almost

in its entirety using the existing stone, placed in the lime mortar of the described

composition and using the bond in line with the original remains. In all of this it was

important to build into the newly created faces the stone of appropriate dimensions,

as well as to provide during this construction the “connectors” for the connecting

of their faces with the preserved wall mass. Taking into account that large surfaces

of the wall faces were missing and the fact that in the upper zones the depths of the

building to the preserved masses would be over 2.0 m, the Contractor justifiably

proposed the installation of appropriate anchors in order to ensure the necessary


Posebna pa`wa je bila posve}ena obradi leì{ta greda me|uspratnih konstrukcija

gra|evina prislowenih uz bedeme, kako bi se naglasio wihov volumen.

Zavr{ne zone zidawa kula i bedema modelovane su na licu mesta prema sa-

~uvanim originalnim ostacima masa zidova, budu}i da „su {ematski prikazane

na projektnim crteìma“ i da ih treba „zavr{iti nepravilno, da sugeri{u

nekompleksnost“. 12 Tokom izvo|ewa radova izmene su nastale i u pogledu izvo|ewa

hidroizolacije zidova i wihove zavr{ne „krune“. U dogovoru sa projektantom

i implementatorom projekta odlu~eno je da se hidroizolacija uradi preko

prethodno pripremqene malterne podloge, i to kao dvoslojna, sa zavr{nom

„krunom“ od kamena. Tako je preko malterne podloge nanet prajmer „Kemacryl“

proizvo|a~a „Kema“, zatim hidroizolacioni premaz „Hidrostop vario 94“ istog

proizvo|a~a, preko ~ega je postavqena mreìca, pa potom drugi sloj istog premaza.

U ciqu za{tite hidroizolacije nanet je sloj maltera, te je nad wim izvedena

„kruna zida“ od lomqenog kamena, koja je potom obra|ena fugovawem. Sve

zavr{ne povr{ine bedema i kula modelovane su u nagibu, kako bi se atmosferska

voda slivala prema spoqa{wem prostoru.

U okviru ovih radova izvo|a~ je sa~inio Projekat restauracije glavne ulazne

kapije Zamka, koja je prema wemu potpuno obnovqena. 13 Na osnovu originalnih

ostataka obnovqene su bo~ne strane kapije do po~etka svoda, i to postoje}im

lomqenim kamenom, a na uglovima su ugra|eni blokovi bre~e. Nad prolazom

kapije obnovqen je u celosti poluobli~asti svod, raspona 1,9 m, blokovima sige.

Iza ulaznog portala ugra|ena je hrastova greda u originalna leì{ta i nad

wom ozidano lice zida.

Na osnovu dokumentacije i materijalnih ostataka, izvo|a~ je obnovio i

naknadno probijeni ulaz u Kulu 6, pre svega iz bezbednosnih razloga, jer je

implementator radova traìo da u kuli ostane cevasta skela, kao privremena

komunikacija za izlazak na krune bedema i kula. Obnova ulaza u Kulu 6 izvedena

je nakon detaqnog premeravawa i opservacije maltera i o~uvane mase zida, te

je konstatovano da wegova originalna visina iznosi samo 152 cm. U skladu sa

tim, ozidane su wegove bo~ne strane i na wih je osloweno pet hrastovih gredica

da prihvate masu zida iznad prolaza, a ugra|ene su i dve gredice u prag.

Tako|e je obnovqen i jedini, delimi~no sa~uvani otvor u nivou druge eta-

è u Kuli 1 – Glavnoj kuli, na osnovu opisa istraìva~a pedesetih godina pro-

{log veka i sa~uvanih ostataka. 14

Sva novozidana lica bedema i kula obra|ena su fugovawem, malterom napred

opisanog sastava. U retkim zonama gde su sa~uvani ostaci originalnog

fugovawa pokazalo se da su fuge skoro u ravni lica zida i da su ivice kamena

minimalno vidqive, te je posle vi{e proba odlu~eno da se fugovawe vr{i na najpribli`niji

na~in. Posebna pa`wa bila je posve}ena tome da se novo fugovawe

uklopi sa originalnim ostacima, pa su u zonama kontakta starog i novog, malteru

dodavani zemqani pigmenti. Zavr{na obrada fuga vr{ena je ~i{}ewem

metlicama i ~eli~nim ~etkama, kako bi se istakla faktura maltera. Ekstremni

klimatski uslovi, izuzetno visoke temperature tokom leta i vetar oteàvali

su izvo|ewe radova, pa su fugovane povr{ine morale da se {tite jutanom

tkaninom, koja je redovno kva{ena. Nasuprot tome, tokom jesewih meseci i

znatno niìh temperatura, fugovane povr{ine su prekrivane jutom kako bi se

spre~ilo eventualno mr`wewe i destrukcija maltera.

12 Projekat revitalizacije Novog Brda,

Op{ti uslovi, 3.0. Zidarski radovi.

13 Projekat restauracije glavne ulazne

kapije Zamka sa~inila je mr arhitekta

G. Simi}, ~lan stru~nog tima

izvo|a~a radova.

14 Predlog obnove ulaza u Kulu 6

i otvora u Kuli 1 sa~inila je

mr arhitekta G. Simi}, ~lan stru~nog

tima izvo|a~a radova.

290

12 Novo Brdo Revitalisation Project,

General Conditions, 3.0. Masonry works.

13 Castle’s Main Entrance Gate Restoration

Project has been prepared by architect

G. Simi}, M.Sc., member of

the Contractor’s expert team.


connection between the existing mass and the newly built structure, which the

design engineer did not accept at the time.

Thus, all the faces of the ramparts and the towers were built using the described

technique, with the building in of the corner breccia blocks on the towers that were

alternately placed lengthwise. The construction was done on both sides, in the form

of rings along the entire perimeter of the fortress, with the relevant care for and the

protection of the walls. Minor damages in the wall faces were rehabilitated in the

same manner, as well as those in the interior walls of the towers. All the places for

the inter-floor structure beams found in the towers were processed and shaped up

in line with the found remains, installing in the place of the bracketed beams in the

wall faces oak beams with their dimensions in line with the authentic impressions

and protected by an appropriate coating. Special attention was paid to the processing

of the bearings of the inter-floor structure beams of the buildings adjacent to

the ramparts in order to emphasise their volume.

The final zones of the construction of the towers and ramparts were modelled

on the spot in line with the preserved original remains of the wall masses, taking

into consideration that “they were shown schematically in the design drawings” and

that they should be “finished irregularly, in order to suggest non-complexity.” 12

During the conducting of the works, there were changes also as regards the execution

of the hydro-insulation of the walls and their finishing “crown.” Through an

agreement with the Design Engineer and the Implementing partner of the project,

it was decided to do the hydro-insulation over the previously prepared mortar base

and to do it in two layers, with the final “crown” made of stone. Thus, over the mortar

base, “Kemacryl” primer by “Kema” company was applied, followed by a hydroinsulation

coating “Hidrostop vario 94” by same manufacturer, over which a net

was placed, after which another layer of the same coating was applied. For the purpose

of protecting the hydro-insulation, a layer of mortar was applied and above it

the “wall crown” was made of broken stone which was then finished by pointing. All

the final surfaces of the ramparts and towers were modelled at an inclination in

order to make sure that the precipitation water would run down towards the exterior

space.

Within the scope of these works, the Contractor developed the Castle’s Main

Entrance Gate Restoration Project, which was completely reconstructed in line with

this project. 13 On the basis of the original remains, the lateral sides of the gate were

reconstructed up to the beginning of the vault and this was done using the existing

broken stone, while breccia blocks were installed into the corners. Above the passage

of the gate, the semi-spherical vault with the span of 1.9 m was reconstructed in its

entirety using tufa blocks. Behind the entrance portal, an oak beam was installed

into the original bearings and the face of the wall above it was built.

On the basis of the documentation and the material remains, the Contractor also

reconstructed the subsequently driven entrance into Tower 6, primarily for safety

reasons, since the Implementing partner for the works asked for the pipe scaffolding

to remain within the tower, as a temporary communication for going up to the

crowns of the ramparts and the towers. The reconstruction of the entrance into

Tower 6 was done after a detailed measuring and observation of the mortar and the

preserved wall mass and it was established that its original height was only 152 cm.

In line with that, its lateral sides were built and 5 small oak beams were rested against


Sl. 5. Zamak – Kula 2 i Kula 3,

izgled zidnog platna posle fugovawa

Fig. 5. Castle – Tower 2 and Tower 3,

appearance of the wall curtain

after the pointing

Kada su u pitawu otkrivene gra|evine unutar Zamka, bilo je nesporno da se

wihovi ostaci moraju konzervirati i prezentovati, imaju}i u vidu arhitektonski

zna~aj svakog pojedina~nog objekta, ali i wihovu va`nost u pogledu sagledavawa

ukupnog urbanisti~kog plana i organizacije unutra{weg prostora. Otkriveni

ostaci gra|evina pruàli su mogu}nost wihove delimi~ne obnove, ali je

problem predstavqala ~iwenica da sredstva za wihovu za{titu nisu bila predvi|ena,

budu}i da se nisu ni o~ekivali wihovi nalazi, kako je ve} re~eno.

Zahvaquju}i detaqnoj arhitektonskoj dokumentaciji, kojom je raspolagao

izvo|a~ radova, a ~iju je izradu obezbedio jo{ tokom arheolo{kih istraìvawa,

bio je u mogu}nosti da sa~ini Predlog preventivne konzervacije gra|evina

unutar Zamka, sa kojim se sloìo projektant i koji je prihvatio implementator

projekta. 15 Ciq ovog predloga bio je da se sva zdawa za{tite od daqeg propadawa,

pa su predvi|ene samo nu`ne konzervatorske intervencije zate~enog

stawa, koje bi obuhvatile demontaù rastresitih delova zidova, zidawa lica i

zatvarawe mawih o{te}ewa, izradu hidroizolacije i zavr{ne krune, kao i fugovawe

zidova. Samo su pojedini elementi arhitekture, poput prozora i portala,

predvi|eni da se delimi~no obnove, kako bi doprineli op{tem utisku i

sagledavawu wihovog autenti~nog izgleda.

Tako su ostaci Crkve, kao najzna~ajnijeg zdawa u Zamku, konzervirani sa

namerom da se prvenstveno istakne wen nekada{wi gabarit u odnosu na pozniji

turski ambar. Ju`ni zid crkvenog zdawa, od koga su bili sa~uvani neznatni

ostaci, ozidan je u visini samo dva reda kamena, dok je severni zid nakon uklawawa

turskog nadzi|ivawa konzerviran u zate~enim visinama. Na isti na~in

je tretiran i zapadni zid Crkve, pri ~emu je uklowena poznija zazida portala, a

u isto~nom zidu su nagla{ene kalote proskomidije i oltarske apside. Otkrivene

ostatke ìvopisa u Crkvi, koji nisu mogli da ostanu na otvorenom, bri-

`qivo su skinuli slikari-konzervatori, a potom ih konzervatorski tretirali

i prezentovali na novoj podlozi. 16 Originali skinutih fresaka predati su

15 Predlog i na~in konzervacije

gra|evina, sa arhitektonskom

dokumentacijom i predra~unom radova,

sa~inili su ~lanovi stru~nog tima

izvo|a~a: dr M. Popovi}, mr arhitekta

G. Simi} i arhitekta S. Radovanovi}.

16 Izvo|a~ radova je angaòvao ekipu

slikara-konzervatora, a o na~inu

i postupku skidawa fresaka

v. Samarxi}, Jakovqev 2016.

292

14 The proposal for the reconstruction of

the entrance into Tower 6 and the opening

in Tower 1 has been prepared by architect

G. Simi}, M.Sc., member of

the Contractor’s expert team.

15 The proposal for and the manner of the

conservation of the buildings, with the

architectural documentation and the priced

bill of quantities were prepared by members

of the Contractor’s expert team:

M. Popovi}, PhD, architect G. Simi}, M.Sc.

and architect S. Radovanovi}.


them in order to receive the mass of the wall above the passage, while two small

beams were built into the threshold, too.

Also, the only partially preserved opening at the level of the second floor in

Tower 1 – the main tower was also restored on the basis of the description of the

experts from the 1950’s and the preserved remains. 14

All the newly built faces of the ramparts and towers were finished by pointing,

using mortar of the above described composition. In the rare zones where remains

of the original pointing had been preserved, it turned out that the grouts were almost

at the level of the wall face and that the edges of the stones were minimally visible.

Therefore, after several tests, it was decided that the new pointing would be done in

the most similar way. Special attention was paid to making sure that the new pointing

would fit the original remains and for this reason in the zones of the contact

between the old and the new one, earthy pigments were added to the mortar. The

final finishing of the grouts was done by cleaning the joints with dusters and steel

brushes in order to accentuate the facture of the mortar. The extreme climate conditions,

exceptionally high temperatures during the summer and the wind, made

the conducting of the works very difficult and thus the pointed surfaces had to be

protected by burlap which was regularly wetted. In contrast, during the autumn

months and significantly lower temperatures, the pointed surfaces were covered with

burlap in order to prevent possible freezing and destruction of the mortar.

When it comes to the discovered buildings within the Castle, it was unquestionable

that their remains had to be conserved and presented, bearing in mind the architectural

significance of every single structure, as well as their importance for the grasping

of the overall urban plan and the organisation of the interior space. The revealed

remains of the buildings provided the possibility of their partial reconstruction, but

the problem lay in the fact that the funds for their protection had not been allocated

since it had not been expected that they would be found, as it has already been said.

Thanks to the detailed architectural documentation which the Contractor disposed

with and which it made sure would be developed already during the archaeological

explorations, the Contractor had a possibility to prepare the Proposal for the

Preventive Conservation of the Buildings within the Caste, which the design engineer

agreed with and which was accepted by the Implementing Partner of the project. 15

The goal of this proposal was to protect all the buildings from further deterioration

and therefore only the necessary conservation interventions on the encountered

state were foreseen which would include the dismantling of the loose parts of the

walls, building of the faces and closing of smaller damages, installation of hydro-insulation

into the finishing crowns, as well as wall pointing. Only some architectural

elements, such as windows and portals, were envisaged to be partially reconstructed

in order to contribute to the general impression and the grasping of their authentic

appearance.

Thus the remains of the church, as the most important building in the Castle,

were conserved with an intention to emphasise primarily its former size with respect

to the later-date Ottoman granary. The south wall of the church, only sparse remains

of which had been preserved, was built at the height of only two rows of stone, while

the north wall, after the removal of the Ottoman addition, was conserved at the

encountered heights. The west wall of the church was treated in the same manner,

removing the later-date walling-in of the portal, while in the east wall the calottes of


Arheolo{kom institutu u Pri{tini za muzejsko izlagawe, 17 a wihove kopije

se ~uvaju u Narodnom muzeju u Beogradu.

U priprati Crkve izvedene su ne{to obimnije konzervatorske intervencije,

posebno na severnom i zapadnom zidu. Naime, kako je severni zid zasnovan

delom na zidu cisterne a delom na sloju gline, do{lo je do wegovog nagiwawa, te

da bi se spre~ilo eventualno obru{avawe, morao je da se delimi~no demontira

i ponovo ozida. Prema sa~uvanim ostacima, koji su arhitektonski dokumentovani,

delimi~no su obnovqena dva prozorska otvora u wemu, sa doprozornicima

od sige. Na osnovu otkrivenih fragmenata tokom arheolo{kih istraìvawa,

komada isklesanih od bre~e, a koji su identifikovani kao delovi praga i dovratnika

portala priprate, izvr{ena je delimi~na obnova severnog zida. Samo

je ju`ni zid konzerviran u zate~enom stawu.

U skladu sa prihva}enim konzervatorskim principom za{tite, na svim

zidovima je izvedena hidroizolacija i „kruna“, a wihova unutra{wa i spoqna

lica su fugovana. Unutra{wi prostor Crkve, ukqu~uju}i i pripratu, nasut je

kamenim agregatom, a u priprati su prezentovani svi fragmenti plastike otkriveni

tokom istraìvawa Crkve.

Severna gra|evina – dvorana, kao druga po va`nosti unutar Zamka, konzervirana

je u obimu sa~uvanih arhitektonskih struktura. Weni obimni zidovi

su konzervatorski tretirana na isti na~in, s tim {to su u unutra{wosti dowe

etaè sanirane dve lepo oblikovane ni{e kamenim blokovima. Ulaz u pri-


izgled posle konzervacije

i delimi~ne obnove portala


appearance after the conservation

and partial restoration of the portal

17 Fragmenti ìvopisa su, kao i sav

arheolo{ki materijal, predati ovoj

instituciji kao nadle`noj za ~uvawe,

prema Zakonu o za{titi kulturnih

dobara Republike Srbije, uz odgovaraju}u

dokumentaciju i reverse.

294


a

16 The Contractor engaged a team of

painters-conservators; for the manner of and

the procedure for the removal of frescoes,

see: S. Samardì}, G. Jakovljev, 2016.

17 Like all the archaeological materials, the

fragments of the wall paintings have been

handed over to this institute as the one in

charge of the safekeeping, under the Law on

the Protection of Cultural Properties of

the Republic of Serbia, with the relevant

documentation and signed receipts.

the prothesis and the altar apse were accentuated. The remains of the wall paintings

discovered in the church, those that could not remain out in the open, were carefully

taken off by painters-conservators and then they were treated in the conservation

manner and presented on a new base. 16 The originals of the removed frescoes

were handed over to the Institute of Archaeology in Pri{tina for their museum display,

17 while their copies are kept at the National Museum in Belgrade.

Somewhat more extensive conservation interventions were carried out in the

narthex of the church, especially in the north and the west walls. Namely, as the north

wall is partly founded on the wall of a cistern and partly on a layer of clay, there had

been its leaning to one side and in order to prevent any possible collapse it had to

be partially dismantled and then built again. In line with the preserved remains,

that are architecturally documented, two openings within it were restored, with the

window jambs made of tufa. On the basis of the fragments discovered during the

archaeological surveying, carved out of breccia, which were identified as parts of

the threshold and the jambs of the narthex’s portal, its partial restoration was carried

out. Only the south wall was conserved in the as-is state.

In conformity with the accepted conservation principle of protection, hydroinsulation

and the “crown” were carried out on all the walls, while their interior and

exterior faces were pointed. The interior space of the church, including also the

narthex, was filled with stone aggregate, while in the narthex all the fragments of

plastics discovered during the surveying of the church were presented.

The North Building – the Hall, as the second most important edifice within the

Castle, was conserved to the degree of the preserved architectural structures. In

terms of conservation, its extensive walls were treated in the same manner, with a note

that two nicely shaped niches in the interior of the lower floor were rehabilitated

using stone blocks. The entrance onto the ground floor was partially restored by


b

Sl. 7. Zapadna gra|evina u Zamku:

a) detaq obnovqenog ju`nog ulaza;

b) detaq ni{e u ju`nom zidu

Fig. 7. West Building in the Castle:

a) a detail of the restored south entrance;

b) a detail of the niche in the south wall

zemnu etaù je delimi~no obnovqen ugradwom ugaonih blokova bre~e, kao i

hrastovih greda, u prag i stepenike. U okviru we su konzervirani i ostaci, odnosno

postament zidanog loì{ta na spratu.

Zapadna gra|evina, koja je delimi~no otkopana polovinom pro{log veka,

tako|e je konzervirana uz minimalnu nadgradwu zidova i izvo|ewe „kruna“. To

se pre svega odnosi na wen ju`ni zid, u kome su nagla{ena mesta greda me|uspratne

konstrukcije i obnovqena ni{a ugradwom hrastovih talpi prema sa-

~uvanim otiscima. U severnom zidu, prema Cisterni 2, delimi~no je obnovqen

prozor sa doprozornicima izvedenim komadima sige, ali je ostavqena wegova

poznija zazida, kao vaàn podatak koji svedo~i da je cisterna oformqena nakon

izgradwe objekta. Isto~ni zid je nadgra|en za nekoliko redova kamena vi-

{e, kako bi se prvenstveno delimi~no obnovio i naglasio ulaz, kome su obnovqene

bo~ne strane i stepenici za pristup dowoj etaì, uz ugradwu hrastovih

greda.

Zidovi Ju`ne gra|evine, desno od ulaza u Zamak, konzervirani su na isti

na~in. U ciqu postizawa utiska wenog nekada{weg izgleda delimi~no je obnovqen

portal za ulaz u najniù etaù, i to nadzi|ivawem bo~nih strana i obnovom

praga sa stepenicima, u koje su ugra|ene tako|e hrastove grede. Delimi~no

su obnovqeni prozori u severnom i isto~nom zidu, a konzerviran je i postament

loì{ta.

Sve preduzete konzervatorske intervencije na zdawima unutar Zamka zasnovane

su na rezultatima istraìvawa i detaqnoj arhitektonskoj dokumentaciji

o svim o~uvanim autenti~nim materijalnim podacima o pojedinim elementima

arhitekture, kako bi se istraìva~ima ostavila mogu}nost daqeg

razmatrawa i prou~avawa wihovog nekada{weg arhitektonskog sklopa, a posetiocima

delimi~no do~arao wihov izgled.

296

18 The conducting of these works was done

by the same team of painters-conservators.


building in breccia corner blocks, as well as oak beams, into the threshold and the

steps. Within the scope of the North Building, the remains, that is, the base of the

built fireplace on the upper floor were also conserved.

The West Building, which was partially excavated around the middle of the last

century, was also conserved with minimal additional building of the walls and the

creation of the “crowns.” This primarily refers to its south wall in which the places for

the beams of the inter-floor structure were accentuated and the niche was restored

by building in oak plants in line with the preserved remains. In the north wall,

towards Cistern 3, a window with jambs was restored used tufa pieces, but its subsequent

walling-in was left as an important data that testifies to the fact that the

cistern was created after the construction of this building. The east wall was built

by adding several rows of stone upwards primarily in order to partially restore and

accentuate the entrance the lateral sides of which and the steps for reaching the

lower floor were restored, along with the installation of oak beams.

The walls of the South Building, to the right from the entrance into the Castle,

were conserved in the same manner. With the aim to create an impression of its former

appearance, the portal for the entrance onto its lowest floor was partially restored

by building additions on the lateral sides and by the restoring the threshold with

steps into which we also installed oak beams. The windows in the north and the east

walls were partially restored, while the base of the fireplace was also conserved.

All the conservation interventions undertaken at the buildings within the Castle

were based on the results of the surveying and detailed architectural documentation

on all the preserved authentic material data on individual architecture elements in

order to leave a possibility for the experts to consider and study further their former

architectural assembly, while creating a semblance of their former appearance

for the visitors.

The small steam bath within the Castle, as a unique building in the Serbian medieval

architecture known so far, was not treated in terms of conservation since the

experts believed that additional archaeological and architectural surveying should

take place which would entail at least partial removal of a wall from the subsequently

built Ottoman granary. For this reason it was decided that the remains of this building

should be protected for the purpose of future explorations and thus the Contractor

created a temporary protective structure in the shape of a canopy. Bearing

in mind the significance and the specificity of this building, authentic remains of

the hydraulic mortar were lined and this was done by painters-conservators. 18

After the surveying, the cisterns revealed within the Castle were presented in

the as-is state, with minor interventions and underpinning of the authentic steps

in the case of Cistern 2.

According to the planned dynamics and contractual obligations, the surveying

and preparatory works started for the rehabilitation of the Northeast Rampart and

Tower 8. Pipe scaffolding was assembled within and around Tower 8, as well as partially

along the Northeast Rampart. The preserved upper surfaces of the rampart

and the tower were cleaned from vegetation, earth and loose building material.

Samples of the original mortars were immediately taken for analyses which showed,

like those in the Castle, that this was calcium-carbonate-based mortar, with the volumetric

ratio of the binder and the aggregate of 40% : 60%, in which there was predominance

of quartz, quartzite and shale grains, with the size of up to 4 mm.


Malo parno kupatilo unutar Zamka, kao jedinstvena gra|evina do sada poznata

u srpskoj sredwovekovnoj arhitekturi, nije konzervatorski tretirano,

budi}i da su istraìva~i smatrali da treba izvr{iti dodatna arheolo{ka i

arhitektonska istraìvawa, koja bi podrazumevala makar delimi~no uklawawe

zida poznijeg turskog ambara. Stoga je odlu~eno da se ostaci ove gra|evine za{tite

za budu}a istraìvawa, pa je izvo|a~ radova izveo privremenu za{titnu konstrukciju

u vidu nadstre{nice. Imaju}i u vidu zna~aj i specifi~nosti ovog

objekta, izvr{eno je op{ivawe autenti~nih ostataka hidrauli~nog maltera,

koji su obavili slikari-konzervatori. 18

Otkrivene cisterne unutar Zamka posle istraìvawa prezentovane su u

zate~enom stawu, uz mawe intervencije i podzi|ivawe autenti~nih stepenika

kod Cisterne 2.

Prema planiranoj dinamici i ugovornim obavezama zapo~eta su istraìvawa

i pripremni radovi za sanaciju Severoisto~nog bedema i Kule 8. Montirana

je cevasta skela unutar Kule 8 i oko we, kao i delom uz Severoisto~ni bedem.

O~uvane gorwe povr{ine bedema i kule o~i{}ene su od rastiwa, zemqe i rastresenog

gra|evinskog materijala. Odmah su uzeti uzorci originalnih maltera za

analize, koje su pokazale, kao i one iz Zamka, da je u pitawu kalcijum-karbonatni

malter, zapreminskog odnosa veziva i agregata u razmeri 40% : 60%, u kome

preovladavaju zrna kvarca, kvarcita i {kriqca, krupno}e do 4 mm.

Na platou ispred poterne u Sevroisto~nom bedemu Doweg grada organizovana

je doprema i deponovawe potrebnog materijala za gradwu. Pokazalo se da

je neophodno prvo da se omogu}i bezbedan ulaz kroz poternu, {to je zna~ilo da je

treba u celosti obnoviti. Stoga je obavqeno weno detaqno arhitektonsko snimawe,

a potom i izrada Projekta restauracije poterne, koji je prihvatio projektant.

19 Izvo|a~ radova je obezbedio potreban materijal, te je prema projektu

izvr{eno klesawe blokova bre~e za dovratnike i luk, te potpuna obnova wenog

spoqa{weg portala. Bo~ne strane kapije, odnosno prolaza kroz bedem obnovqene

su lomqenim lokalnim kamenom prema originalnim ostacima. Najve}i problem

je predstavqala obnova svoda nad prolazom kapije, koji je trebalo obnoviti

lomqenim kamenom sa malim dodatkom blokova sige, budu}i da je nad wim

postojala o~uvana masa bedema. Zahvaquju}i znawu i ume{nosti majstora, ovaj

svod je u celosti obnovqen, kao i unutra{we lice poterne.

Istovremeno je detaqno arhitektonski dokumentovana Kula 8, posle obavqenog

uklawawa vegetacije, ru{ewa rastresitih delova i potom sprovedenih

arheolo{kih istraìvawa, kao i ostaci svih otkrivenih gra|evina uz Severoisto~ni

bedem. Izvr{ena je i dopuna dokumentacije u projektu o istom bedemu.

Tokom dvogodi{we kampawe, 2015. i 2016. godine, izvedeni su obimni istraìva~ki

i konzervatorski radovi. Kako bi se stekao uvid u obim izvedenih

radova tokom 258 radnih dana, moramo da istaknemo ~iwenicu da je u tom periodu

istraìvawa izvr{en iskop kamena i zemqe u koli~ini preko 10.000 m³,

montirano je oko 3.900 m² cevaste skele, ozidano 2.030 m³ mase zidova, ugra|eno

oko 270 m 1 ugaonih blokova bre~e, ozidano i isfugovano oko 2.900 m² lica

zidova.

Naàlost, implementator Projekta revitalizacije Novog Brda avgusta 2016.

godine obavestio je izvo|a~a radova da prekine sve daqe aktivnosti na konzervaciji

novobrdskih fortifikacija zbog sumwe da projektovani i odobreni iznos

18 Izvo|ewe ovih radova obavio je

isti tim slikara-konzervatora.

19 Dokumentaciju o zate~enom stawu

i projekat obnove sa~inila je

mr arhitekta G. Simi}, ~lan stru~nog

tima izvo|a~a radova.

298

19 The documentation on the encountered

state and the restoration project were

prepared by architect G. Simi}, M.Sc.,

a member of the Contractor’s expert team.


The supplying and depositing of the material required for the construction was

organised at the plateau in front of the sally port in the northeast rampart of the Lower Town.

It turned out that it was necessary first to ensure a safe entrance through the sally

port, which meant that it had to be restored in its entirety. For this reason, detailed

architectural surveying of the sally port was conducted, followed by the preparation

of the Sally Port Restoration Project, which was accepted by the design engineer. 19 The

Contractor provided the necessary material and in line with the project breccia blocks

were carved for the jambs and the arch, and thus its exterior portal was completely

restored. The lateral sides of the gate, that is, of the passage through the rampart were

restored using broken local stone in line with the original remains. The biggest problem

lay in the restoring of the vault above the gate’s passage which had to be restored

using broken stone with small addition of tufa blocks, since there was a preserved

rampart mass above it. Thanks to the knowledge and the skilfulness of the workmen,

this vault was completely restored, as well as the interior face of the sally port.

At the same time, after the removal of the vegetation, bringing down of loose

sections and conducting of archaeological surveying, Tower 8 was architecturally

documented in detail, as well as the remains of all the revealed buildings next to the

northeast rampart. The supplementing of the documentation in the project on this

rampart was also done.

During the two-year campaign, in 2015 and 2016, extensive surveying and conservation

works were carried out. In order to get an idea of the scope of the works conducted

during 258 days, we have to emphasise the fact that in this period, during the

explorations, over 10000 m³ of stone and earth were excavated, around 3900 m² of

pipe scaffolding were assembled, 2030 m³ of wall mass were built, around 270 m 1 of

breccia corner blocks were installed and around 2900 m² of wall faces were pointed.

Unfortunately, in August 2016, the Implementing Partner of the Novo Brdo

Revitalisation Project informed the Contractor to cease with all further activities on

the conservation of Novo Brdo fortifications on account of a suspicion of whether

the designed and the allocated amount of funds could cover the conducted works.

As there was no guarantee when the works could be continued, the Contractor dismantled

all of the previously installed scaffolding on the northeast rampart, placed

a temporary carpentry door at the sally port, as well as door panels for the entrance

into the Castle, thus conserving the construction site on 31 October 2016.

In the following period, during 2017 and 2018, the Contractor carried out regular

monitoring of the state of the conducted works. Cracks in the faces of the walls

and smaller damages, as well as deformations in the shape of blisters, on the newly

restored wall faces were recorded in October 2018, which the Implementing Partner

of the Project was duly informed about and on this occasion they also received the

relevant photo-documentation. At the end of 2018 and the beginning of 2019, during

winter, there was partial collapsing of wall faces. The obligation of the Contractor

was to remove all damages that occurred in the warranty period and thus in July

2019 the Contractor started with the organisation of the construction site in order

to start with the rehabilitation works, but this was followed by the first cessation of

works. In an attempt of the Contractor to dismantle the loose sections of the wall

faces, in order to safely assemble the scaffolding for the placement of anchors and

for the building of the wall faces, the works were stopped again until the rehabilitation

project has been developed and the permit has been obtained.


sredstava moè da pokrije izvedene radove. Kako nije bilo garancije kada bi se

radovi mogli nastaviti, izvo|a~ je demontirao sve prethodno postavqene skele

na Severoisto~nom bedemu, postavio privremena tesarska vrata u poterni,

kao u vratnice za ulaz u Zamak, ~ime je gradili{te konzervirano 31. oktobra

2016. godine.

U narednom periodu, tokom 2017. i 2018. godine, izvo|a~ je vr{io redovan

uvid u stawe izvedenih radova. Pukotine na licima zidova i mawa o{te}ewa,

kao i deformacije u vidu potklobu~ewa, na novoobnovqenim licima zidova evidentirana

su u oktobru 2018. godine, o ~emu je uredno obave{ten implementator

projekta, kome je dostavqena i odgovaraju}a foto-dokumentacija. Krajem iste

i po~etkom 2019. godine, tokom zime, do{lo je do delimi~nog obru{avawa lica

zidova. Obaveza izvo|a~a radova bila je da otkloni sva nastala o{te}ewa u

garantnom roku, te je u julu 2019. zapo~eo organizaciju gradili{ta, kako bi pristupio

sanacionim radovima, ali je usledila prva obustava radova. U poku{aju

izvo|a~a da demontira rastresite delove lica zidova, kako bi bezbedno montirao

skelu za postavqawe ankera i zidawe lica zidova, radovi su ponovo obustavqeni

do izrade projekta sanacije i dobijawa dozvole.

Sl. 8. Zamak, dvori{te sa

ostacima gra|evina posle

izvedenih konzervatorskih radova

Fig. 8. Castle, the courtyard

with remains of the buildings

after the conducted conservation works

300


Regardless of this complex, sensitive situation which was needlessly spectacularly

presented in the media and eventually turned into a political issue, it was necessary

to consider the possible causes that had led to the collapsing in order to avoid

these in the future. The Contractor’s expert team analysed the damages and it was

established that they were all created in the upper third of the newly restored faces of

tower walls, where the depth of the building to the preserved masses was the largest.

It was also established that the degradation of the ramparts’ and tower walls’ crowns

was minimal, which indirectly showed that the applied hydro-insulation from the

rainfall was effective. Thus, the following factors were seen as the possible causes

of the collapsing:

– composition and strength of the lime mortar, both the one used for the building

of the missing wall masses and for the building of the faces, adjusted to the

character, that is, the type of the monument (fortress);

– application of old technologies in the restoration of the monument and today’s

requests of the Investor as regards the dynamics of the conducting of the

works, as well as

– geographic position and climate conditions in which the monument endures.

The approach to the protection of monument heritage has, at the global level,

changed and evolved over time, both in terms of the methods for the technical protection

and in terms of the application of different technologies. It is a fact that

during the second half of the last century the conservation of the monuments of

culture throughout Europe was done by flexible cement mortar, as well as that partial

and particularly complete restorations of the monuments were done with concrete

in order to clearly separate the restored parts from the original structures,

especially when it comes to fortifications.

Such an approach has directly reflected on the protection of the fortified monument

complexes in Serbia as well. Thus, during the second half of the 20 th century,

flexible cement mortars were mostly applied both for the building of wall masses

and for the building of wall faces, using aggregate coming from quarry, while the

pointing was done using river sand. The pointing was done using the same mortar

prepared with white cement in order to achieve an effect that corresponded to the

preserved remains.

Contrary to that, the generally accepted principle today is that the restoration

or more precisely the conservation of monuments is done only at the encountered

corpus, without partial restoration and using only authentic building material,

which also entails application of lime mortars. This procedure is without any doubt

completely justified, especially when it comes to sacral monuments with remains of

wall paintings, as well as revealed structures at the level of archaeological remains

the walls of which have small thickness.

However, when it comes to medieval fortifications, there is a question of the

effectiveness of applying such a procedure. In most of the cases, at least when it

comes to the territory of medieval Serbia, the fortifications are located at pronounced

and difficult to access places, and therefore by the rule any organisation of works is

made more difficult. They are most often preserved up to the upper zones in which

there are pronounced destruction processes at the level of the finishing platforms of

the towers and wall walks of the ramparts, excluding those that are in archaeological

remains. The devastation of their structure starts with the collapsing of merlons on


Bez obzira na ovako sloènu, osetqivu i bespotrebno spektakularno prikazanu

situaciju u medijima, a potom kona~no i politizovanu, neophodno je bilo

da se razmotre mogu}i uzroci koji su uticali na obru{avawa, kako bi se ona ubudu}e

izbegla. Stru~ni tim izvo|a~a radova analizirao je o{te}ewa i konstatovao

da su sva nastala u gorwoj tre}ini novoobnovqenih lica zidova kula, gde

je dubina zidawa do o~uvanih masa bila najve}a. Tako|e je konstatovano da je

degradacija kruna bedema i zidova kula minimalna, {to posredno ukazuje na to

da je izvedena hidroizolacija od atmosferskih padavina delotvorna. Tako su,

kao mogu}i uzrok ru{ewu, sagledani slede}i faktori, a to su:

– sastav i ja~ina kre~nog maltera, kako za zidawe nedostaju}ih masa zidova,

tako i za zidawe lica, primerenog karakteru, odnosno vrsti spomenika

(utvr|ewe);

– primena starih tehnologija pri restauraciji spomenika i dana{wi zahtevi

investitora u pogledu dinamika izvo|ewa radova, kao i

– geografski poloàj i klimatski uslovi u kojima spomenik opstaje.

Pristup za{titi spomeni~kog nasle|a, na globalnom nivou, s vremenom se

mewao i evoluirao, kako u pogledu metoda tehni~ke za{tite, tako i u pogledu

primene razli~itih tehnologija. îwenica je da je tokom druge polovine pro-

{log veka konzervacija spomenika kulture {irom Evrope vr{ena produ`nim

cementnim malterom, kao i da su delimi~ne, a posebno potpune obnove korpusa

spomenika izvo|ene u betonu, kako bi se jasno razdvojili restaurirani delovi

od originalnih struktura, posebno kada su fortifikacije u pitawu.

Ovakav pristup se neposredno odrazio i na za{titu utvr|enih spomeni~kih

kompleksa u Srbiji. Tako su se tokom druge polovine 20. veka uglavnom koristili

produ`ni cementni malteri, kako za zidawe mase zidova, tako i za zidawe

lica zidova agregatom iz kamenoloma, a fugovawe re~nim peskom. Fugovawa

su vr{ena istim malterom spravqanim sa belim cementom, kako bi se postigao

efekat odgovaraju}i o~uvanim ostacima.

Nasuprot tome, danas je op{teprihva}eno na~elo da se obnova, preciznije

konzervacija spomenika, vr{i samo u zate~enom korpusu, bez delimi~ne restauracije,

i to autenti~nim gradivom, podrazumevaju}i primenu kre~nih maltera.

Ovaj postupak je, bez sumwe, potpuno opravdan, posebno kada su u pitawu sakralni

spomenici sa ostacima ìvopisa, kao i otkrivene strukture na nivou

arheolo{kih ostataka, ~ije su debqine zidova malih veli~ina.

Me|utim, kada su u pitawu sredwovekovne fortifikacije, postavqa se pitawe

delotvornosti primene ovakvog postupka. U najve}em broju slu~ajeva, bar

kada je u pitawu prostor sredwovekovne Srbije, utvr|ewa su locirana na istaknutim

i te{ko pristupa~nim poloàjima, pa je svaka organizacija radova po

pravilu oteàna. Naj~e{}e su o~uvane do gorwih zona, u kojima su izraèni

procesi destrukcije, i to u nivou zavr{nih platformi kula i {etnih staza bedema,

izuzimaju}i one koje su u arheolo{kim ostacima. Devastacija wihovih

struktura po~iwe uru{avawem zubaca na parapetu, {to dovodi do o{te}ewa

{etnih staza, koja omogu}avaju prodor vode u zidove. Potom dolazi do destrukcije

prvo unutra{wih, a potom ubrzano i spoqnih lica zidova. S vremenom se

sa~uvane unutra{we mase zidova smawuju usled mr`wewa, tako da wihova {irina

u gorwim zonama moè da bude od 0,5 do 1 m, dok im u dowim zonama nedostaje

samo lice dubine oko 0,3 m.

302


the parapet, which leads to the damaging of wall walks thus enabling penetration of

water into the walls. Then comes the destruction first of the interior and very soon

after of the exterior faces of the walls. With time, the preserved interior wall masses

are reduced on account of the freezing action and thus their width in the upper zones

may be from 0.5 m to 1.0 m, while in the lower zones only the face is missing with

the depth of around 0.3 m.

Our conservation practice has confirmed the recommendation of structural

engineers which says that when restoring walls in which the depth of the damaging

is significant, it is important to build in steel anchors, arranged in a zigzag sequence,

at the distance of 1.0 m around which beams of smaller dimensions, bearers, are

arranged in order to receive the newly built wall masses, but these are not visible

on the face.

Guided by the acquired experience, in the case of Novo Brdo fortifications we

attempted to enhance the designed technology for the wall restoration using lime

mortar by installing anchors. In doing this, we primarily had in mind the depth of

the building, the time required for the binding of the lime mortar, as well as the

extreme climate conditions in Novo Brdo. Unfortunately, this was not accepted and

the subsequent collapsing only confirmed the justifiability of our proposal.

This experience leads us to a conclusion that in such cases the building of the

wall masses, as well as wall faces, cannot be done with lime mortar, but rather with

flexible mortars, possibly of different strengths, but with a mandatory installation of

anchors. Otherwise, if we strive towards authentic building technique, then wooden

grids-batch boxes would have to be installed, serving as subcrust layers, while leaving

openings for the drying of the mortars. Needless to say, the dynamics of the works

using this technology would be significantly longer, which is something design

engineers and investors, as well as contractors would have to be aware of.

Thus, this time around the fortifications of Novo Brdo were again partially

explored and protected. It remains an open question in which manner the rehabilitation

of the incurred damages would be carried out, as well as the question of the

methodological approach to the protection during future works. We believe that the

modalities and the manner would be found to protect and present in a suitable

manner this most significant town of the Serbian medieval state.


Na{a konzervatorska praksa je potvrdila preporuku stati~ara da pri obnovi

zidova kod kojih je dubina o{te}ewa znatna treba ugra|ivati ankere od ~elika,

postavqenih u cikcak poretku, na rastojawu od 1 m, oko kojih su formirane

grede mawih dimenzija – nosa~i, kako bi prihvatile novoozidane mase

zidova, koje nisu vidqive u licu.

Rukovode}i se ste~enim iskustvima, nastojali smo da se i u slu~aju novobrdskih

fortifikacija projektovana tehnologija obnove zidova kre~nim malterom

unapredi ugradwom ankera. Pri tome smo prvenstveno imali u vidu dubinu

zidawa, potrebno vreme vezivawa kre~nog maltera, kao i ekstremne klimatske

uslove u Novom Brdu. Naàlost, to nije bilo prihva}eno, a poznija obru{avawa

su potvrdila opravdanost na{eg predloga.

Ovo iskustvo nas navodi na zakqu~ak da se u ovakvim slu~ajevima zidawe

masa, kao i lica zidova, ne moè vr{iti kre~nim ve} produ`nim malterima,

mogu}e razli~itih ~vrsto}a, ali uz obaveznu ugradwu ankera. U suprotnom, ukoliko

se teì autenti~noj tehnici gradwe, morali bi se ugra|ivati drveni ro-

{tiqi – santra~i, u funkciji liba`nih slojeva, uz ostavqawe otvora za isu{ivawe

maltera. Naravno da bi dinamika radova ovom tehnologijom bila znatno

duà, ~ega bi morali da budu svesni i projektanti i investitori, kao i izvo|a-

~i radova.

Tako su i ovog puta novobrdske fortifikacije delimi~no istraène i za-

{ti}ene. Ostaje otvoreno pitawe o na~inu sanacije nastalih o{te}ewa, ali i

metodolo{kom pristupu za{titi prilikom budu}ih radova. Verujemo da }e se

na}i modaliteti i na~in da se ovaj najzna~ajniji grad srpske sredwovekovne

dràve na primeren na~in za{titi i prezentuje.

304

Vesna Biki}

Pottery from Novo Brdo –

View at the pottery technology, use and style

in the late Middle Ages

1 ]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1962.

2 Jovanovi} 2004, 136.

3 ]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1962, 177–178.

4 Ibid., 178–180;

Jovanovi} 2004, 68–70, fig. 65.

5 Jovanovi} 2004, fig. 69.

6 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, fig. 101/2, 4.

7 ]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1962, 181.

WHEN CLOSE TO 60 YEARS AGO MIRJANA ]OROVI]-LJUBINKOVI] WROTE A

paper on the Serbian medieval glazed pottery, 1 subtitle Medieval Pottery from Novo

Brdo, it underlined an exceptional significance which it had for the laying down of

the pottery production context in medieval Serbia. This material, found during the

archaeological excavations of the Cathedral (Church of Saint Nicholas), not only

became an example of the urban pottery ware, but also confirmed Novo Brdo as a

place with specific consumer needs reflected precisely in the style of pottery dishes. 2

The most important feature of the pottery from Novo Brdo, as it was established at

the time, was a simple, white painted decoration under a single-coloured glaze of

yellow and, to a lesser degree, green colour (fig. 1/1). 3 More luxurious specimens,

however, had two-coloured and multi-coloured painted motifs, in individual cases

combined with sgraffito templates, and exceptionally also with circular ornaments

done with stamps. 4 Still, in the cluster of the tableware from Novo Brdo, as well as

among the Serbian medieval pottery as a whole, a sgraffito jug with stylised tree of

life in palmettes holds a prominent position (fig. 1/2). 5 By its technological and decorative

style, this jug is similar to the products from the area of the Morava river

valley and the land of the Lazarevi} family at the end of the 14 th century and the

early 15 th century. 6

The preliminary overview – taking into consideration that at the time when the

paper was published the excavations in the areal of the Cathedral had not been finished

– also brings summary data on the forms of the ware. Parallel to the assessment

that “The biggest share of the forms from Novo Brdo ware found so far corresponds

to the familiar forms of the Byzantine and the Byzantinising potteries…,” it was also

shown that the most frequently found were “jugs, jars of different sizes, big and

small pots, flattish and deeper plates, bigger and smaller, and finally by far most often

found were smaller and bigger bowls on a low foot, which are the most characteristic

form of the Byzantine glazed pottery in all of the sites surveyed so far.” 7 Considering

that after the works led by the Institute of Archaeology, the National Museum in

305

Vesna Biki}

Keramika Novog Brda –

pogled na tehnologiju, upotrebu i stil

keramike u kasnom sredyem veku

KADA JE PRE BLIZU 60 GODINA MIRJANA ]OROVI]-QUBINKOVI]

napisala ~lanak o srpskoj sredwovekovnoj gle|osanoj keramici, 1 podnaslov

Sredwovekovna keramika sa Novog Brda potcrtao je vanredni zna~aj koji je ona

imala za postavku proizvodnog konteksta keramike u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji. Taj

materijal, prona|en u toku arheolo{kih iskopavawa katedrale (crkve Svetog

Nikole), ne samo da je postao primer gradskog kerami~kog mobilijara, ve} je posvedo~io

Novo Brdo kao sredinu sa osobenim potro{a~kim potrebama, oli~enim

upravo u stilu kerami~kog posu|a. 2 Najva`niju odliku novobrdske keramike,

kako je tada konstatovano, predstavqa jednostavan, belo slikani ukras ispod

jednobojne gle|i ùte i, u mawoj meri, zelene boje (sl. 1/1). 3 Luksuzniji primerci

pak imali su dvobojno i vi{ebojno slikane motive, u pojedinim slu~ajevima

kombinovane sa zgrafito-predlo{cima, a izuzetno i kru`nim ukrasima izvedenim

pe~atima. 4 Ipak, u skupini novobrdskog trpeznog posu|a, ali i me|u

srpskom sredwovekovnom keramikom u celini, istaknuto mesto zauzima zgrafito-bokal

sa stilizovanim drvetom ìvota u palmetama (sl. 1/2), 5 koji je po

svom tehnolo{kom i dekorativnom stilu blizak proizvodima s kraja 14. ili iz

ranog 15. veka iz doline Morave i oblasti porodice Lazarevi}. 6

Preliminarni pregled – budu}i da u trenutku objave ~lanka arheolo{ka

iskopavawa u arealu katedrale nisu bila okon~ana – donosi i sumarne podatke

o oblicima posu|a. Uz ocenu da „najve}i deo do sada na|enih oblika novobrdskih

posuda odgovara poznatim oblicima vizantijske i vizantiniziraju}e keramike“,

predo~eno je i da se naj~e{}e javqaju „kr~azi, }upovi raznih veli~ina, lonci

i lon~i}i, tawiri pli}i i dubqi, ve}i i mawi, i najzad daleko naj~e{}e

mawe i ve}e zdele na niskoj nozi, koje su najkarakteristi~niji oblik vizantijske

gle|osane keramike na svim dosada{wim ispitanim lokalitetima.“ 7 S obzirom

na to da nakon radova koje su vodili Arheolo{ki institut, Narodni muzej

u Beogradu i Vojni muzej JNA u nekoliko kampawa {ezdesetih i ranih sedamdesetih

godina pro{log veka 8 iskopavawa nisu kasnije obnavqana, a kerami~ki

1 ]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1962.

2 Jovanovi} 2004, 136.

3 ]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1962, 177–178.

4 Isto, 178–180;

Jovanovi} 2004, 68–70, sl. 65.

5 Jovanovi} 2004, sl. 69.

6 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, sl. 101/2, 4.


8 Iskopavawa su obavqena izme|u

1952. i 1962. godine, mawim ili ve}im

intenzitetom i uz povremene prekide,

uz neuspe{an poku{aj obnove radova

i posledwu kampawu 1969. godine,

v. tekst Popovi}, Simi} u ovoj kwizi.

306

8 The excavations were carried out

between 1952 and 1962 with lower or

higher intensity and with occasional

interruptions, along with an unsuccessful

attempt to renew the works and

the last campaign in 1969,

see Popovi}, Simi}, in this book

9 Jovanovi} 2004, 130–136.

10 Damjanovi} et al. 2016.

11 Popovi}, Simi}, in this book.

12 The primary processing and analysis of

the material from the excavations were

made possible for us and were organised

by the head of the archaeological

explorations Marko Popovi}, PhD,

and company “KOTO d.o.o.”, for which

I would like to thank them wholeheartedly

on this occasion. The drawings of the

pottery have been done by

\or|e Milosavljevi} and Maja Milosavljevi},

while they were prepared for printing

by Aleksandra Suboti}. The reconstruction

of the ware has been done by

Neboj{a Bobi}. The illustrations that

follow the text have been adjusted to

the publication in which the appendix

is published (M. Popovi}, G. Simi},

Fortifications of Novo Brdo, Belgrade

2020), while the results of individual

traceological analyses will be the subject of

detailed considerations in a separate paper

where they will be appropriately illustrated.

13 Popovi}, Simi}, in this book.

14 Comp. e.g., Mini} 1979; Biki} 2003a;

Biki} 2017; Pletnüov 2004.


Belgrade and the Military Museum of the JNA (Yugoslav People’s Army) conducted

over several campaigns that took place in the 1960’s and the early 1970’s 8 the excavations

were not renewed later on and that the pottery material was not analysed

in detail, the observations of M. ]orovi}-Ljubinkovi} were repeated in a concise

shape also in the study on Novo Brdo by Vojislav Jovanovi}, published in 2004 in

the collection of papers of the same name dedicated to this important medieval

mining centre. 9 Later, samples from that material were taken for the purpose of

archaeometric analyses which established certain production aspects of the pottery

of Novo Brdo. 10

Systematic archaeological excavations of Novo Brdo were carried out significantly

later on. The project related to the exploration, conservation and partial restoration

of the fortifications of Novo Brdo, carried out in the organisation of the

UNESCO in 2015–2016, focused the attention of the experts onto the interior of

the Castle and, at the same time, onto the surfaces along the northeast rampart, including

Tower 8. 11 The obtained results provided precise stratigraphic frameworks

for the life in the Castle and also for the settlement contexts on the interior side of

the ramparts. All the results obtained in the recent times have enabled the considering

of the pottery from Novo Brdo in a more complete light which in addition to the

chronological and cultural aspects also includes the aspects concerning the technology

and use of the dishes. 12 Because of this, we are able here to present the features

of the pottery starting from the reconstruction of the chaîne opératoire of its creation

and then to point at the specificities of its craft and cultural context in the milieu

of medieval Serbia.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONTEXTS – POTTERY ASSEMBLAGES

Bearing in mind that the stratigraphy of the cultural layers in the areas surveyed

during the latest works in Novo Brdo has been described in detail in the section of the

main body of the book and also illustrated in an appropriate manner by movable

archaeological finds, 13 in this place we are going to repeat briefly the data that are

of importance for the consideration of the pottery dishes as a whole. The life of the

mining and merchant town of Novo Brdo may be seen through two cultural horizons.

The first horizon includes approximately one century of the life in the Castle, from

the first half of the 14 th century to the middle of the following one. Its final level – the

level of the demolition during the Ottoman sieges, stands out clearly by its structure,

but not by its pottery. The most meaningful in this regard is the material from Tower

8 – looked at by stratigraphic levels it provides a stronghold for the differentiation

of the dishes from the two mentioned levels. Along with a different style of painted

decoration, which will be dealt with more later on, in the final level there is a noticeable

presence of green-glazed bowls with a foot and jugs with whistle-like spouts

that characterise Ottoman pottery assemblages in the broader area of the Balkans. 14

On the other hand, traces of a cultural layer from the Ottoman period cannot be

clearly separated stratigraphically from the periods that precede it, while the pottery

finds from that time are sparsely present and only in small fragments.

The pottery dishes finds from the stratigraphic ensembles and structures provide

a rather uniformed picture. The structures within the Castle, viewed through

the pottery assemblages that have been formed above the cisterns and within and

around the buildings, the North and the South ones, are characterised by glazed


Sl. 1. Kerami~ki lonac (1) i bokal (2) otkriveni u toku istraìvawa crkve

Svetog Nikole u Novom Brdu (Narodni muzej u Beogradu, inv. br. 4255 i 4293)

Fig. 1. Ceramic pot (1) and jug (2) discovered during the surveying of the Church of

St. Nicholas in Novo Brdo (National Museum in Belgrade, inv. no. 4255 and 4293)

materijal nije detaqno analiziran, zapaàwa M. ]orovi}-Qubinkovi} u saètom

obliku ponovqena su i u studiji o Novom Brdu Vojislava Jovanovi}a, objavqenoj

2004. godine u istoimenom zborniku radova posve}enih ovom znamenitom

sredwovekovnom rudarskom sredi{tu. 9 Kasnije su iz tog materijala izdvojeni

uzorci za arheometrijska ispitivawa, kojima su utvr|eni pojedini proizvodni

aspekti novobrdske keramike. 10

Sistematska arheolo{ka iskopavawa Novog Brda obnovqena su znatno kasnije.

Projekat istraìvawa, konzervacije i delimi~ne obnove fortifikacija

Novog Brda izveden u organizaciji Uneska 2015. i 2016. godine usmerio je

pa`wu istraìva~a na unutra{wost Zamka i, uz to, na povr{ine du` Severoisto~nog

bedema, ukqu~uju}i Kulu 8. 11 Dobijeni rezultati pruìli su precizne

stratigrafske okvire ìvota u Zamku, a tako|e i za naseobinske kontekste sa

unutra{we strane bedema. Svi rezultati dobijeni u novije vreme omogu}ili su

razmatrawe keramike Novog Brda u potpunijem svetlu, koje pored hronolo{kih

i kulturnih obuhvata aspekte tehnologije i upotrebe posu|a. 12 Zbog toga smo u

mogu}nosti da odlike keramike ovde izloìmo, po~ev od rekonstrukcije sleda

operacija wene izrade, a potom ukaèmo na osobenosti wenog zanatskog i kulturnog

konteksta u okruèwu sredwovekovne Srbije.

ARHEOLO[KI KONTEKSTI – KERAMI^KE CELINE

Imaju}i u vidu da je stratigrafija kulturnih slojeva na povr{inama istraènim

prilikom najnovijih radova na Novom Brdu detaqno opisana u odeqku glavnog

korpusa kwige, tako|e i na odgovaraju}i na~in ilustrovana pokretnim arheolo{kim

nalazima, 13 na ovom mestu bi}e kratko ponovqeni podaci koji su od

9 Jovanovi} 2004, 130–136.


11 Popovi}, Simi}, u ovoj kwizi.

12 Primarna obrada i analiza

materijala sa iskopavawa omogu}ena nam

je i organizovana od strane rukovodioca

arheolo{kih istraìvawa dr Marka

Popovi}a i preduze}a „KOTO d.o.o.“,

na ~emu im i ovom prilikom srda~no

zahvaqujem. Crteè keramike uradili

su \or|e Milosavqevi} i Maja

Milosavqevi}, a za {tampu ih je

priredila Aleksandra Suboti}.

Rekonstrukciju posuda uradio je

Neboj{a Bobi}. Ilustracije koje prate

tekst prilago|ene su publikaciji

u kojoj se prilog objavquje (M. Popovi},

G. Simi}, Utvr|ewa sredwovekovnog grada

Novog Brda, Beograd 2020), dok }e

rezultati pojedinih traseolo{kih

analiza biti predmet detaqnog

razmatrawa u posebnom ~lanku,

gde }e one biti na odgovaraju}i na~in

ilustrovane.

13 Popovi}, Simi}, u ovoj kwizi.

308


dishes, predominantly pots of different sizes with white painted decorations, with

the presence of tableware bowls and jugs. 15 In contrast to these, in the houses surveyed

on the interior side of the north rampart, as well as in Tower 8, along with the

said ware, there were also bread-baking pans and only sporadically large ceramic

baking lids (cooking bells). 16 Outside Tower 8, in the corner which the wall of the

tower creates with the west rampart, an area was discovered where ware were thrown

away as waste. In addition to the fragments of white painted glazed pots, this assemblage

is also important because of the finding of pieces of thick- wall jars among

which it is possible to recognise three dishes. 17 There are similar observations in the

material from the waste dump area which was created on the exterior side between

Towers 5 and 6 in the gap in the rock. 18

15 Popovi}, Simi}, in this book,

fig. 21–22.

16 Ibid., fig. 23–25.

17 Ibid., fig. 26.

18 Ibid., fig. 27.


20 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, 12.

21 Ibid., 106; Biki} 2003b, 199–201.


23 Ibid., 2016, 392–393.

The stated paper analyses the material

from the surveying in the area of

the Cathedral, while among the specimens

there are fragments of pots, bowls and jugs,

as well as one plate.

24 Ibid., 390, figs. 1, 2.

25 See e.g., Kilikoglou, Vekinis, Maniatis

1995, 2959–2965.

TECHNOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS

It was already M. ]orovi}-Ljubinkovi} who confidently presumed that all of the

revealed pottery dishes (except for a small cobalt-blue dish – “pyxida”) had been

made in the areal of Novo Brdo. Along with the finds of unfinished and twisted

ware, as well as traces of spilt glaze on stone, the presumption was justified with the

natural preconditions, that is, the deposits of the ore of manganese, silver, copper,

lead and iron which are necessary for the preparation of dyed glazed pottery, as it

is called by ]orovi}-Ljubinkovi}. 19 It was also important that there had been a mention

of a potter – certain Radule, from one of the nearby villages. 20 All subsequent

authors who have considered the production of the Serbian medieval pottery have

unreservedly accepted the supposition on the local production, corroborating it

with the specificity of Novo Brdo’s pottery assemblage expressed primarily through

the white painted decoration. 21 However, it was only recently that this supposition

has been checked by archaeometric analyses using a sample from the material found

at some point in the areal of the Cathedral. 22 Combined results of the recently conducted

archaeological analyses, with the previously published results of the

archaeometric testing, have enabled on this occasion more detailed considerations

of the technology of the revealed pottery, that is, of the style of Novo Brdo’s pottery

workshop.

The natural surroundings certainly had their impact on the technological

choices of the potters, while also facilitating the access to the raw materials. As the

results of the archaeometric analyses have shown, the raw material from the direct

surroundings of Novo Brdo was used for the ware – this was basically illite clay the

composition of which includes silicon, aluminium, iron and potassium as the main

components, in which the particularly high content of silicon suggests sand (quartz)

as the basic temper. 23 The clay mixture was well kneaded, with an even distribution

of grains, which may be seen well on the cross-sections of the majority of the pots,

jugs, bowls and jars. 24 Also, most of the ware have medium-grained texture, with a

note that it is possible to notice differences within the functional clusters, in terms

that the bowls and most of the glazed pots have a fine-grained body, while some pots,

unglazed and glazed, and jars have somewhat coarser granulation, and quite rarely

even rough texture. The rough texture and thick walls characterise bread-baking pans

in which, almost by the rule, the basic raw material included added coarse mineral

inclusions – pebbles, primarily in order to ensure better resistance to sudden changes

in temperature. 25


zna~aja za razmatrawe kerami~kog posu|a celina. @ivot rudarskog i trgova~kog

grada Novog Brda sagledava se kroz dva kulturna horizonta. Prvi horizont

obuhvata pribli`no jedno stole}e ìvota u Zamku, od prve polovine 14. veka do

sredine narednog stole}a. Wegov zavr{ni nivo – nivo ru{ewa u vreme osmanskih

opsada – jasno se izdvaja po strukturi, ali ne i prema keramici. Najre~itiji

u tom pogledu je materijal iz Kule 8 – sagledan po stratigrafskim nivoima,

on nudi upori{te za razlikovawe posu|a iz dva pomenuta nivoa. Uz druga~iji

stil slikane dekoracije, o ~emu }e daqe biti vi{e re~i, u zavr{nom nivou primetno

je prisustvo zelenogle|osanih zdela na stopi i kr~aga sa izvijenim izlivnicima,

koji odlikuju osmanske kerami~ke celine na {irem prostoru Balkana.

14 S druge strane, tragovi postojawa kulturnog sloja osmanskog doba u

stratigrafskom smislu ne mogu se jasno izdvojiti od onih koji mu prethode,

dok su nalazi keramike iz tog vremena slabo zastupqeni i u sitnim ulomcima.

Nalazi kerami~kog posu|a iz stratigrafskih celina i objekata pruàju

dosta ujedna~enu sliku. Objekte u Zamku, sagledane kroz kerami~ke celine koje

su obrazovane iznad cisterni i unutar gra|evina i oko wih, Severne i Ju`ne,

odlikuje gle|osano posu|e, prete`no lonci razli~itih veli~ina sa belo slikanim

ukrasima, uz prisustvo trpeznih zdela i bokala. 15 Nasuprot wima, u ku}ama

istraènim sa unutra{we strane Severnog bedema, kao i u Kuli 8, uz pomenute

posude, javqaju se i crepuqe, a sasvim sporadi~no i vr{nici. 16 Izvan Kule 8,

u uglu koji zid kule tvori sa Zapadnim bedemom, otkriven je prostor gde su posude

odba~ene kao otpad. Pored ulomaka od belo slikanih gle|osanih lonaca,

ova celina zna~ajna je zbog nalaza delova }upova debelih zidova, me|u kojima

se mogu prepoznati tri posude. 17 Sli~no se zapaà i u materijalu iz otpadnog

prostora koji se obrazovao sa spoqne strane izme|u Kule 5 i Kule 6 u raselini

stene. 18

TEHNOLO[KE ODLIKE

Ve} je M. ]orovi}-Qubinkovi} uvereno pretpostavila da je sve otkriveno kerami~ko

posu|e (izuzev male kobaltnoplave posude – „pikside“) izra|ivano u

arealu Novog Brda. Uz nalaze nedovr{enih i iskrivqenih posuda, kao i tragova

prosute gle|i na kamenu, pretpostavka je obrazloèna prirodnim preduslovima,

tj. leì{tima ruda mangana, srebra, bakra, olova i gvo`|a, neophodnih u

izradi bojene gle|osane keramike, kako je naziva ]orovi}-Qubinkovi}. 19 Od zna-

~aja je bio i pomen grn~ara – izvesnog Radula, iz jednog od obli`wih sela. 20 Svi

kasniji autori koji su razmatrali proizvodwu srpske sredwovekovne keramike

prihvatili su pretpostavku o lokalnoj proizvodwi bezrezervno, potkrepquju-

}i je osobeno{}u novobrdskog kerami~kog asemblaà, iskazanog pre svega kroz

belo slikanu dekoraciju. 21 Me|utim, tek nedavno ova pretpostavka proverena je

arheometrijskim analizama, na uzorku iz materijala svojevremeno otkrivenom

u arealu katedrale. 22 Objediweni rezultati nedavno sprovedenih arheolo{kih

analiza, uz prethodno objavqene rezultate arheometrijskih ispitivawa, omogu-

}ili su ovom prilikom detaqnija razmatrawa tehnologije otkrivene keramike,

odnosno stila novobrdske grn~arske radionice.

Prirodno okruèwe nesumwivo je imalo uticaja na tehnolo{ke izbore grn-

~ara, istovremeno i olak{avalo pristup sirovinama. Kako su pokazali rezultati

arheometrijskih analiza, za posude je kori{}ena sirovina iz neposredne

14 Up. npr. Mini} 1979; Biki} 2003a;

Biki} 2017; Pletnüov 2004.

15 Popovi}, Simi}, u ovoj kwizi,

sl. 21–22.

16 Isto, sl. 23–25.

17 Isto, sl. 26.

18 Isto, sl. 27.


20 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, 12.

21 Isto, 106; Biki} 2003b, 199–201.


310

26 Courty, Roux 1995.

27 Rye 1981,75.

28 Hamer 1985, 81–82.

29 Tomi} 1954, 174–176, fig. 3, 4, 6.

30 Roux 2019, 55.

31 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 65.


The discovered pottery material provides a lot of data on the techniques applied

in the shaping of the ware. Two ways of forming were observed: wheel-thrown

(pots, jars, bowls, different types of jugs and baking lid) and hand-forming, without

the use of a wheel (bread-baking pans). Traces of different procedures in the production

are visible both on the interior and on the exterior surfaces. The forming

on a wheel – this was a fast rotating, foot-powered wheel – leaves a characteristic

mark in the shape of shallow parallel grooves on the interior surface. 26 The pots of

a middle size and different types of jugs were formed from a single piece of clay and

for this reason the walls in their lower zone are thicker in comparison to the upper

section of the receptacle. 27 In addition to this one, other forming techniques were

also used. In the case of bowls and some jugs, on the previously made bottom, the

receptacle was made by coiling. The marks of this technique are suggested by the

damages that are created when the wall and the bottom of the dish are of different

thickness and in the case of a glazed jug also when there is a greater thickness of

the glaze than the one the wall can sustain, which during the process of drying and

firing leads to their uneven expansion and contraction the consequence of which is

partial separation. 28

Big wares were built in several phases, from pieces that would be joined and

dried before the next step in order to achieve stability and strength, that is, in order

for the piece not to collapse under its own weight. According to the positions of the

joints in the remaining parts, it is partially possible to reconstruct the procedure

used in the forming of the jars of Novo Brdo. It is greatly reminiscent of the technique

used until recently to make jars in the Morava river valley (Pomoravlje) and in

Macedonia: a piece of clay is used to form the bottom first and the beginning of the

wall is pulled up, after which the section created like this is left to rest and dry a little;

then another piece of clay is used in order to make a strip the length of which

corresponds to the diameter of the first part, but is thicker than the wall of the first

part. After this these parts are joined and by rotating them on a wheel the wall is

thinned out, flattened and again left to dry a little; the procedure is repeated up to

the rim and in doing this parallel to the adding of the parts at the places of the joints,

strips are attached to the exterior side by gently pressing them with fingers or they

are decorated by a wooden tool. 29 The rim is fixed by previously thinning the clay

out with fingers in order to make sure that it would adhere better to the receptacle,

that is, to the neck of the vessel. The ethnographic data suggests that the points of

the joints may have been additionally covered with a clay solution which would

strengthen the places of attachment and prevent separation of the integral parts

during the drying. 30

As for the lids, which predominantly appear in two related conical types with a

broad rim at the base (fig. 4/2, 15), it is presumed that they were made using a mould.

Namely, a piece of clay was formed manually in line with the mould and then using

the rotation of the wheel the thickness of the wall was made even, while the surface

was flattened as the finishing touch. 31 On the interior of the lids from Novo Brdo

there are visible marks in the shape of shallow oblique uneven sections which correspond

to the motion of a mild twisting when taking the piece off the mould.

In addition to the decorative strips applied on the jars, the ware of Novo Brdo

have been predominantly decorated by incising or by painting which was done on

dried out ware. The incisions were done with a continuous or an interrupted motion,


okoline Novog Brda – u osnovi to je ilitska glina, koja u sastavu ima silicijum,

aluminijum, gvo`|e i kalijum kao glavne komponente, pri ~emu naro~ito visok

sadràj silicijuma ukazuje na pesak (kvarc) kao osnovnu primesu. 23 Smesa je bila

dobro ume{ena, sa ravnomernim rasporedom zrna, {to se dobro vidi na prelomima

velike ve}ine lonaca, bokala, zdela, }upova. 24 Tako|e ve}ina posuda je

sredwe fakture, s tim da se unutar funkcionalnih skupina prime}uju razlike,

utoliko {to zdele i ve}ina gle|osanih lonaca imaju finiju fakturu, dok pojedini

lonci, negle|osani i gle|osani, i }upovi imaju ne{to krupniju granulaciju,

sasvim retko i grubu fakturu. Gruba faktura i debeli zidovi odlikuju

crepuqe, kod kojih su, gotovo po pravilu, u osnovnu sirovinu dodate krupne mineralne

primese – kamen~i}i, pre svega radi postizawa boqe otpornosti na

nagle promene temperature. 25

Otkriveni kerami~ki materijal nudi dosta podataka o tehnikama oblikovawa

posuda. Uo~ena su dva na~ina oblikovawa: na vitlu (lonci, }upovi, zdele,

kr~azi, bokali i vr{nik) i bez upotrebe vitla (crepuqe). Tragovi pojedinih

postupaka u izradi vidqivi su kako na unutra{wim, tako i na spoqa{wim povr{inama.

Oblikovawe na vitlu – re~ je o brzorotiraju}em, no`nom vitlu –

ostavqa karakteristi~an trag u vidu plitkih paralelnih `lebova na unutra-

{woj povr{ini. 26 Lonci sredwe veli~ine, bokali i kr~azi oblikovani su iz

jednog komada gline, zbog toga su kod wih zidovi u dowoj zoni debqi u odnosu

na gorwi deo recipijenta. 27 Pored ove, praktikovane su i druge tehnike oblikovawa.

Kod zdela i pojedinih bokala/kr~aga na prethodno napravqeno dno u

vidu prstena zidan je recipijent. Na tragove te tehnike ukazuju o{te}ewa koja

nastaju onda kada je zid posude i dno razli~ite debqine, a u slu~aju gle|osanog

kr~aga i ve}a debqina gle|i od one koju zid moè da podrì, {to je u procesu

su{ewa i pe~ewa dovelo do wihovog nejednakog {irewa i skupqawa, a za posledicu

imalo delimi~no razdvajawe. 28

Velike posude gra|ene su u nekoliko faza, iz delova koji su me|usobno spajani

i prosu{eni pre narednog koraka, da bi se postigla stabilnost i ~vrsto}a,

tj. da se posuda ne bi uru{ila pod sopstvenom teìnom. Prema poloàjima spojeva

na preostalim delovima, moè se donekle rekonstruisati postupak oblikovawa

novobrdskih }upova. On umnogome podse}a na tehniku kojom su }upovi

do nedavno pravqeni u Pomoravqu i Makedoniji: iz komada gline prvo se oblikuje

dno i izvla~i po~etak zida, zatim se tako dovr{en deo ostavqa da se odmori,

prosu{i; potom se iz drugog komada gline razvla~i traka duìne koja odgovara

pre~niku prvog dela, ali debqa od zida prvog dela, i potom se ti delovi

spajaju, a rotirawem na vitlu zid se istawi i poravna i ponovo ostavi da se prosu{i;

postupak se ponavqa do oboda, pri ~emu se uporedo sa dodavawem delova na

mestima spoja sa spoqne strane lepe trake, koje se blago pritiskaju prstima ili

ukra{avaju drvenom alatkom. 29 Obod je nalepqen tako {to je glina prethodno

istawena prstima, da bi lak{e priawala za recipijent, odnosno vrat posude.

Etnografski podaci upu}uju na to da su mesta spoja mogla biti dodatno lepqena

rastvorom gline, koji bi oja~ao mesta pripajawa i predupredio razdvajawe

delova u toku su{ewa. 30

Za poklopce, koji se prete`no javqaju u dva bliska koni~na tipa sa {irokim

obru~em u bazi (sl. 4/2, 15), pretpostavqa se da su ra|eni uz pomo} kalupa.

Naime, komad gline je oblikovan prema kalupu rukama, potom je uz pomo}

23 Isto, 392–393. U navedenom radu

analiziran je materijal sa istraìvawa

na prostoru katedrale, a me|u uzorcima

su ulomci lonaca, zdela, kr~aga, kao

i jedan tawir.

24 Isto, 390, sl. 1, 2.

25 V. npr. Kilikoglou, Vekinis, Maniatis 1995,

2959–2965.

26 Courty, Roux 1995.

27 Rye 1981, 75.

28 Hamer 1985, 81–82.

29 Tomi} 1954, 174–176, sl. 3, 4, 6.

30 Roux 2019, 55.

312


Sl. 2. Belo slikani lonci i lon~i} sa urezima (dokumentacija Arheolo{kog instituta)

Fig. 2. White-painted pots and a small pot with incisions (documentation of the Institute of Archaeology)


rotacije vitla debqina zida ujedna~ena, a povr{ina zavr{no izravnata. 31 U unutra{wosti

novobrdskih poklopaca vidqivi su tragovi u vidu plitkih kosih neravnina,

koji odgovaraju pokretu blagog uvrtawa prilikom skidawa s kalupa.

Pored apliciranih ukrasnih traka na }upovima, novobrdske posude ukra-

{ene su prete`no urezivawem i slikawem, koje je izvo|eno na prosu{enim posudama.

Urezi su izvedeni kontinuiranim ili prekinutim pokretom, {tapi-

}em ili nekom vrstom ~e{qa, u zavisnosti od zami{qenog dizajna. Prilikom

urezivawa linearnih predloàka na rubovima ureza ostaje vi{ak gline, koji

se u zavr{noj obradi uklawa „mekom“ alatkom, recimo, komadom tkanine. 32 Na

pojedinim kr~azima dr{ke su ukra{ene jednom vrstom `lebova, koji su naro-

~ito efektni kada se komad pripremqene duìne blago uvije. Uz to, ~esto se

javqaju aplicirane bobice, kao i ubodi, naro~ito na ve}im posudama.

U materijalu koji je bio predmet na{eg prou~avawa preovla|uje, kako je pomenuto,

belo slikana i gle|osana keramika, i to lonci i, znatno mawe, kr~azi.

Slikawe se po pravilu izvodilo direktno na prosu{enoj povr{ini sudova, a

pre nano{ewa gle|i. Re~ je o glini (u vidu praha) razmu}enoj u vodi, koja se naj-

~e{}e naziva premazom, mada se koristi i engleska re~ slip (slip). 33 Bela boja,

po svoj prilici, poti~e od kaolinita, mada se moè dobiti i od smrvqenih

kostiju. 34 Budu}i da se nanosi pre pe~ewa, slip je naj~e{}e u boji razli~itoj

od tela posude, tako i na novobrdskim posudama – belo slikani ukras izveden

na crvenoj pozadini stvara efektan kontrast, koji dobija na puno}i nakon {to

ga prekrije bledoùta glazura (sl. 2). Druga vrsta primene, koja podrazumeva

premazivawe cele povr{ine, javqa se kod zdela, gde su na beloj pozadini motivi

slikani u zelenoj i braon boji kao jedini ukras ili kombinovani sa urezanim

(zgrafito) motivima. Da bi slip u potpunosti prionuo na povr{inu suda,

potrebno je da posuda bude dobro osu{ena, {to je ina~e preduslov za

uspe{no pe~ewe i priawawe gle|i. U ranijim stole}ima primene belo slikane

dekoracije, posuda je pe~ena dva puta, prvi put sa slipom, a drugi put nakon

nano{ewa gle|i. 35 Pretpostavqamo da su istu praksu sledili i novobrdski

grn~ari, ali to ostaje da se utvrdi kada se odabrani uzorci budu podvrgli

SEM–EDS analizi (skenirawe elektronskim mikroskopom sa energo-disperzivnom

spektrometrijom).

Zavr{nu obradu povr{ine na ve}ini novobrdskog kerami~kog posu|a predstavqa

gle|osawe. Re~ je o olovnoj gle|i, koja je prozirna, ùte i, re|e, zelene

boje, od gvo`|a i bakra kao glavnih koloranata. 36 Kod lonaca sredwe veli~ine i

malih, kao i posuda za dràwe te~nosti, sloj gle|i je tanak i pokriva posude do

razli~ite visine, prekrivaju}i slikani ukras delimi~no ili potpuno, dok je

unutra{wost gle|osana samo u zoni oboda. Kod otvorenih formi je suprotno –

zdele i tawiri imaju gle|osanu unutra{wost, spoqa{wost uglavnom do sredine

recipijenta. Veliki lonci (}upovi) gotovo su po pravilu gle|osani u celini

spoqa i iznutra. Izuzetno je unutra{wost za{ti}ena belim premazom.

O postavqawu posuda prilikom pe~ewa ima vrlo malo podataka. Naro~ito

je to zna~ajno u slu~aju gle|osanih posuda, budu}i da prilikom pe~ewa mo-

è do}i do priawawa jedne uz drugu. Zbog toga se prilikom re|awa otvorenih

gle|osanih formi koriste trokraki kerami~ki podupira~i (tripodi), koji na

unutra{woj povr{ini ostavqaju male, ali neuredne, okrugle tragove, 37 kao

{to se vidi na delu jedne gle|osane zdele iz Novog Brda. Razdvajawe gle|osanih


32 Roux 2019, 107.

33 Rye 1981, 41.

34 Roux 2019, 103.

35 Morgan 1942, 95; Ting et al. 2019, 7–8.

36 Damjanovi} et al. 2016, 396.

37 Papadopoulos 1992, 208–209, fig. 3.

314

32 Roux 2019, 107.

33 Rye 1981, 41.

34 Roux 2019, 103.

35 Morgan 1942, 95;

Ting et al. 2019, 7–8.


37 Papadopoulos 1992, 208–209, fig. 3.


using a stick or some kind of a comb, depending on the imagined design. When incising

linear templates in, slight surplus of clay remains on the edges of the incision

and it is removed in the final finishing using a “soft” tool, for instance, a piece of

cloth. 32 In the case of some jugs, the handles were decorated with a type of grooves

that are particularly effective when the piece of the prepared length is mildly bent.

Along with this, there are often beads, as well as indentations, applied especially on

bigger ware.

As it has been mentioned, in the material that was the subject of our study there

is predominance of white painted and glazed pottery, mostly cooking pots and, significantly

less, jugs. The painting was, by the rule, done directly on the slightly dried

surface of the ware before the application of the glaze. This was (powdered) clay dissolved

in water which is most often called coating, although word “slip” is also used. 33

The white most likely comes from kaolinite, although it may also be made of crushed

bones. 34 Taking into consideration that it is applied before the firing, the slip is

most often in a colour that differs from that of the body of the dish and this is so

also on the ware of Novo Brdo – white painted decoration done against the red background

creates an effective contrast which gains in its fullness after being covered

by pale yellow glaze (fig. 2). Another type of application, which entailed coating of

the entire surface, appears in the case of bowls where against the white background

the motifs were painted in green and brown colour as the only decoration or they

were combined with incised (sgraffito) motifs. In order for the slip to adhere fully to

the surface of the dish it is necessary for the dish to be well dried, which is anyway

the precondition for successful firing and the adherence of the glaze. In the earlier

centuries when the white painted decoration was applied, the dish was fired twice,

first time with the slip and the second time after the application of the glaze. 35 We

presume that the same practice was also followed by the potters from Novo Brdo,

but this remains to be ascertained when the selected specimens are subjected to the

SEM–EDS (scanning electron microscopy with energy-dispersive spectrometry)

analysis.

The finishing of the surface on most of the pottery ware from Novo Brdo consists

of the glazing. This was done by using lead-based glaze which is transparent, of

yellow and more rarely green colour, with iron and copper as the main colourants. 36

In the case of medium- and small-sized pots, as well as ware used for liquids, the glaze

layer is thin and it covers the ware up to a different height covering the painted decoration

partially or completely, while the interior is glazed only in the zone of the

rim. In the case of the open forms, the situation is opposite – the bowls and plates

have glazed interior, while the exterior is glazed mostly down to the middle of the

receptacle. Large pots (jars) almost by the rule are glazed in their entirety both on

the outside and on the inside. As a matter of exception the interior is protected by

a white coating.

There is very little data on the arrangement of the ware during the firing. This

is particularly important in the case of glazed ware, since they may get attached one

to the other during the firing. For this reason, during the arrangement of open glazed

forms, tripod ceramic props are used which on the interior surface leave small, but

disorderly circular marks, 37 as may be seen in the example of a glazed bowl from

Novo Brdo. Distancing of glazed ware during the firing using tripods was adopted

by the Byzantine potters in the period between the 12 th and the 13 th centuries,


Sl. 3. Crepuqa iz Ku}e 2

(dokumentacija Arheolo{kog

instituta)

Fig. 3. Bread-baking pan from House 2

(documentation of the Institute

of Archaeology)

posuda u toku pe~ewa pomo}u tripoda usvojili su vizantijski grn~ari na prelazu

12. u 13. vek, prvi put izra|uju}i osobenu skupinu kasne zgrafito-keramike

tzv. ceuksipos posude (Zeuxippos ware). 38 Poreklo ove tehnike je u Kini, gde

je osmi{qena u periodu Tri carstva (220–265), a zahvaquju}i islamskim grn-

~arima, preneta je u Evropu, u oblasti unutar vizantijskog zanatskog kruga, time

i u Srbiju. 39

Boja novobrdske keramike pruà nam uvid u uslove i reìm pe~ewa posuda.

U materijalu sa novijih iskopavawa velika ve}ina gle|osanih lonaca i

zdela ima povr{inu ujedna~ene crvene boje, koja ukazuje na pe~ewe u oksidacionoj

atmosferi. Oni tako|e imaju istu boju na prelomu. Sasvim retko, jezgro je

sivo, po svoj prilici zbog postojawa organskih primesa uz nepotpunu oksidaciju

ugqenika. 40 Naime, eksperimenti su pokazali da je tzv. sendvi~ struktura

tipi~na za pe~ewe u pe}ima posuda ra|enih od gline bogate organskim materijama,

gde se uprkos oksidacionoj atmosferi odvija spora difuzija kiseonika,

{to zapravo stvara redukcione uslove. 41 Temperatura pe~ewa je procewena

u opsegu izme|u 850°S i 950°S. 42 Ve}i lonci i, naro~ito, }upovi, bili gle|osani

ili ne, srazmerno ~esto imaju na prelomu sivo jezgro, a sli~na pojava je

uo~ena, kako smo videli, i na pojedinim kr~azima, {to moè biti posledica

naglog hla|ewa nakon uklawawa iz pe}i. 43 Na reìm pe~ewa, me|utim, najpre

mogu da ukaù promene koje se manifestuju na gotovim posudama. Primera radi,

na jednom }upu primetne su posledice neprilago|eno visoke temperature

pe~ewa, poput quspawa, u ovom slu~aju gle|i, dok povr{ina posude postaje hrapava.

Quspawe ve}ih povr{ina, koje je prime}eno na jednom velikom }upu, po

svoj prilici posledica je nedovoqnog isparavawa vode u procesu su{ewa i pe-

~ewa posude, koje se manifestuje i kasnije u toku upotrebe, a naro~ito prilikom

duèg skladi{tewa vode.

38 Megaw 1968, 69, 87;

Papanikola Bakirtzi, Dauterman Maguire,

Maguire 1992, 26, figs. 16–17;

Inanan 2008, 121, fig. 3.

39 Papadopoulos 1992, 208–209;

Megaw, Jones 1983, 237, 243–244,

pl. 29/1, 2; Dimitrov 1960, 114, obr. 4;

Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, 101, sl. 120.

40 Rye 1981, 116.

41 Maritan et al. 2006


43 Rye 1981, 116.

316

38 Megaw 1968, 69, 87;

Papanikola Bakirtzi, Dauterman Maguire,

Maguire 1992, 26, figs. 16–17;

Inanan 2008, 121, fig. 3.

39 Papadopoulos 1992, 208–209; Megaw,

Jones 1983, 237, 243–244, pl. 29/1, 2;

Dimitrov 1960, 114, obr. 4;

Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, 101, fig. 120.

40 Rye 1981, 116.

41 Maritan et al. 2006


43 Rye 1981, 116.

44 Petrovi} 1936, 21–23;

Filipovi} 1951; Tomi} 1983, 18–23,

76–78, 239–241. In the recent times,

ethno-archaeological explorations

have started in the area of east and

south Serbia, see \or|evi} 2011;

Djordjevi}, Nikolov 2011.

45 Filipovi} 1951, 39–44.

46 Ibid., 15.

47 Ibid., 59–60.

48 \or|evi} 2011, 14–15.

49 Filipovi} 1951, 65–66.

50 [ari}, Biki}, Eri} 2018, 757.


making for the first time a particular group of the late sgraffito pottery, the so-called

Zeuxippos ware. 38 The origin of this technique is in China, where it was conceived

in the period of the Three Kingdoms (220–265), and thanks to the Islamic potters

it was transferred to Europe, to the areas within the Byzantine artisanry circle, and

thus to Serbia as well. 39

The colour of Novo Brdo’s pottery provides us with an insight into the conditions

and the regime of the firing of the ware. In the material from the latest digs,

the vast majority of the glazed pots and bowls have the surface of uniformed red

colour, which suggests firing in an oxidising atmosphere. They also have the same

colour at the cross-section. Quite rarely, the core is gray, most likely because of the

presence of organic inclusions with an incomplete oxidation of carbon. 40 Namely,

experiments have shown that the so-called sandwich structure is typical of the firing

in furnaces of the ware made of clay rich in organic matters where despite the oxidising

atmosphere there is slow oxygen diffusion which actually creates reduction

conditions. 41 The temperature of the firing has been assessed to have gone within

the scope of 850°C and 950°C. 42 Bigger pots and, especially, jars, whether glazed or

not, comparatively often have gray core at the cross-section, while a similar occurrence

was noticed, as we have seen, in some jugs as well, which may be a consequence

of abrupt cooling after the removal from the kiln. 43 The firing regime, however, can

primarily be suggested by the changes that manifest on the finished ware. For example,

there are visible consequences of inappropriately high firing temperature on

one jar, such as spalling of the glaze in this case, while the surface of the dish remains

coarse. The spalling of larger surfaces, which has been noticed on one large jar, is

most likely a consequence of insufficient evaporation of water during the drying

process and the firing of the dish, which is also manifested later during the use and

in particular during the longer keeping of water in the vessel.

On the other hand, the production of bread-baking pans follows the traditional

frameworks for this type of ware (fig. 3). The process of the manufacture of breadbaking

pans has been dealt with in ethnographic literature which explains the characteristics

of the manufacturing process in some of the regions of Serbia and the

Balkans. 44 This is basically about the clay to which mineral inclusions are always

added – sand, pebbles and in some areas chaff, too, in order for the dish to withstand

the heating and moving on the hearth. 45 As described by M. Filipovi}, breadbaking

pan is “a shallow, very simple, bulky and heavy earthenware: it has a thick

round bottom and a low and thick wreath, also done roughly.” 46 It is formed by

making a thick bottom in the form of a flatbread out of a single piece of clay first

and then a rim, a wreath, is manually pulled out of that mass, while all the time

during the modelling the hands are wetted in order to maintain the elasticity, while

polishing the surface. 47 Quite exceptionally, the rim is shaped separately and then

pushed into the bottom. 48 The ethnographic explorations have shown that after the

drying the bread-baking pans are fired immediately or they are left out until their

first use when the firing is done at the same time. 49 The archaeometric surveying

of the archaeological finds of manually formed bread-baking pans conducted so far

on the specimens from the medieval contexts in Studenica Monastery suggest that

the firing of bread-baking pans was done at the temperature up to 600–700°C 50 and

likewise we may presume that this was the case for the specimens from Novo Brdo

that have the approximate chronology.


S druge strane, izrada crepuqa sledi tradicionalne okvire za ovu vrstu

posuda (sl. 3). O procesu izrade crepuqa govori etnografska literatura, koja

obja{wava osobenosti proizvodnog procesa u pojedinim regionima Srbije i

Balkana. 44 U osnovi re~ je o glini, u koju se uvek dodaju mineralne primese –

pesak, kamen~i}i, u pojedinim krajevima i pleva, da bi posuda izdràla àrewe

i pomerawe na ogwi{tu. 45 Crepuqa je, kako opisuje M. Filipovi}, „plitak,

veoma jednostavan, glomazan i teàk sud od zemqe: ima debelo okruglo dno, nizak

a debeo venac, tako|e grubo ra|en.“ 46 Oblikuje se tako {to se iz jednog komada

glinene smese prvo napravi debelo dno u vidu poga~e, a potom se rukama

iz te mase izvla~i rub, venac, pri ~emu se za sve vreme modelovawa ruke kvase

da bi se odràla elasti~nost, a povr{ina ugla~ala. 47 Sasvim izuzetno, venac

je oblikovan zasebno i utiskivan u dno. 48 Etnografska istraìvawa pokazala

su da se nakon su{ewa crepuqe odmah peku ili stoje sve do prve upotrebe, kada

se obavqa i pe~ewe. 49 Do sada sprovedena arheometrijska ispitivawa arheolo-

{kih nalaza rukom oblikovanih crepuqa na uzorcima iz sredwovekovnih konteksta

u manastiru Studenici, sugeri{u da je pe~ewe crepuqa obavqeno na temperaturi

do 600–700°S, 50 pa sli~no moèmo pretpostaviti i za novobrdske

primerke, koji su pribli`ne hronologije.

OBLIK I FUNKCIJA – NAÎNI UPOTREBE POSU\A

Sastav gline, vrsta i koli~ina primesa, tako|e i procedura pe~ewa, odre|uju

termi~ka svojstva keramike i wenu otpornost na razli~ite aktivnosti kako

prilikom izrade, tako i u toku wene upotrebe. 51 To se naro~ito odnosi na ogwi-

{no posu|e, koje je izloèno ne samo termi~kim ve} i razli~itim mehani~kim

pritiscima. S jedne strane, posude moraju biti prilago|ene izlagawu visokim

temperaturama, odnosno hla|ewu nakon skidawa s vatre, u protivnom }e

do}i do pucawa i lomqewa posuda, a istovremeno moraju provoditi toplotu, da

bi se sadràj brè zagrejao, a sporije hladio. 52 S druge strane, mora se predvideti

~vrsto}a, da bi posuda mogla da primi odre|enu koli~inu sadràja,

ali i da bi izdràla eventualne udare i habawe prilikom rukovawa i povla-

~ewa po podlozi. 53 Poroznost zidova je veoma va`na osobina za posu|e nameweno

dràwu te~nih sadràja, zbog visoke sposobnosti hla|ewa, ali istovremeno

nije pogodna za dugotrajno skladi{tewe jer }e zidovi vremenom propu{tati

te~nost. Za{titni sloj glazure, koji je prisutan na ve}ini novobrdskih posuda,

pove}ao je tvrdo}u posude, smawio wenu poroznost i predstavqao je va`nu

dodatnu za{titu od mehani~kih o{te}ewa. 54 Na u~inkovitost posuda uti~e

forma i, naro~ito, debqina zidova. Uz oblik i veli~inu, o funkciji posude

dosta govore i druge odlike, npr., otvorenost recipijenta, postojawe izlivnika,

stabilnost. 55 Tako|e posude tawih zidova boqe provode toplotu i otpornije

su na promene temperature, dok one debqih zidova pruàju boqu za{titu i

mogu}nost duèg ~uvawa sadràja. 56

U kerami~kom materijalu sa novijih arheolo{kih istraìvawa Novog Brda

uo~ene su tri funkcionalne klase posuda: za kuvawe (i pe~ewe), za skladi{tewe

i za posluìvawe. U okviru svake od wih javqa se mawi broj oblika (tipova)

i dimenzionih klasa. Sagledana u aspektu radnih karakteristika, keramika

Novog Brda u ve}ini slu~ajeva podràva povezanost forme i funkcije posuda.

O konkretnoj upotrebi pojedinih formi i tipova posuda svedo~e promene na

44 Petrovi} 1936, 21–23;

Filipovi} 1951; Tomi} 1983, 18–23,

76–78, 239–241. U novije vreme zapo~eta

su etnoarheolo{ka istraìvawa

na prostoru isto~ne i ju`ne Srbije,

v. \or|evi} 2011; Djordjevi}, Nikolov 2011.

45 Filipovi} 1951, 39–44.

46 Isto, 15.

47 Isto, 59–60.

48 \or|evi} 2011, 14–15.

49 Filipovi} 1951, 65–66.

50 [ari}, Biki}, Eri} 2018, 757.

51 Schiffer, Skibo 1987, 599.

52 Isto, 604–605; Skibo 2013, 40.

53 Skibo 2013, 41.

54 Biki} 2015, 176–177.

55 Linton 1944.

56 Braun 1983; Smith 1985, 273.

318

51 Schiffer, Skibo 1987, 599.

52 Ibid., 604–605;

Skibo 2013, 40.

53 Skibo 2013, 41.

54 Biki} 2015, 176–177.

55 Linton 1944.

56 Braun 1983; Smith 1985, 273.

57 E.g. Skibo 1992; Skibo 2013.


SHAPE AND FUNCTION – THE WAYS TO USE THE WARE

The composition of the clay, the type and the quantity of the inclusions, as well as

the firing procedure determine the thermal features of pottery and its resistance to

different activities both during its creation and during its use. 51 This refers in particular

to the hearth dishes which are exposed not only to thermal pressures, but

also to different mechanical ones. On the one hand, the ware must be adjusted to

the exposure to high temperatures and to the cooling after the removal from the

fire, because otherwise there will be cracking and breaking of the ware, while at the

same time they must conduct heat in order for the contents to be heated more

quickly and cooled more slowly. 52 On the other hand, its strength needs to be foreseen

in order for the dish to be able to receive a certain quantity of contents, but also

to sustain possible impacts and wear and tear during handling and pulling across a

base. 53 The porosity of the walls is also a very important feature for the ware

intended for holding liquid contents because of the high cooling capability, while at

the same time it is not suitable for durable storing since the walls will leak the liquid

over time. The protective glaze layer, which is present in the case of most of the ware

from Novo Brdo, increased the hardness of the dish, reduced its porosity and constituted

an important additional protection against mechanical damages. 54 The performance

of ware is influenced by its shape and, especially, by the thickness of the

walls. Along with the shape and the size, the function of a dish is also reflected in

its other features, for instance, the openness of the receptacle, if there is a lip or not

and its stability. 55 Also, the ware with thinner walls conducts heat better and they

are more resistant to temperature changes, while those with thicker walls provide a

better protection and a possibility to store the contents for longer. 56

In the pottery material from the more recent archaeological surveying of Novo

Brdo, three functional classes of ware have been observed: for cooking (and baking),

for storing and for serving. Within the scope of each one of them there is a smaller

number of shapes (the types) and of dimension classes. If viewed in the aspect of

working characteristics, in most of the cases the pottery of Novo Brdo supports the

connectedness between the form and the function of the ware. The concrete use of

different forms and types of ware is testified to by the changes in their surfaces which

are a consequence of different mechanical, chemical and/ or thermal processes. 57

The fact that the pottery ware of Novo Brdo is mostly glazed significantly enhances

the characteristics of the ware, primarily their hardness and resistance to mechanical

damages. Because of this, the markings that are created during the use are less

present and there are fewer of them overall than what the case would be were these

unglazed ware.

Among the cooking ware, and that is the most numerous group of pottery, there

is predominance of pots, in addition to which there are also bread-baking pans and

large baking lids, although these last mentioned ones are found only sporadically.

The greatest impression is certainly made by an exceptional quantity of glazed pots

(fig. 4). Moreover, only a dozen unglazed pots have been noticed in the new material

and among them only one smaller, while the others have the usual medium size.

Unfortunately, on the basis of the discovered fragments for only a couple of them

it was possible to establish the form and the whole profile (fig. 2/4 and 4/16). Along

with the sooting clouds on the exterior surface of the middle-sized pots (fig. 2), different

profile (vessel shape) also suggests they used to be used for the preparation


Sl. 4. Pregled oblika lonaca (dokumentacija Arheolo{kog instituta)

Fig. 4. Overview of the pot shapes (documentation of the Institute of Archaeology)

320

58 Eerkens 2005, 97.

59 Ibid., 97;

Henrickson and McDonald 1983, 631.


of different dishes. Namely, ethno-archaeological explorations have shown that the

shape of pots may be an indicator of the cooking technique and therefore a pot with

a larger diameter of the orifice and a wide, spherical receptacle (fig. 4/1) would be

suitable for quick cooking, while another one (fig. 4/7) on account of its narrower

orifice and a short neck could have been used for longer cooking on slow heat, since

the existence of the neck reduces the evaporation of liquid from the dish. 58 Unfortunately,

among the other fragments there were no indicative ones that would allow

the establishing of the whole profile.

The glazed pots are grouped into several shapes (types), with differences in the

width of the orifice and the curve of the receptacle, as well as in the moulding of

the rim, but almost by the rule always on a stable, flat and wide bottom. These are

basically spherical and ovaloid receptacles which could, from the aspect of proportions,

be marked also as relatively shallow. Only as a matter of exception, the pots are

elongatedly oval, deep, with the point of balance positioned high (fig. 4/10, 16),

which makes them less stable in comparison to the shallower spherical specimens

and impacts the accessibility of the contents during the cooking. A certain manner

of cooking is also suggested by the appearance of the opening and thus the rims on

the pots of Novo Brdo were made in several ways, as open, wide and bandlike (fig.

4/5, 9, 10, 14, 16), short upright (fig. 4/15) and mildly arcuate (fig. 4/4, 6–8). One of

the important features of the pots of Novo Brdo are their handles – usually they had

one wide bandlike handle or two, placed one close to the other, for easier pouring

over or pouring out of the contents (fig. 2/1 and 4/10). The handles are, almost by

the rule, very decorative, whether this is in the form of a painted decoration fit into

the design of the dish or sequences of piercings, more rarely cuts, which are often the

only decoration on larger glazed pots and jars (fig. 6/1).

As it has been mentioned earlier, the thickness of the wall has an impact on the

function of the dish. When it comes to the ware intended for cooking, this plays a

significant role, since it talks about conductivity – thin walls better transfer heat, they

are more suitable for higher cooking temperatures, while thicker walls in addition

to providing the hardness to the dish are also suitable for cooking. 59 On the analysed

sample, different thicknesses of the walls were noticed among the pots, but we could

not establish any regularity in the relation between the thickness of the wall and a

certain type of dish. In most of the cases, the thickness of the wall of the ware is

3–4 mm, while the ware with exceptionally thin walls, around 2 mm, appears quite

sporadically (fig. 4/9, 16).

On the glazed pots there are characteristic markings that were made during

their use, that is, during their exposure to fire. There are such traces on the painted

ware of different sizes (fig. 2/3 and 4), which is to a degree contrary to the usual

opinion that the ware with painted decorations was primarily used for the serving

and eating of food. The use-alteration analysis has given us a result which is not

simple to interpret on the basis of the available pottery material. Namely, similar to

the analysis of the thickness of the wall, traces in the form of sooting clouds on the

exterior surfaces appear on the pots of different shapes and sizes. It has even been

established that among the wares of the same type, some pieces were exposed to fire,

while some others were not. Although the sooting clouds are always on the same

side of the dish, by the rule opposite the handle(s), they are not of the same size and

intensity and therefore we may speak about a longer or a shorter exposure to fire,


wihovim povr{inama, koje su posledica razli~itih mehani~kih, hemijskih

i/ili termi~kih procesa. 57 îwenica da je novobrdsko kerami~ko posu|e najve}im

delom gle|osano zna~ajno unapre|uje karakteristike posuda, pre svega

tvrdo}u i otpornost na mehani~ka o{te}ewa. Zbog toga su tragovi koji nastaju

prilikom upotrebe slabije izraèni i u celini ih je mawe nego {to bi to bilo

u slu~aju negle|osanih posuda.

Me|u posudama za kuvawe, a to je najbronija skupina keramike, preovla|uju

lonci. Pored wih javqaju se crepuqe i vr{nici, mada posledwi pomenuti

sasvim sporadi~no. Najve}i utisak svakako ostavqa izuzetna koli~ina gle|osanih

lonaca (sl. 4). [tavi{e, u novoj gra|i uo~eno je tek desetak negle|osanih

lonaca, me|u kojima je samo jedan mali, dok su ostali uobi~ajene sredwe

veli~ine. Naàlost, na osnovu otkrivenih ulomaka za svega nekoliko wih bilo

je mogu}e utvrditi oblik i izgled profila (sl. 4/16 i 2/4). Uz tragove gari na

spoqa{woj povr{ini lonaca sredwe veli~ine (sl. 2), razli~ita profilacija

upu}uje na mi{qewe o wihovom kori{}ewu za kuvawe razli~itih jela. Naime,

etnoarheolo{ka istraìvawa pokazala su da profilacija lonca moè biti

pokazateq tehnike kuvawa, pa bi prema tome lonac koji ima ve}i pre~nik

otvora i {irok loptast recipijent (sl. 4/1) bio pogodan za brzo kuvawe, dok bi

drugi (sl. 4/7) zbog uèg otvora i kratkog vrata mogao biti kori{}en za duè

kuvawe na slaboj vatri, jer postojawe vrata smawuje isparavawe te~nosti iz jela.

58 Naàlost, me|u ostalim ulomcima nije bilo indikativnih za utvr|ivawe

profilacije.

Gle|osani lonci grupi{u se u nekoliko oblika (tipova), sa razlikama u

{irini otvora i oblini recipijenta, tako|e i profilaciji oboda, ali gotovo

po pravilu na stabilnom, ravnom i {irokom dnu. U osnovi su to loptasti i

ovaloidni recipijenti, koji bi se, sa aspekta proporcija, mogli ozna~iti i

kao relativno plitki. Sasvim izuzetno, lonci su izduèno ovalni, duboki, sa

visoko postavqenim centrom ravnoteè (sl. 4/10, 16), {to ih ~ini mawe stabilnim

u odnosu na pli}e loptaste primerke i uti~e na dostupnost sadràja u toku

kuvawa. Odre|eni na~in kuvawa odaje tako|e i izgled otvora, pa su tako na novobrdskim

loncima obodi izvedeni na nekoliko na~ina, kao otvoreni, {iroki i

trakasti (sl. 4/5, 9, 10, 14, 16), kratki uspravni (sl. 4/15) i blago lu~ni (sl.

4/4, 6–8). Jednu od va`nih odlika novobrdskih lonaca predstavqaju dr{ke –

uobi~ajeno su imali jednu {iroku trakastu dr{ku ili dve, postavqene blizu

jedna drugoj, za lak{e presipawe ili izlivawe sadràja (sl. 2/1 i 4/10). Dr{ke

su, gotovo po pravilu, vrlo dekorativne, bilo da je re~ o slikanom ukrasu, koji

je uklopqen u dizajn posude, ili o nizovima uboda, re|e ureza, koje su ~esto i

jedini ukras na ve}im gle|osanim loncima i }upovima (sl. 6/1).

Kako je ranije pomenuto, debqina zida ima uticaja na funkciju posude.

Kada je re~ o posudama namewenim kuvawu, to ima zna~ajnu ulogu, jer govori o

provodqivosti – tanki zidovi boqe propu{taju toplotu, pogodniji su za ve}e

temperature kuvawa, a debqi zidovi, osim {to daju posudi ~vrstinu, tako|e su

pogodni za kuvawe. 59 Na analiziranom uzorku me|u loncima su uo~ene razli-

~ite debqine zidova, ali nije nam po{lo za rukom da utvrdimo pravilnost u

odnosu izme|u debqine zida i odre|enog tipa posude. U najve}em broju slu~ajeva

debqina zida posude iznosi 3–4 mm, dok se posude izuzetno tankih zidova,

oko 2 mm, javqaju sasvim sporadi~no (sl. 4/9, 16).

57 V. npr. Skibo 1992; Skibo 2013.

58 Eerkens 2005, 97.

59 Isto, 97;

Henrickson, McDonald 1983, 631.

322

60 Hally 1983,11–14; Skibo 1992,152–162;

Biki} 2015, 174–175.

61 Skibo 1992, 148–152;

Skibo, Blinman 1999, 179–181, fig. 11.2.

62 Skibo 2013, 97–98.


that is, about bigger or smaller distance from the fire. 60 Similar distribution of soot

may also be noticed on the lids, additionally revealing in this way that the pots were

covered partially, that is, that during the cooking the liquid evaporated, most likely,

in the section towards the handle. Also, when placing the lid the edge of the orifice

of the pot was exposed to abrasive processes that are shown as a narrow long surface

from which the glaze was removed. Similar damages could be created also if during

the periods when it was not used the dish was kept in the up-side-down position.

Along with the above said, a part of the painted pots in which traces of soot on

the outside have been noticed also have changes on the interior surface, those that

are a consequence of cooking certain contents. This primarily concerns carbonised

zones that are created when water evaporates during the cooking, while fats are kept

on the surface and carbonise. 61 In several pots from Novo Brdo it is possible to notice

a carbonisation ring the upper edge of which is approximately in the middle of the

receptacle. Such distribution of the layers testifies to longer cooking (simmering)

of brothy dishes, such as different soups or stews. 62 Even the painted pots that have

traces of soot only on the exterior surface were also used in order to warm up some

content put into them or, perhaps, only the dish was warmed up. However, the absence

of any traces on the interior surfaces makes the issue of their use problematic.

On the other hand, only for a small number of painted pots it is possible to presume

their purpose which completely excludes use on the hearth or in an oven, taking

into consideration that there are no characteristic traces on the surfaces. For this

reason, we are prone to presume that they were used for the storing of water in the

household, while the handles were placed close one to the other in order to make

the handling of the vessel easier. Also, they may have served as tableware from which

liquid contents, such as water or wine, were poured into smaller receptacles, such as

cups and goblets. We cannot exclude a possibility that among them was a “reserve,”

a “backup,” obtained at a certain, favourable moment, but because of the circumstances

they had been broken before they were used.

During their use, some glazed pots from Novo Brdo had their purpose changed.

This change was, most probably, caused by the damages to the pots, either mechanical

ones or those that were a consequence of a chemical process. In several cases,

the bottom of the ware was turned into a grid-like surface by piercing tiny, approximately

round openings. In this way, a type of colander was made or, perhaps, a pot

for growing flowers.

In addition to the pots, the cluster of hearth pottery includes bread-baking

pans (crepulja) and large baking lids (vr{nik) (fig. 3 and 5) which were traditionally

used for the baking of bread. In the material from the more recent explorations, the

quantity of bread-baking pans is relatively small (in comparison to the surveyed

area and the character of the archaeological contexts), around 20 pieces of ware,

judging by the number and the characteristics of the fragments. In addition to two

finds from the area of the east square in the Citadel, parts of bread-baking pans

were also found in House 2 (fig. 3), in Tower 8, in the waste-dump areas along the

Northeast Rampart and in front of Tower 6. On account of the small quantity of

bread-baking pans, we are considering a possibility that bread may have been baked

in different ways, without the use of receptacles, primarily in bread-baking ovens

that could have existed in the areal of Novo Brdo’s suburb. On the basis of the only

pan preserved to a larger degree, we can conclude that these were bread-baking


Na gle|osanim loncima javqaju se karakteristi~ni tragovi koji su nastali

u toku wihove upotrebe, tj. izlagawa posuda vatri. Takvi tragovi postoje i

na slikanim posudama razli~itih veli~ina (sl. 2/3 i 4), {to je donekle u suprotnosti

sa uvreènim mi{qewem da su posude sa slikanom dekoracijom

upotrebqavane najpre za servirawe i konzumirawe jela. Analiza promena na

keramici dala je rezultat koji nije jednostavno protuma~iti na osnovu raspoloìvog

kerami~kog materijala. Naime, sli~no kao u analizi debqine zida,

tragovi u vidu naslaga gari na spoqnim povr{inama javqaju se na loncima razli~itih

oblika i veli~ina. Utvr|eno je ~ak da su me|u posudama jednog istog

tipa pojedine posude izlagane vatri, dok druge nisu. Iako su tragovi uvek na

istoj strani posude, po pravilu suprotno od dr{ke (dr{ki), oni nisu jednake

veli~ine i intenziteta, stoga se moè govoriti o duèm ili kra}em izlagawu

vatri, odnosno ve}em ili mawem udaqewu od vatre. 60 Sli~na distribucija gari

prime}uje se i na poklopcima, otkrivaju}i nam dodatno da su lonci bili

pokrivani delimi~no, odnosno da je prilikom kuvawa te~nost ispravala, po

svoj prilici, u delu prema dr{ci. Tako|e, prilikom oslawawa poklopca, ivica

otvora lonca je izloèna abrazivnim procesima, koji se ispoqavaju kao

uzana duga povr{ina sa koje je skinuta gle|. Sli~na o{te}ewa mogla su da nastanu

i ako je posuda dràna u obrnutom poloàju i pomerana u periodima kada

nije kori{}ena.

Uz pomenuto, jedan deo slikanih lonaca kod kojih su prime}eni tragovi

gari spoqa ima i promene na unutra{woj povr{ini, one koje su posledica kuvawa

odre|enog sadràja. Pre svega, re~ je o karbonizovanim zonama koje nastaju

kada u toku kuvawa voda isparava, a masti se zadràvaju na povr{ini i ugqeni{u.

61 Na nekoliko novobrdskih lonaca uo~ava se prsten karbonizacije, ~ija

je gorwa ivica pribli`no na sredini recipijenta. Ovakva distribucija naslaga

svedo~i o duèm kuvawu (kr~kawu) ~orbastih jela, poput supe, ~orbe ili paprika{a.

62 I slikani lonci koji imaju tragove gari samo na spoqnoj povr{ini

tako|e su kori{}eni da bi se u wima grejao neki sadràj ili, mo`da, sama

posuda. Me|utim, odsustvo bilo kakvih tragova na unutra{wim povr{inama

problematizuje pitawe wihove upotrebe.

S druge strane, tek za mali broj slikanih lonaca moè se pretpostaviti

namena koja potpuno iskqu~uje upotrebu na ogwi{tu ili u pe}i, s obzirom na

to da karakteristi~ni tragovi na povr{inama u potpunosti izostaju. Zbog toga,

skloni smo pretpostavci da su oni kori{}eni za skladi{tewe vode u doma-

}instvu, pri ~emu su dr{ke postavqene blizu jedna drugoj olak{avale rukovawe

posudom. Tako|e mogli su sluìti i kao trpezni sudovi, odakle su te~ni

sadràji, voda ili vino, presipani u mawe recipijente, ~a{e i pehare. Ne mo-

è se iskqu~iti mogu}nost da su pojedini me|u wima bili „rezerva“, nabavqena

u odre|enom, povoqnom trenutku, ali su sticajem okolnosti bili polomqeni

pre nego {to su upotrebqeni.

Pojedinim novobrdskim gle|osanim loncima u toku upotrebe promewena

je namena. Ta promena, najverovatnije, iznu|ena je o{te}ewem lonca, mehani~kim

ili onim koje je posledica hemijskog procesa. U nekoliko slu~ajeva dna

posuda pretvorena su u re{etkastu povr{inu, probijawem sitnih pribli`no

okruglih otvora. Na taj na~in napravqena je neka vrsta cediqke ili, mo`da,

saksija za gajewe cve}a.

60 Hally 1983, 11–14;

Skibo 1992,152–162;

Biki} 2015, 174–175.

61 Skibo 1992, 148–152;

Skibo, Blinman 1999, 179–181, fig. 11.2.

62 Skibo 2013, 97–98.

324


Sl. 5. Pregled oblika crepuqa i

vr{nika (dokumentacija

Arheolo{kog instituta)

Fig. 5. Overview of the shapes

of bread-baking pans

and ceramic baking lids


of Archaeology)

63 Filipovi} 1951, 18–19.

pans that were perforated in the middle in order to be able to pick them up from

the embers (using a hook), while in this way they would also warm up faster. 63

The bread-baking pans from Novo Brdo have the usual medium size, with the

diameter between 18 and 22 cm. Among the specimens, there are differences in the

thickness of the bottom and the inclination of the wall, which is upright or slanting,

but by the rule they have a rounded edge of the orifice. Only on some of them the

exterior is sooted which says that these bread-baking pans were used independently,

on the embers of the hearth. As far as others are concerned, those with no changes

on their surfaces, it is presumed that they were used in a combination with a lid – the

cooking bell. However, the large baking lids appear in the available material only

sporadically. For the time being, the only find comes from a small waste-dump pit

within the Citadel – a wheel-thrown large baking lid, with a calotte form, with a decoration

in the rim zone consisting of incisions and applied strips with impressed

decoration (fig. 5/1). On its exterior surface there are visible traces of its exposure

to fire.


Pored lonaca, skupini ogwi{ne keramike pripadaju crepuqe i vr{nici

(sl. 3 i 5), koji su tradicionalno kori{}eni za pe~ewe hleba. U materijalu sa

novijih istraìvawa koli~ina crepuqa je srazmerno mala (u odnosu na istra-

ènu povr{inu i karakter arheolo{kih konteksta), oko 20 posuda, sude}i po

broju i karakteristikama ulomaka. Pored dva nalaza na prostoru isto~nog trga

u citadeli, delovi crepuqa otkriveni su u Ku}i 2 (sl. 3), u Kuli 8 i u otpadnim

prostorima du` Severnog bedema i pred Kulom 6. Zbog male koli~ine crepuqa,

pomi{qa se i na druge na~ine pe~ewa hleba, bez upotrebe recipijenta,

pre svega u hlebnim pe}ima, koje su mogle postojati u arealu novobrdskog Podgra|a.

Na osnovu jedine u ve}oj meri sa~uvane, re~ je o crepuqama koje su probu-

{ene na sredini da bi se lak{e podizale iz àra (uz pomo} kuke), a tako|e i

brè zagrevale. 63

Novobrdske crepuqe su uobi~ajenih sredwih veli~ina, pre~nika izme|u

18 i 22 cm. Me|u primercima postoje razlike u debqini dna i nagibu zida, koji

je uspravan ili zako{en, ali po pravilu sa zaobqenom ivicom otvora. Tek na

pojedinim javqaju se tragovi gari na spoqnoj povr{ini, koji svedo~e da su te

crepuqe kori{}ene samostalno, na àru ogwi{ta. Za druge pak bez promena na

povr{inama, pretpostavqena je upotreba u kombinaciji sa poklopcem – vr{-

nikom. Me|utim, kerami~ki vr{nici se u raspoloìvom materijalu javqaju

sporadi~no. Za sada jedini je nalaz iz mawe otpadne jame u citadeli – vr{nik

oblikovan na vitlu, kalotaste forme, sa ukrasom u zoni oboda, koji ~ine urezi

i aplicirane trake sa utisnutim ukrasom (sl. 5/1). Na wegovoj spoqnoj povr{ini

vidqivi su tragovi od izlagawa vatri.

Va`nu skupinu novobrdske keramike ~ine posude za skladi{tewe. Skupina

obuhvata posude razli~itih veli~ina i profilacije, koje smo ozna~ili zajedni~kim

nazivom }up, kao jasnu distinkciju od lonca, koji prevashodno asocira

na posudu za kuvawe. U novootkrivenoj novobrdskoj keramici prepoznato

je oko deset }upova, ali je wihov broj, po svemu sude}i, bio ne{to ve}i. Zbog

znatne fragmentarnosti, oblik je mogao biti utvr|en u nekoliko slu~ajeva (sl.

6). Kao {to se moè videti na ilustrovanim primercima, oblici i veli~ine

}upova su razli~iti, stoga se pretpostavqaju i razli~iti sadràji koji su u

wima bili ~uvani duè ili kra}e vreme. Me|u wima tri (~etiri) bila su negle|osana,

velika, debelih zidova (sl. 6/5, 6), nalik anti~kim pitosima. Nizovi

apliciranih traka sa utisnutim ukrasima, raspore|eni na pravilnim

razmacima du` recipijenta, dodatno obezbe|uju mesta spojeva delova prilikom

su{ewa, o ~emu je bilo re~i ranije.

Na unutra{wim povr{inama ovih }upova vidqive su jamice koje su nastale

kao posledica fermentacije. 64 Gorwa ivica o{te}ewa, koja je pribli`no u

gorwoj polovini recipijenta, ukazuje na nivo do kog je }up bio napuwen. Promene

koje prate pripremu i ~uvawe pojedinih namirnica i alkoholnih pi}a

vidqive su i na gle|osanim }upovima, mada u mawoj meri. 65 Pored jamica, na

gle|osanim }upovima javqaju se i mestimi~na quspawa kako na unutra{woj,

tako i na spoqa{woj povr{ini, o ~emu je ranije bilo vi{e re~i. Iste promene

uo~ene su i na jo{ nekim ulomcima posuda debqih zidova, me|utim, u ve}ini

slu~ajeva zbog delova koji su nedostajali nije bilo mogu}e sagledati wihov oblik

i profilaciju. Identi~ne promene vide se i na velikom loncu sa dve dr{ke

– }upu, kod koga je preko unutra{we povr{ine, umesto gle|i, nanet sloj belog

63 Filipovi} 1951, 18–19.

64 Hally 1983, 14–17; Skibo 2013, 152;

Biki} 2015, 179, sl. 18b.

65 Biki} 2015, 179.

326

Sl. 6. Pregled oblika }upova


instituta)

Fig. 6. Overview of the jar shapes


of Archaeology)


An important cluster of Novo Brdo’s pottery includes storing ware. This cluster

incorporates ware of different sizes and profiles which we marked with a joint name

of jar (}up), as a clear distinction from pot, which primarily associates of a cooking

dish. Around ten jars have been recognised in the newly-discovered pottery of Novo

Brdo, but judging by all their number was somewhat bigger. Because of the significant

fragmentation, it was possible to determine the shape only in several cases (fig.

6). As it may be seen on the illustrated specimens, the shapes and the sizes of the

jars are different and therefore we presume different contents that used to be kept

in them for a longer or a shorter periods of time. Among them, there are three (four)


Sl. 7. ]up sa tragovima popravki


instituta)

Fig. 7. Jar with traces of repairs


of Archaeology)

slipa (sl. 6/1 i 7), tako|e s namerom da se smawi poroznost i propustqivost

posude. 66 Me|utim, ta posuda je o~igledno imala nedostatak jo{ u postupku izrade

– pukotina du` dna nastala je zbog nejednakog skupqawa gline u dnu i zidovima,

koje je moglo biti izazvano neuskla|enim pritiscima prstima u toku

oblikovawa posude. 67 Iako je pukotina sanirana (po svoj prilici, u samoj grn-

~arskoj radionici neposredno nakon zavr{enog procesa izrade) tako {to je zatvorena

komadi}ima gline (sl. 7), ostaje otvoreno pitawe o wenoj prvobitnoj

upotrebi. Unutra{wost }upa izgleda kao da je o{te}ena skladi{tewem te~nog

sadràja, ali zbog prirode o{te}ewa dna ostaje upitna mogu}nost duè upotrebe

za tu namenu, kao i wegova pogodnost za skladi{tewe zrnastih namirnica,

koje je trebalo sa~uvati u suvom stawu. Po svemu sude}i, sanirawe pukotine nije

re{ilo problem dugoro~no, budu}i da je posuda u trenutku otkrivawa sluìla

kao skrivnica za vredne srebrne predmete. 68

Kako smo mogli da primetimo, samo jedan }up (sl. 6/2) izgledao je netaknut

sadràjem, odnosno procesima prerade namirnica u svrhu ~uvawa, koji ostavqaju

tragove od zna~aja za pouzdanije utvr|ivawe namene. Uz to, kao i zbog wegove

veli~ine, koja je znatno mawa od ostalih }upova, moè se pretpostaviti da je

kori{}en za skladi{tewe malih koli~ina ~vrstih zrnastih namirnica.

Mobilijar kuhiwe dopuwuju kerami~ke cediqke. Naàlost, veoma sitni

perforirani gle|osani ulomci ne pruàju ni pribli`no dovoqno elemenata

za rekonstrukciju prvobitnog izgleda ovih posuda. Ipak, moè se pretpostaviti

da je re~ o kalotastim oblicima, zaobqenog ili ravnog dna, kakve su ra|ene

i u narednim stole}ima. 69

Skupina trpezne keramike, kako je napred nazna~eno, obuhvata otvorene i

zatvorene recipijente. Servirawu i konzumirawu jela nameweni su otvoreni

recipijenti, a u slu~aju Novog Brda to su prevashodno zdele. Zdele se javqaju u

nekoliko u osnovi kalotastih oblika i veli~ina i sve su, gotovo po pravilu, na

niskoj stopi (sl. 8). Sasvim retko dno je prstenasto, izvu~ene ivice (sl. 8/13, 14).

Me|u zdelama samo jedna je imala vodoravnu dr{ku (sl. 9/3). Uz profilaciju,

66 Rice 1987, 232.

67 Hamer 1975, 81.

68 Popovi}, Biki} 2017, 395.

69 Biki} 2003a, 77–78.

328

64 Hally 1983, 14–17; Skibo 2013, 152;

Biki} 2015, 179, fig. 18b.

65 Biki} 2015, 179.

66 Rice 1987, 232.

67 Hamer 1975, 81.

68 Popovi}, Biki} 2017, 395.

69 Biki} 2003a, 77–78.


unglazed ones, big and with thick walls (fig. 6/5, 6), similar to pithoi from the Antiquity.

Sequences of applied strips with impressed decorations, distributed at regular

distances along the receptacles, additionally secure the points of joints of different

parts during the drying, which has been dealt with earlier.

On the interior surfaces of these jars there are visible small pits that were created

as a consequence of fermentation. 64 The upper edge of the damage, which is

approximately in the upper half of the receptacle, points at the level up to which

the jar used to be filled. The changes that accompany the preparation and keeping of

some foods and alcoholic drinks are also visible on glazed jars, although to a lesser

degree. 65 Next to the small pits, on the glazed jars there is also sporadical spalling,

both on the interior and on the exterior surfaces, which has been dealt with earlier

on. The same changes have also been noticed on some other fragments of ware with

thicker walls. However, in most of the cases it was not possible to get to their shape

and profile on account of the missing parts. Identical changes may also be seen on a

large pot with two handles – a jar, in the case of which a layer of white slip was applied

over the interior surface instead of glaze (fig. 6/1 and 7), also with an intention to

reduce the porosity and permeability of the dish. 66 However, that dish obviously

had a failing already during the process of its creation – a crack along the bottom

was made on account of an uneven contraction of the clay in the bottom and the

walls, which may have been caused by imbalanced pressures of the fingers applied

during the throwing of the dish. 67 Although the crack was repaired (most likely at

the very pottery workshop right before the completion of the manufacturing process),

by closing it with pieces of clay (fig. 7), the question of its original use remains open.

The interior of the jar appears as if it had been damaged by keeping liquid contents

inside of it, but because of the nature of the damage of the bottom, the possibility of

any prolonged use for this purpose is questionable, and so is its suitability for storing

grainy foodstuff that had to be kept in a dry state. Judging by all, the repairing of the

crack did not solve the problem in the long run, since at the time when it was discovered

the dish was used as a hiding place for valuable silver objects. 68

As we could notice, only one jar (fig. 6/2) seemed untouched by the contents,

that is, by the processes related to the processing of foodstuff for the purpose of

storing, which leaves traces of importance for any more reliable determining of the

purpose. In addition, also because of its size, which is significantly smaller than that

of the other jars, it may be presumed that it used to be used for the storing of small

quantities of solid grainy foodstuff.

The kitchenware is supplemented by pottery colanders. Unfortunately, very small

perforated glazed fragments do not provide even approximately enough elements for

a reconstruction of the original appearance of these vessels. Still, it may be presumed

that these were calotte-like shapes, of a rounded or flat bottom, such as were made

in the centuries to come. 69

As it has been stated above, the cluster of tableware includes both open and

closed receptacles. Open receptacles are intended for the serving and eating of meals,

and in the case of Novo Brdo these are predominantly bowls. Bowls appear in several

basically calotte-like shapes and sizes and they are all, almost by the rule, placed

on a low foot (fig. 8). Only rarely, the bottom is ring-like, with a pulled-out edge

(fig. 8/13, 14). Among the bowls, only one had a horizontal handle (fig. 9/3). Along

with the profile, the depth and the volume of the receptacles was adjusted to the


Sl. 8. Pregled oblika trpeznih posuda (dokumentacija Arheolo{kog instituta)

Fig. 8. Overview of the tableware shapes (documentation of the Institute of Archaeology)

330


content that was planned to be served in and eaten from them. Although this all

concerns significantly fragmented material, the majority of the fragments are the

calotte-shaped bowls, such as those from House 2 and Cistern II (fig. 8/5, 6, 10),

and slightly less of deep bowls (fig. 8/1–3). They were made in two ways, as singlecoloured

ones, glazed in yellow and green, and as painted in different colours and

then glazed in yellow or yellow-green, in both cases over white slip. An unusual

solution may be seen in the partial application of white slip used in order to emphasise

a spiral incised in the bottom of a calotte-shaped bowl (fig. 10). The white painted

motifs under yellow glaze, which dominate the pots, appear very rarely on bowls

(fig. 8/10 and 9/4). Shallow bowls, also done in a single colour, have yellow glaze

applied directly on the surface of the dish (fig. 8/8, 9). There is only one smaller

conical bowl with green painted decoration (fig. 8/15) and one plate (?) with green

painted spirals (fig. 8/9). Wide open deeper receptacles with horizontal rim (fig. 8/11,

12, 17 and 9/1) were marked as deep plates, thus presuming their use for the serving

of dishes. Among them, individual specimens stand out by their sgraffito decoration

which is combined with painted motifs. The application of the same decorative

techniques may be seen in one other plate (fig. 8/7). Small bowls (fig. 8/13), most

likely intended for the serving of sauces, appear exceptionally rarely.

Just like in the case of cooking pots, it is also possible to notice spalling of the

glaze on bowls, which is a consequence of insufficient drying or a quick exposure of

the dish to a high temperature during the firing (fig. 9/2). Taking into consideration

that such bowls were among the discarded ware, the problem most likely surfaced

during the use, when they were filled with contents that sped up their decay and these

could, primarily, be hot dishes. On the other hand, thanks to the glazed layer, the

bowls were more resistant to mechanical damages. Still, in some specimens it is possible

to see the wear and tear of the orifice (fig. 10), most likely from the lid by which

the content was kept at a certain temperature and protected against insects.

The diversity of the shapes and volumes may also be noticed in the cluster of

ware intended for the serving of liquid contents, wine, water and sweet fruit-based

beverages (fig. 8/17–20). There were far more jugs than what is shown by the illustrated

specimens, taking into account the findings of lips and other segments, primarily

handles and bottoms with strip-like profile (fig. 8/1) usual for this type of ware. The

preserved pieces allow for a possibility to assume the appearance of the jugs up to a

point, first of all the form of the opening, which is round or with a small lip. Although

they were predominantly glazed in a single colour, yellow and (more rarely) green,

directly on the surface of the dish or over the white slip (fig. 10), there are also white

painted examples such as the one from Cistern 1 in the Citadel (fig. 10). Like in the

case of the other forms, in the cluster of the ware used for the serving of liquid contents

there is an exceptionally small number of jugs decorated in the painted sgraffito

technique. In the materials that have been processed, only one of them has a

more complex decoration in the shape of a medallion with tiny spirals that are also

repeated on the lip (fig. 8/20). Only one jug could be seen in its entirety on the basis

of the preserved pieces from House 2 (fig. 8/19). In addition, for several fragments it

has been presumed that they may have come from flasks (fig. 9/5–8).

Similar to the pots and bowls, certain flaws created during the drying and the

firing processes have been noticed on jugs and these manifest on the ware through

the spalling of the glaze (fig. 10). The enclosing of the receptacles and some parts,


dubina i zapremina recipijenata prilago|ena je sadràju koji je predivi|en

da se servira i konzumira. Iako je re~ o znatno fragmentovanom materijalu,

me|u ulomcima najvi{e je kalotastih zdela, poput onih iz Ku}e 3 i Cisterne 2

(sl. 8/5, 6, 10), ne{to mawe i dubokih zdela (sl. 8/1–3). One su ra|ene u dva vida,

kao jednobojne, ùto i zeleno gle|osane, i kao vi{ebojno slikane i potom

ùto ili ùtozeleno gle|osane, u oba slu~aja preko belog slipa. Neobi~no re-

{ewe predstavqa delimi~no nano{ewe belog slipa, da bi se istakla spirala

urezana na dnu jedne kalotaste zdele (sl. 10). Belo slikani motivi ispod ùte

gle|i, dominantni na loncima, na zdelama se javqaju retko (sl. 8/10 i 9/4).

Plitke zdele su tako|e jednobojne, sa ùtom gle|i, nanetom direktno na povr{inu

suda (sl. 8/8, 9). Svega jedna je mala koni~na zdela sa zeleno slikanim ukrasom

(sl. 8/15) i jedan tawir (?) sa zeleno slikanim spiralama (sl. 8/9). [iroko

otvorene dubqe recipijente sa vodoravnim obodom (sl. 8/11, 12, 17 i 9/1)

ozna~ili smo kao duboke tawire, pretpostavqaju}i time wihovu upotrebu za servirawe

jela. Me|u wima, pojedini primerci izdvajaju se po zgrafito-dekoraciji,

koja je kombinovana sa slikanim motivima. Primena istih dekorativnih

tehnika uo~ava se na jo{ jednom tawiru (sl. 8/7). Male zdele (sl. 8/13), predvi|ene

najverovatnije za servirawe sosova, javqaju se izuzetno retko.

Sli~no loncima, i na zdelama se prime}uje quspawe gle|i, koje je posledica

nedovoqnog su{ewa i brzog izlagawa posude visokoj temperaturi u toku

pe~ewa (sl. 9/2). S obzirom na to da su takve zdele bile me|u odba~enim posudama,

problem se ispoqio, po svoj prilici, u toku upotrebe, kada su one puwene

sadràjima koji su pospe{ili wihovo propadawe, a to bi mogla biti pre svega

vru}a jela. S druge strane, zahvaquju}i gle|osanom sloju, zdele su bile otpornije

na mehani~ka o{te}ewa. Ipak, na pojedinim primercima vidqivo je habawe

Sl. 9. Primeri tawira (1),

zdela (2–4) i buklija (5–8)


instituta)

Fig. 9. Examples of plates (1),

bowls (2–4) and flasks (5–8)


of Archaeology)

332


Sl. 10. Kerami~ko posu|e iz Novog Brda – arheolo{ka iskopavawa 2015–2016

(dokumentacija Arheolo{kog instituta)

Fig. 10. Pottery ware from Novo Brdo – the archaeological excavations in 2015–2016

(documentation of the Institute of Archaeology)

such as lips and spouts, were adjusted to the purpose of the serving and the need to

handle the ware in a certain manner. The handling primarily involves frequent moving,

that is, contact with surfaces of different degree of hardness and of different

structure. Unfortunately, the available material has provided very little data in connection

with their use, both because of the fragmentation of the ware and because

of the existence of the protective layer of glaze. Traces of abrasion on the edge of the

bottom noticed on a yellow-glazed jug (fig. 10) are most probably a consequence of

frequent moving and placing on a hard surface.

70 Rice 1981, 223.

71 Cf. Rice 1987, 180–181; Costin 1991;

Costin, Hagstrum 1995.

NOVO BRDO WARE AND THE POTTERY IN MEDIEVAL SERBIA

The presented technological features of the pottery of Novo Brdo testify to the

knowledge and the skills that were invested into the making of the ware, as well as

to the intention of the potters to make ware that would be adjusted to the needs of

the cooking, baking, storing and serving. One of its important characteristics is the

uniformity that is manifested both through the use of constant raw materials (for

certain functional classes) and through simple throwing technique, and small number

of shapes and sizes of the ware. 70 Although in addition to the technological standard

this pottery also follows a standard in terms of the shapes, certain differences in the

profile, size and decoration within the scope of certain classes and types of ware suggest

that there was a larger number of potters who were involved in the production

process. 71 Judging by all, this was the ware produced in the areal of Novo Brdo, for the

needs of its residents. Whether and to which degree it was also available in the local


ivice otvora (sl. 10), najverovatnije od poklopca, kojim je sadràj bio dràn na

odgovaraju}oj temperaturi i za{ti}en od insekata.

Raznovrsnost oblika i zapremina opaà se i u skupini posuda namewenih

servirawu te~nih sadràja, vina, vode, slatkih vo}nih pi}a (sl. 8/17–20). Kr~aga

je bilo daleko vi{e nego {to to pokazuju ilustrovani primerci, s obzirom

na nalaze izlivnika i drugih delova, pre svega dr{ki i dna sa trakastom profilacijom

(sl. 8/1), uobi~ajenom za ovu vrstu sudova. Sa~uvani delovi dopu{taju

mogu}nost da se donekle pretpostavi izgled kr~aga, pre svega oblik otvora,

koji je okrugao ili sa malim izlivnikom. Iako su prete`no jednobojno gle|osani,

ùto i (re|e) zeleno, direktno na povr{inu suda ili preko belog slipa,

ima i belo slikanih primeraka, poput onog iz Cisterne 1 u citadeli (sl. 10).

Kao i me|u drugim formama, i u skupini posuda za servirawe te~nih sadràja

tehnikom slikanog zgrafita ukra{en je izuzetno mali broj primeraka kr~aga.

U gra|i koja je obra|ena tek jedan od wih imao je sloèniju dekoraciju, u vidu

medaqona sa sitnim spiralama, koje se ponavqaju i na grebenu izlivnika (sl.

8/20). Svega jedan bokal mogao je biti sagledan u celosti na osnovu sa~uvanih

delova iz Ku}e 2 (sl. 8/19). Uz to, za nekoliko ulomaka je pretpostavqeno da su

mogli biti od buklija (sl. 9/5–8).

Sli~no kao na loncima i zdelama, i na kr~azima su uo~eni propusti u postupku

su{ewa i pe~ewa, koji se na posudama manifestuju quspawem gle|i (sl. 10).

Zatvorenost recipijenta i pojedini delovi, poput izlivnika i piska, prilago-

|eni su nameni servirawa i potrebi da se posudom rukuje na odre|eni na~in. Rukovawe

pre svega podrazumeva ~esto pomerawe, odnosno kontakt sa povr{inama

334

72 Georgieva 1974, obr. 2–4;

Popovi} 2015, 141–143, fig. 81, 82.

73 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 59, fig. 41, 42;

Biki} 1994, 68, fig. 24/1, 9;

Popovi} 1978, 108, ill. 3;

Popovi} 2015, fig. 81/5, 6, 96/6, 97/7, 10,

120/1–4; Biki} 2015, 343, fig. 7;

Juri{i} 1989, 30, 31, fig. 30.

74 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 59, 62–63;

Popovi} 1978, 108, ill. 3 and documentation

of the Institute of Archaeology.


76 Ibid., 67–68, fig. 49;

Popovi} 2015, fig. 96/3, 4,

97/19–23, 24, 119/1–4, 5, 7.

77 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, T. XIV;

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 97, fig. 48;

Popovi} 2015, fig. 97/12.

78 Papanikola–Bakirtzis 1999, Cat. Nos. 1,

2, 4, 5, 14–18, 22, 23, 29, 32, 36–40,

43, 44, 74, 76, 79–83, 96–100;

Georgieva 1974, 58–153.

79 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, T. XVIII;

Popovi} 2015, fig. 94/2, 96/2,

97/14, 15, 122/3–7, 12, 13.

80 Mini}, Vukadin 2007,

fig. 50/1–5, 51/6–9, 53/1, 2.

81 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, T. XXXV,

XXXVI; Qubinkovi} 1970, 202, T. VI/2;

Juri{i} 1989, 40, fig. 43/1;

Juri{i} 1991, 74, fig. 64; Ze~evi} 2003,

73–104 (with examples and literature);

Biki} 2015, fig. 10/3, 4, 5 155;

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, fig. 51/1–3;

Biki} 1994, fig. 25/4.


market remains to be surveyed in the future when the archaeological explorations

in addition to the larger areas of the suburb also include the broader surroundings

of the town.

At the current level of conducted explorations of urban agglomerations in medieval

Serbia, Novo Brdo remains recognisable and to a large degree specific as regards

the pottery ware (fig. 2 and 10), on top of everything else. After everything that has

been said, what is left is to consider what makes the pottery of Novo Brdo specific

when viewed within the scope of the ware production aspects in medieval Serbia

and its close surroundings. In terms of chronology it belongs to the last stage of this

production, from the late 14 th century and the first decades of the 15 th century,

together with the pottery from Stala}, Belgrade and Smederevo, as well as from

monastery complexes. Following the features of the technological styles of these

assemblages, it is possible to discern common characteristics and local specificities.

In the group of the hearth ware, the common features reflect the tradition, primarily

through the form and, where it exists, through the style of the incised decoration.

Alongside wide spherical cooking pots, the usual element of the kitchenware

is a pot with a handle, a shape which became a part of the pottery ware repertoire

during the 13 th century. 72 There were several regional variants produced in the

decades of the end of the 14 th century and the beginning of the 15 th century, with

the differences in the composition of the raw material and the firing procedures. 73

The pots from Novo Brdo have predominantly fine texture and they were all wheelthrown,

which consequently means that they share most of the similarities with the

ware from Stala}, specifically that from the later phase, at the beginning of the 15 th

century, which is characterised by higher degree of uniformity and wheel-thrown

production technique, as well as with that from Smederevo. 74 In all of these pottery

clusters, their multi-purpose use has also been established – in addition to the cooking

and heating of food, these pots with handles were also used as vessels for the

serving of liquid contents. 75 The technological similarity and the similarity of the

shapes is even more pronounced in the case of bread-baking pans, while in the case

of large baking lids the point of comparison is the technology, rather than the form

or the decoration. 76 In a similar way it is possible to contrast the ware for the storing

of foodstuff. Although they constitute a comparatively small and also a very dispersed

group in terms of the profile, the ware has thick walls and, almost by the rule,

sequences of applied strips. 77

The tableware has different artisanry background. The lines of the bowls and

plates developed from the Byzantine pottery of the 12 th –13 th century, from the

groups of sgraffito and painted pottery, that is, from their subsequent Byzantine

and Balkan, primarily Bulgarian, interpretations. 78 These templates are present, to a

larger or a lesser degree, among the pottery from all domestic workshops 79 and also

from Novo Brdo. However, compared to the findings from Stala} from the same period,

80 the bowls of Novo Brdo appear in a small number of different shapes (fig.

8/1–17 and 9). Among them, there is only one fragment of a bowl with a horizontal

handle (fig. 9/3), the type of a dish which holds a prominent place in the domestic

pottery production. Although a larger number of the specimens known so far have

been found in monastery complexes, they also appear in fortresses and urban centres.

81 Different types of jugs show the greatest diversity, not only in the material

from Novo Brdo, but also in those from other archaeological sites. Still, it is possible


razli~ite tvrdo}e i strukture. Naàlost, raspoloìvi materijal dao je vrlo

malo podataka u vezi s wihovom upotrebom, kako zbog fragmentarnosti posuda,

tako i zbog postojawa za{titnog sloja gle|i. Tragovi abrazije na ivici dna prime}eni

na ùto gle|osanom kr~agu (sl. 10), po svoj prilici, posledica su ~estog

pomerawa i spu{tawa na tvrdu podlogu.

POSU\E IZ NOVOG BRDA

I KERAMIKA U SREDWOVEKOVNOJ SRBIJI

Predo~ene tehnolo{ke osobine novobrdske keramike svedo~e o znawu i ve{tinama

koje su uloène u izradu posuda, tako|e i o nameri grn~ara da naprave posu|e

koje }e biti prilago|eno potrebama kuvawa, pe~ewa, skladi{tewa, poslu-

ìvawa. Jednu od wenih va`nih odlika predstavqa uniformnost, koja se

manifestuje kako kroz ujedna~ene sirovine (za odre|ene funkcionalne klase),

tako i kroz jednostavne tehnike izrade, mali broj oblika i veli~ina posuda. 70

Iako, pored tehnolo{kog, podleè standardu u oblikovnom pogledu, odre|ene

razlike u profilaciji, veli~ini i dekoraciji u okviru odre|enih klasa i tipova

posuda ukazuju na ve}i broj grn~ara koji su bili ukqu~eni u proizvodni

proces. 71 Po svemu sude}i, re~ je o posu|u proizvo|enom u arealu Novog Brda,

za potrebe wegovih ìteqa. Da li je, i u kolikom opsegu, ono bilo dostupno na

lokalnom trì{tu, ostaje da se ispita u budu}nosti, kada arheolo{kim istra-

ìvawima uz ve}e povr{ine Podgra|a, bude obuhva}ena i {ira okolina grada.

Na sada{wem stepenu istraènosti urbanih aglomeracija u sredwovekovnoj

Srbiji, Novo Brdo ostaje prepoznatqivo i u velikoj meri osobeno u pogledu

kerami~kog posu|a (sl. 2 i 10), pored svega drugog. Nakon svega {to je re~eno,

ostaje da razmotrimo u ~emu se ogleda osobenost novobrdske keramike, sagledana

u aspektima proizvodwe posu|a u sredwovekovnoj Srbiji i wenom bliskom

okruèwu. U hronolo{kom sledu ono pripada posledwoj etapi te proizvodwe,

iz poznog 14. i prvih decenija 15. veka, zajedno sa keramikom iz Stala}a, Beograda

i Smedereva, kao i manastirskih kompleksa. Prate}i odlike tehnolo{-

kih stilova ovih asemblaà, uo~avaju se zajedni~ke odlike i lokalne specifi~nosti.

U skupini ogwi{nih posuda zajedni~ke odlike odraàvaju tradiciju,

71 Up. Rice 1987, 180–181;

70 Rice 1981, 223.

pre svega kroz formu i, tamo gde postoji, stil urezane dekoracije. Uz {iroke Costin 1991; Costin, Hagstrum 1995.

loptaste lonce, uobi~ajen sadràj kuhiwskog mobilijara predstavqa lonac sa

72 Georgieva 1974, obr. 2–4;

dr{kom, oblik koji postaje deo repertoara kerami~kog posu|a tokom 13. veka. 72 Popovi} 2015, 141–143, sl. 81, 82.

73 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 59, sl. 41, 42;

U decenijama na prelazu 14. u 15. vek izra|uje se u nekoliko regionalnih varijanti,

uz razlike u sastavu sirovine i procedurama pe~ewa. 73 Novobrdski lon-

Popovi} 1978, 108, ill. 3;

Biki} 1994, 68, sl. 24/1, 9;

ci prete`no imaju finu fakturu i svi su oblikovani na brzom vitlu, pa prema Popovi} 2015, sl. 81/5, 6, 96/6, 97/7, 10,

120/1–4; Biki} 2015, 343, sl. 7;

tome najvi{e me|usobnih sli~nosti imaju sa posudama iz Stala}a, i to iz kasnije

faze, s po~etka 15. veka, koje odlikuje ve}a uniformnost i izrada na brzom 74

Juri{i} 1989, 30, 31, sl. 30.

vitlu, kao i iz Smedereva. 74 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 59, 62–63;

U svim tim kerami~kim celinama utvr|ena je tako|e

vi{enamenska upotreba – osim za kuvawe i podgrevawe, lonci sa dr{kom Arheolo{kog instituta.

Popovi} 1978, 108, ill. 3 i dokumentacija

su kori{}eni i kao posude za servirawe te~nih sadràja. 75 Tehnolo{ka i oblikovna

bliskost jo{ je ve}a u slu~aju crepuqa, dok me|u vr{nicima ta~ku pove-

76 Isto, 67–68, sl. 49;


zivawa ~ini tehnologija, a ne forma i dekoracija. 76 Popovi} 2015, sl. 96/3, 4,

Na sli~an na~in dovode se

97/19–23, 24, 119/1–4, 5, 7.

u vezu i posude za skladi{tewe namirnica. Iako predstavqaju srazmerno malobrojnu,

tako|e i veoma razu|enu skupinu u pogledu profilacije, posude su de-

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 97, sl. 48;

77 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, T. XIV;

belih zidova i, gotovo po pravilu, sa nizovima apliciranih traka. 77 Popovi} 2015, sl. 97/12.

336

82 Juri{i} 1991, fig. 70/1;

Kandi}, Mini}, Pejovi} 1995, 25,

kat. br. 7; Mini}, Vukadin 2007,

fig. 59/4–6, 13–15;

Biki} 2015, fig. 13/3.

83 Georgieva 1974, obr. 12/1, 17–21.

Multiple similarities which the pottery

of Novo Brdo has with the dishes made

for the needs of the Bulgarian urban

centres, expressed through the forms

of the ware, the decorative techniques

and details, are still left in the

background, hidden by the domination

of the picturesque sgraffito.

See e.g. Georgieva 1974; Genova 1989.

Despite this, the Bulgarian glazed

tableware remains an important link with

the eclectic Byzantine production style.

Cf. Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 95–102;

Biki} 2016, 169–171.

84 Popovi} 1978, ill. 4;

Biki} 1994, fig. 25/10, 71; Ni{ka tvr|ava,

Narodni muzej u Ni{u, inv. br. 621;

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 61, fig. 62

85 Kandi}, Mini}, Pejovi} 1995,

kat. br. 10; Biki} 1996, fig. 3/9;

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, fig. 64;

Biki} 2015, 348, fig. 13/1.

86 Krsti}, Veli~kovi},

Marjanovi}-Vujovi} 1983, kat. br. 119.

87 Morgan 1942, 95–99;

Megaw 1989, 264–265; Papanikola-Bakirtzi,

Maurikiou, Bakirtzis 1999, 53.

88 Morgan 1942, 96.

89 Morgan 1942, 97–99, figs. 71, 75, 79;

Papanikola Bakirtzis 1987, 195,

fig. 1 a–d, Pl. I; Papanikola-Bakirtzi,

Maurikiou, Bakirtzis 1999, 53,

Cat. nos. 77–91. One of its variants,

reflected in the decoration based on

painted circles, was represented

predominantly in Podunavlje

(the Danube valley) during the

12 th –13 th century, see Mini} 1998.

90 Morgan 1942, 99–101, figs. 77, 78;

Georgieva 1974, obr. 19–22;

Bakirtzis 1980, 149, fig. 19;

Waksman, Spieser 1997, 120, 129;

Vionis 2012, 229–230.

91 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, fig. 63;

Juri{i} 1989, fig. 44; Popovi} 1991,

fig. 1, Biki} 2015, fig. 7, 9, 11;

Mini} 1999, 230, fig. 2.5;

Biki} 1996, 283, fig. 3/5.


to notice that some forms are constant, such as a jug with a small lip which is glazed

in a single colour (fig. 10) or, more frequently, with sgraffito decoration. 82 Additional

decoration of handles on the ware for the serving of liquid contents using

piercings and button-like applications – details that characterised somewhat earlier

dishes from the Bulgarian capital of Tarnovo 83 – appears comparatively rarely and

only in some places; beside Novo Brdo, also in Smederevo, Belgrade, Ni{ and Stala}. 84

Although the Serbian medieval pottery is also specific by its flasks, the finds of

these vessels are rare and even rarer are the cases that they have been preserved to

a sufficient degree that their shape may be grasped and that their overall appearance

may be reconstructed. 85 For the time being, this also applies to Novo Brdo –

along with a whole yellow-green flask with a rosette, found during the explorations

conducted in the early 1970’s, 86 the more recent findings incorporate less than ten

yellow and yellow-green glazed fragments with modest, linear sgraffito decoration

(fig. 9/5–8).

All that has been previously mentioned is brought together by the white-painted

decoration which is the most pronounced feature of the pottery of Novo Brdo.

Although seemingly simple to do, the technique of painting the ware using white

diluted clay (slip painted ware) is in fact very demanding and it entails serious knowledge

of the pottery technology in order to make sure that the painted decoration is

going to adhere to the surface of the dish and remain durable after the glazing and

firing. 87 This technique has a long tradition – it is presumed that the origin of this

decorative style lies in the Persian so-called lustre ware, that is, in the Byzantine

imitation of the lustre ware which was a part of the 12 th -century glazed pottery production.

88 On the Byzantine bowls and jugs there are linear templates, as well as a

design with spirals, similar like in the sgraffito ware that at that time reached the

peak in terms of their demand. 89 Towards the end of the 12 th century there was

simplification of the motifs and an increase in the production which continued over

the following centuries, practically until the modern times, not only with regards to

their original white-painted design, but also with regards to a somewhat modified

colour-scheme, in a combination with green and brown small ornaments. 90

The available data on the spatial distribution of the white-painted ware suggest

a concentration of the finds in the broad area around Ras and primarily in monastery

complexes, although with a modest quantity of ware that would belong to the

period of the 14 th –15 th century. 91 However, this distribution of the finds may be

misleading since this area has been surveyed more in comparison to the other regions.

Although we do not have the precise statistics of pottery clusters from most of the

sites, the data published so far reveal significant disproportion between the sgraffito

and the white-painted ware, certainly in favour of the sgraffito pottery. Therefore, we

may presume that the white-painted ware were less in demand than the sgraffito

dishes and that, in line with this, they belonged to a side line of the tableware production

in the workshop(s) of Ras region. We have a completely opposite situation in

Novo Brdo where the white-painted decoration appears in all functional groups, on

all the dish shapes and in a quantity which significantly exceeds the presence of the

white-painted ware in all other medieval centres. Along with this, the diversity of

the design is exceptional, taking into account that there are only several templates.

Basically, these are spirals, semi-circles, dots, flat and wavy lines that touch and

overlap. In most of the cases, there is a combination of two or three elements at the


Trpezno posu|e ima druga~iju zanatsku pozadinu. Linije zdela i tawira

razvile su se iz vizantijske keramike 12–13. veka, iz skupina zgrafito i slikane

keramike, odnosno iz wenih kasnijih vizantijskih i balkanskih, pre svega

bugarskih, interpretacija. 78 Ti predlo{ci prisutni su, u ve}oj ili mawoj

meri, me|u keramikom iz svih doma}ih radionica, 79 pa tako i iz Novog Brda.

Me|utim, upore|ene sa istovremenim nalazima iz Stala}a, 80 novobrdske zdele

javqaju se u malom broju oblika (sl. 8/1–17 i 9). Me|u wima svega je jedan

ulomak od zdele sa vodoravnom dr{kom (sl. 9/3), tipa posude koji u doma}oj kerami~koj

proizvodwi zauzima zna~ajno mesto. Iako je ve}i broj do sada poznatih

primeraka na|en u manastirskim kompleksima, javqaju se i u utvr|ewima

i urbanim sredi{tima. 81 Kr~azi i bokali pokazuju najve}u raznovrsnost ne samo

u materijalu iz Novog Brda nego i na ostalim nalazi{tima. Ipak, uo~ava

se da su pojedini oblici konstantni, poput kr~aga sa malim izlivnikom, koji

je jednobojno gle|osan (sl. 10) ili, ~e{}e, sa zgrafito-ukrasom. 82 Dodatno ukra-

{avawe dr{ki na posudama za posluìvawe te~nih sadràja ubodima i dugmetastim

aplikacijama – detaqima koji su odlikovali ne{to ranije posu|e iz

bugarske prestonice Trnova 83 – javqa se srazmerno retko i tek na pojedinim

mestima, pored Novog Brda, u Smederevu, Beogradu, Ni{u, Stala}u. 84 Mada je

srpska sredwovekovna keramika osobena i po buklijama, nalazi ovih posuda su

retki, a jo{ re|i su slu~ajevi da su ostale sa~uvane u dovoqnoj meri da se mo-

è sagledati wihov oblik i rekonstruisati celovit izgled. 85 Za sada je tako i

na Novom Brdu – uz jednu celu ùtozelenu bukliju sa rozetom, na|enu prilikom

istraìvawa u ranim sedamdesetim godinama pro{log veka, 86 novije nalaze

predstavqa mawe od deset ùtih i ùtozelenih gle|osanih ulomaka sa skromnim,

linearnim zgrafito-ukrasom (sl. 9/5–8).

Sve prethodno pomenuto povezuje belo slikana dekoracija, koja je najistaknutije

obele`je novobrdske keramike. Tehnika slikawa belom razmu}enom

glinom (eng. slip painted ware), iako naizgled jednostavna za izvo|ewe, zapravo

je veoma zahtevna i podrazumeva ozbiqno poznavawe tehnologije keramike, da

bi slikani ukras prionuo na povr{inu suda i ostao postojan nakon gle|osawa

i pe~ewa. 87 Ova tehnika ima dugu tradiciju – pretpostavqa se da je poreklo dekorativnog

stila u persijskim tzv. sjajnim posudama (eng. Lustre ware), odnosno

vizantijskoj verziji tih posuda (eng. Imitation Lustre ware), koja je deo produkcije

gle|osane keramike 12. veka. 88 Na vizantijskim zdelama i kr~azima javqaju

se linearni predlo{ci, ali i dizajn sa spiralama, sli~no kao na zgrafito-

-posudama, koje su u to vreme u zenitu potra`we. 89 Pred kraj 12. veka dolazi do

pojednostavqivawa motiva i pove}awa proizvodwe, koja se nastavqa tokom narednih

stole}a, prakti~no do modernog doba, ne samo u izvornom belo slikanom

dizajnu nego i u donekle izmewenom koloritu, u kombinaciji sa zelenim i

sme|im sitnim ukrasima. 90

Raspoloìvi podaci o prostornom rasporedu belo slikanih gle|osanih posuda

nagove{tavaju koncentraciju nalaza u {iroj oblasti Rasa i prevashodno u

manastirskim kompleksima, mada sa skromnom koli~inom posuda koje bi pripadale

razdobqu 14–15. veka. 91 Me|utim, predo~ena distribucija nalaza moè

biti varqiva, s obzirom na ne{to vi{i stepen istraènosti te oblasti u odnosu

na ostale regije. Iako ne raspolaèmo preciznom statistikom kerami~kih

celina sa ve}ine nalazi{ta, do sada objavqeni podaci otkrivaju zna~ajnu

78 Papanikola–Bakirtzi 1999, Cat. Nos. 1, 2,

4, 5, 14–18, 22, 23, 29, 32, 36–40, 43, 44,

74, 76, 79–83, 96–100; Georgieva 1974,

58–153.

79 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, T. XVIII;

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 102; Popovi} 2015,

sl. 94/2, 96/2, 97/14, 15, 122/3–7, 12, 13.

80 Mini}, Vukadin 2007, sl. 50/1–5, 51/6–9,

53/1, 2.

81 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, T. XXXV,

XXXVI; Qubinkovi} 1970, 202, T. VI/2;

Juri{i} 1989, 40, sl. 43/1; Juri{i} 1991,

74, sl. 64; Ze~evi} 2003, 73–104

(sa primerima i literaturom);

Biki} 2015, sl. 10/3, 4, 5 155;

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, sl. 51/1–3;

Biki} 1994, sl. 25/4.

82 Juri{i} 1991, sl. 70/1;

Kandi}, Mini}, Pejovi} 1995, 25,

kat. br. 7; Mini}, Vukadin 2007, sl. 59/4–6,

13–15; Biki} 2015, sl. 13/3.

83 Georgieva 1974, obr. 12/1, 17–21.

Vi{estruke sli~nosti koje novobrdska

keramika ima sa posu|em izra|ivanim

za potrebe bugarskih urbanih sredi{ta,

ispoqene kroz forme posuda, dekorativne

tehnike i detaqe, ipak ostaju u drugom

planu, prikrivene dominacijom

koloritnog zgrafita. V., npr., Georgieva

1974; Genova 1989. Uprkos tome, bugarsko

gle|osano trpezno posu|e ostaje va`na

veza sa eklekti~nim vizantijskim

proizvodnim stilom. Up. Mini}, Vukadin

2007, 95–102; Biki} 2016, 169–171.

84 Popovi} M. 1978, ill. 4; Biki} 1994,

sl. 25/10, 71; Ni{ka tvr|ava,

Narodni muzej u Ni{u, inv. br. 621;

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, 61, sl. 62.

85 Kandi}, Mini}, Pejovi} 1995,

kat. br. 10; Biki} 1996, sl. 3/9;

Mini}, Vukadin 2007, sl. 64;

Biki} 2015, 348, sl. 13/1.

86 Krsti}, Veli~kovi},

Marjanovi}-Vujovi} 1983, kat. br. 119.

87 Morgan 1942, 95–99; Megaw 1989,

264–265; Papanikola-Bakirtzi, Maurikiou,

Bakirtzis 1999, 53.

88 Morgan 1942, 96.

89 Morgan 1942, 97–99, figs. 71, 75, 79;

Papanikola Bakirtzis 1987, 195, fig. 1 a–d,

Pl. I; Papanikola-Bakirtzi, Maurikiou,

Bakirtzis 1999, 53, Cat. nos. 77–91.

Jedna od wenih varijanti, oli~ena

u dekoraciji zasnovanoj na slikanim

krugovima, bila je zastupqena prete`no

u Podunavqu tokom 12–13. veka,

v. Mini} 1998.

338

92 Biki} 2003a, 55;

Biki} 2007, figs. 2, 3.

93 E. g. Stark 1999, 29–30

(with literature).

94 Biki} 2007.


most, while the spiral motif is the only one that appears independently in the form

of parallel sequences.

Over a period of approximately one hundred years, between the middle of the

14 th century and the middle of the 15 th century, which is the period over which we

can follow the production of pottery in Novo Brdo on the basis of the finds from

archaeological contexts, it is possible to observe certain changes in the repertoire of

the ware. They are visible in the stratigraphic ensembles that were formed towards

the end of that period, around the middle of the 15 th century. On the one hand, the

white-painted pots started to be dominated by linear motifs which almost entirely

suppressed spirals, that recognisable motif of the Serbian medieval pottery. On the

other hand, a change may also be noticed in the domain of the shapes and thus along

with a higher presence of deep green-glazed bowls (fig. 8/3), there are new forms

of different types of jugs, which will characterise the Ottoman production style in

the following centuries. 92 Most of this ware remains within the framework of the

same technology, but there are also exceptions, such as a small jug with Armenian

red coating. The said changes, seemingly small, constitute a clear indicator of the

social changes that took place at the time of the first Ottoman sieges of the town.

A more powerful presence of a new group of people instigated new tendencies in

the consumption of pottery ware, 93 which was led by different needs in certain type

of ware, that is, different habits in connection with the serving and consuming of

food and drinks. A similar phenomenon, reflected in the presence of the ware from

two artisanry and cultural traditions, was also noticed a little later in the pottery

contents of the early Ottoman stratum in Belgrade fortress. 94

In comparison to the known parameters of the Serbian medieval pottery, the

material from Novo Brdo certainly represents a phenomenon of its own kind. Based

on traditional postulates, the pottery of Novo Brdo, which is standardised in terms

of technology and shapes, leaves an impression of a unique artisanry concept which

corresponds to the times in which it was made and used. It brings together and

enhances the artisanry schemes from the time when the domestic production of

pottery ware first started, using the foot-powered wheel-throwing technique and by

firing it in kilns. High artisanry attainments are corroborated by uniformity of the

ware and by the consistently achieved technological style. Still, on the ware there are

also failings visible in certain segments of the production process. Most often this

concerns the spalling of the glazed surface which is a consequence of inappropriately

high firing temperature and which indirectly testifies to the speed at which the ware

was produced.

The standardisation and uniformity of production opened up a possibility of

multi-purpose use of the ware, primarily of those pieces that belong to the pot shape.

One gets an impression that within the scope of the late-medieval kitchenware, the

pot became a kind of a universal receptacle, although with an emphasis on its use in

the preparation of meals. In the established production concept the ware, whether it

was intended for the exposure to fire or not, got an articulated white-painted ornament.

The white-painted decoration, applied to the dishes for cooking, serving and

consuming of meals, certainly greatly contributes to the uniqueness of the pottery of

Novo Brdo on the territory of medieval Serbia. In the Serbian and the Balkan setting

of the sgraffito pottery, the opting for the white-painted decoration as its trademark

remains insufficiently clear. Although international in terms of its distribution,


disproporciju izme|u zgrafito i belo slikanih posuda, svakako u korist zgrafito-keramike.

Stoga moèmo pretpostaviti da su belo slikane posude bile

mawe traène od zgrafito-posu|a i da, shodno tome, pripadaju sporednoj liniji

proizvodwe trpezne keramike u radionici (radionicama) u oblasti Rasa.

Sasvim druga~iju sliku imamo u Novom Brdu, gde se belo slikani ukras javqa u

svim funkcionalnim skupinama, na svim oblicima posuda i u koli~ini koja

zna~ajno prevazilazi pojavu belo slikanog posu|a u svim drugim sredwovekovnim

sredi{tima. Uz to, raznovrsnost dizajna je izuzetna, imaju}i u vidu da je

re~ o svega nekoliko predloàka. U osnovi to su spirale, polukrugovi, ta~ke,

ravne i talasaste linije, koje se dodiruju i preklapaju. U ve}ini slu~ajeva me-

|usobno se kombinuju dva, najvi{e tri elementa, dok se motiv spirale jedini

javqa samostalno, u vidu paralelnih nizova.

U pribli`no stotinu godina izme|u sredine 14. i sredine 15. veka, koliko

se moè pratiti proizvodwa keramike u Novom Brdu na osnovu nalaza iz arheolo{kih

konteksta, prime}uju se odre|ene promene u repertoaru posu|a. One su

vidqive u stratigrafskim celinama koje su formirane pred kraj tog razdobqa,

oko sredine 15. veka. S jedne strane, na belo slikanim loncima po~iwu da preovla|uju

linearni motivi, koji su gotovo u potpunosti potisnuli spirale, taj

prepoznatqiv ukras srpske sredwovekovne keramike. S druge strane, promena se

uo~ava u domenu formi, pa se tako, uz ve}e prisustvo dubokih zelenogle|osanih

zdela (sl. 8/3), javqaju novi oblici kr~aga i bokala, koji }e u narednim stole}ima

odlikovati osmanski proizvodni stil. 92 Ve}ina tih posuda ostaje u okvirima

iste tehnologije, ali ima izuzetaka, poput malog bokala sa jermenskocrvenim

premazom. Pomenute promene, naizgled male, jasan su pokazateq dru{tvenih

promena do kojih dolazi u vreme prvih turskih opsada grada. Sna`nije prisustvo

nove grupe qudi podstaklo je nove tendencije u potro{wi kerami~kog posu|a,

93 koja je vo|ena druga~ijim potrebama za odre|enim posudama, odnosno

druga~ijim navikama u vezi sa servirawem i konzumirawem jela i pi}a. Sli~na

pojava, oli~ena u prisustvu posuda iz dve zanatske i kulturne tradicije, uo~ena

je ne{to kasnije i u kerami~kim sadràjima ranoturskog stratuma na Beogradskoj

tvr|avi. 94

U odnosu na poznate parametre srpske sredwovekovne keramike, materijal

iz Novog Brda svakako predstavqa izdvojenu pojavu. Zasnovana na tradicionalnim

postulatima, keramika Novog Brda, koja je standardizovana u tehnolo-

{kom i oblikovnom pogledu, ostavqa utisak jedinstvenog zanatskog koncepta,

koji odgovara vremenu u kojem je izra|ena i kori{}ena. Ona saìma i unapre-

|uje zanatske postavke iz vremena pokretawa doma}e proizvodwe kerami~kog

posu|a tehnikom oblikovawa na brzom, no`nom vitlu i pe~ewem u pe}ima. Visoki

zanatski dometi potvr|uju se uniformno{}u posuda i dosledno izvo|enim

tehnolo{kim stilom. Ipak, na posudama su vidqivi propusti u pojedinim

segmentima proizvodnog procesa. Naj~e{}e je to quspawe gle|osane povr{ine,

koje je posledica neprilago|eno visoke temperature pe~ewa, a posredno

svedo~i o brzini izrade posuda.

Standardizacija i uniformnost proizvodwe otvorila je mogu}nost vi{enamenske

upotrebe posuda, pre svega onih koje pripadaju obliku lonca. Sti~e

se utisak da je u kasnosredwovekovnom kuhiwskom mobilijaru lonac postao neka

vrsta univerzalnog recipijenta, mada s akcentom na upotrebi u pripremawu

90 Morgan 1942, 99–101, figs. 77, 78;

Georgieva 1974, obr. 19–22;

Bakirtzis 1980, 149, fig. 19;


Ne{eva 2008, 320–321, obr. 167/a, b;

Vionis 2012, 229–230.

91 Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981, sl. 63;

Juri{i} 1989, sl. 44;

Popovi} 1991, sl. 1;

Biki} 2015, sl. 7, 9, 11;

Mini} 1998, 230, fig. 2.5;

Biki} 1996, 283, sl. 3/5.

92 Biki} 2003a, 55; Biki} 2007, figs. 2, 3.

93 Npr. Stark 1999, 29–30

(sa literaturom).

94 Biki} 2007.

340


with finds in Peloponnese, islands in the Aegean Sea, east Mediterranean, and Asia

Minor, 95 this decoration had never had greater dominance anywhere. Judging by all,

the pottery of Novo Brdo constitutes an original achievement which brings together

the domestic tradition, the Byzantine and Mediterranean templates and an enhanced

technology. Although simplified in comparison to the design of its precursors, it

shows exceptional inventiveness of the potters who conceived it and a high degree

of technical knowledge which was applied in order to wrap up the production process

successfully. On the basis of all of this, it is the best indicator of the prosperous,

cosmopolitan Novo Brdo – the town of silver and indeed of gold. 96

95 Morgan 1942, 95–96;

Papanikola-Bakirtzis 1989;


Vionis 2012, 229–230.

96 Konstantin Filozof, 80.


jela. U postavqenom proizvodnom konceptu posu|e, bilo da je nameweno izlagawu

vatri ili ne, dobija artikulisan belo slikani ukras. Belo slikana dekoracija,

primewena na posudama za kuvawe, posluìvawe i konzumirawe jela,

svakako umnogome doprinosi jedinstvenosti novobrdske keramike na podru~ju

sredwovekovne Srbije. U srpskom i balkanskom okruèwu zgrafito-keramike

ostaje nedovoqno jasno posezawe za belo slikanim ukrasom kao wenim za{titnim

znakom. Iako internacionalan u pogledu distribucije, sa nalazima na

Peloponezu, ostrvima u Egejskom moru, isto~nom Mediteranu, u Maloj Aziji, 95

ovaj ukras nikada ranije nigde nije imao primat. Po svemu sude}i, novobrdska

keramika predstavqa originalno ostvarewe, koje povezuje doma}u tradiciju,

vizantijske i mediteranske predlo{ke i unapre|enu tehnologiju. Iako svedena

u odnosu na dizajn wenih prete~a, ona pokazuje izuzetnu inventivnost grn-

~ara koji su je osmislili i visok nivo tehni~kih znawa koji je primewen da

bi se proizvodni proces uspe{no zaokruìo. Po svemu tome, ona je najboqi pokazateq

prosperitetnog, kosmopolitskog Novog Brda – grada srebrnog u istinu

i zlatnog. 96 95 Morgan 1942, 95–96;

Papanikola-Bakirtzis 1989;


Vionis 2012, 229–230.

96 Konstantin Filozof, 80.

342


Bibliografija / Bibliography

Biki} 1994 – V. Biki}, Sredwovekovna keramika Beograda, Beograd 1994.

Biki} 1996 – V. Biki}, Prilog kulturnoj stratigrafiji manastira Svetih arhan|ela

kod Prizrena, Starinar XLVII (1996), 279–286.

Biki} 2015 – V. Biki}, Posu|e i kuvawe u manastiru Studenici u 13–14. veku: analiza

tragova upotrebe, Arhaika 3 (2015), 167–190.

Genova 1989 – E. Genova, Keramikata ot srednovekovna krepost Pleven, Izvesòiÿ na

Nacionalniÿ isòori~eski muzeé VIII (1989), 53–78.

Georgieva 1974 – S. Georgieva, Keramikaòa oòävoreca na Carevec, u: Carevãraä Túrnov

– Dvorecúò na búlãarskiòe care ïrez vòoraòa búlãarska äúràva, Tom 2, Keramika,

bitovi predmeti i vúorúènie, nakiti i túkani, Sofiÿ 1974, 7–186.

Dimitrov 1960 – D. Dimitrov, Rabotilnica za trapezna keramika vúv Varna, Izvesòiÿ

na varnenskoòo arheoloãi~essko äruèsòvo 11 (1960), 111–117.

\or|evi} 2011 – B. \or|evi}, Tri lica tradicionalne kerami~ke proizvodwe u Srbiji,

katalog izlo`be, Beograd 2011.

Ze~evi} 2003 – E. Ze~evi}, Prilog prou~avawu zdela sa vodoravnom dr{kom, Novopazarski

zbornik 27 (2003), 73–105.

Jovanovi} 2004 – V. Jovanovi}, Novo Brdo sredwovekovni grad, u: V. Jovanovi}, S. ]irkovi},

E. Ze~evi}, V. Ivani{evi}, V. Radi}, Novo Brdo, Beograd 2004, 11–160.

Juri{i} 1989 – A. Juri{i}, Gradac, rezultati arheolo{kih radova, Beograd 1989.

Juri{i} 1991 – A. Juri{i}, Nova Pavlica – rezultati arheolo{kih radova, Beograd

1991.

Kandi}, Mini}, Pejovi} 1995 – O. Kandi}, D. Mini}, E. Pejovi}, Manastir Mile{eva.

Istra`vawe i obnova, katalog izlo`be, Beograd, Prijepoqe 1995.

Konstantin Filozof – Konstantin Filozof i wegov ìvot Stefana Lazarevi}a despota

srpskog, prev. L. Mirkovi}, Stare srpske biografije XV i XVII veka, Beograd 1936.

Krsti}, Veli~kovi}, Marjanovi}-Vujovi} 1983 – D. Krsti}, M. Veli~kovi}, G. Marjanovi}-Vujovi},

Arheolo{ko blago Srbije iz muzejskih zbirki, katalog izlo`be, Beograd

1983.


Qubinkovi} 1970 – M. Qubinkovi}, Nekropola crkve Sv. Petra kod Novog Pazara,

Zbornik radova Narodnog muzeja u Beogradu VI (1970), 169–259.

Mini} 1979 – D. Mini}, Grn~arska radionica iz sredwovekovnog Kru{evca, Starinar

XXVIII–XXIX (1979), 153–164.

Ne{eva 2008 – V. Ne{eva, Boãoziäaniÿò ãraä Melnik, Sofiÿ 2008.

Petrovi} 1936 – P. @. Petrovi}, O narodnoj keramici u dolini Ra{ke, Prilozi prou-

~avawu na{e narodne keramike, Beograd 1936, 12–25.

Pletnüov 2004 – V. Pletnüov, Biòovaòa keramika vúv Varna XV–XVIII vek, Varna 2004.

Popovi} 1991 – M. Popovi}, Arheolo{ka istraìvawa u Studenici II, Glasnik Dru{tva

konzervatora Srbije 15 (1991), 44–46.

Popovi} 2015 – M. Popovi}, Manastir Studenica – arheolo{ka otkri}a, Beograd 2015.

Popovi}, Biki} 2017 – M. Popovi}, V. Biki}, Ostaci jedne sredwovekovne ostave iz

Novog Brda, Zbornik Narodnog muzeja u Beogradu 23 (2017), 387–407.

Tomi} 1954 – P. Tomi}, Vr~ve, veliki glineni }upovi, Glasnik Etnografskog muzeja XVII

(1954), 171–186.

Tomi} 1983 – P. Tomi}, Grn~arstvo u Srbiji, Zbirke I, Etnografski muzej, Beograd 1983.

]orovi}-Qubinkovi} 1962 – M. ]orovi}-Qubinkovi}, Srpska sredwovekovna gle|osana

keramika (sredwovekovna keramika sa Novog Brda), Zbornik radova Narodnog muzeja

u Beogradu III (1962), 165–186.

Filipovi} 1951 – M. Filipovi}, @enska keramika kod balkanskih naroda, Beograd 1951.

* * *

Babi} 1971 – B. Babi}, Trouvaille scellée de poterie de table byzantine à Skopsko Kale,

Archaeologia Iugoslavica XII (1971), 45–53.

Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i} 1981 – M. Bajalovi}–Hadì-Pe{i}, Keramika u srednjovekovnoj Srbiji,

Beograd 1981.

Bakirtzis 1980 – Ch. Bakirtzis, Didymoteichon: Un centre de céramique post-byzantine,

Balkan Studies 21 (1980), 147–153.

Biki} 2003a – V. Biki}, Gradska keramika Beograda (16–17. vek), Beograd 2003.

Biki} 2003b – V. Biki}, Byzantine models of Serbian medieval pottery, in: VIIe Congrès

International sur la Céramique Médiévale en Méditerranee: actes, Athens 2003, 191–204.

Biki} 2007 – V. Biki}, The early Turkish stratum on the Belgrade Fortress, in: Çanak: Late

Antique and Medieval Pottery and Tiles in Mediterranean Archaeological Contexts, eds. B.

Bohlendorf-Arslan, A. Osman Uysal, J. Witte-Orr, Proceedings of the First International

Symposium Late Antique and Medieval Pottery and Tiles in Archaeological Contexts

(Canakkale 1–3 June 2005), Byzas 7, Istanbul 2007, 515–522

Biki} 2017 – V. Biki}, Ottoman Glazed Pottery Standardisation: The Belgrade Fortress

Evidence for Production Trends, in: Glazed Pottery in the Mediterranean and the Black Sea

Region, 10 th –18 th centuries, 2, eds. S. Bocharov, V. François, A. Sitdikov, Kazan, Kishinev 2017,

207–216.

Braun 1983 – D. P. Braun, Pots as Tools, in: Archaeological Hammers and Theories, eds. J.

Moore, A. S. Keene, New York 1983, 107–134.

Costin 1991 – C. L. Costin, Craft Specialization: Issues in Defining, Documenting, and

Explaining the Organization of Production, in: Archaeological Method and Theory, ed. M. B.

Schiffer, Tucson 1991, 1–56.

344


Costin, Hagstrum 1995 – C. L. Costin, M. B. Hagstrum, Standardization, Labor Investment,

Skill, and the Organization of Ceramic Production in Late Prehispanic Highland Peru, American

Antiquity 60/4 (1995), 619–639.

Courty, Roux 1995 – M. A. Courty, V. Roux, Identification of wheel throwing on the basis of

ceramic surface features and microfabrics, Journal of Archaeological Science 22/1 (1995), 17–50.

Damjanovi} et al. 2016 – Lj. Damjanovi}, U. Mio~, D. Bajuk-Bogdanovi}, N. Cerovi}, M.

Mari}-Stojanovi}, V. Andri}, I. Holclajtner-Antunovi}, Archaeometric investigation of medieval

pottery from excavations at Novo Brdo, Serbia, Archaeometry 58 (2016), 380–400.

Djordjevi}, Nikolov 2011 – B. Djordjevi}, G. Nikolov, Bread-baking pan (crepulja/crepna)

from Neolithic to present in South-East Europe. The beginning of ethnoarchaeological cooperation

in the region, in: Proceedings of the Fifth Italian Conference on Ethnoarchaeology, Rome,

May 2010, Oxford 2013, 53–57.

Eerkens 2005 – J. W. Eerkens, GC-MS Analysis and Fatty Acid Ratios of Archaeological Potsherds

from the Western Great Basin of North America, Archaeometry 47/1 (2005), 83–102.

Hally 1983 – D. Hally, Use Alteration of Pottery Vessel Surfaces. An Important Source of Evidence

for the Identification of Vessel Function, North American Archaeologist 4 (1983), 3–26.

Hamer 1985 – F. Hamer, The potter’s dictionary of materials and techniques, London 1985.

Henrickson, McDonald 1983 – E. E. Henrickson, M. McDonald, Ceramic Form and Function:

An Ethnographic Search and an Archae ological Application, American Anthropologist, New

Series 85/3 (1983), 630–643.

Inanan 2008 – F. Inanan, Anaia – Kadikalesi: A new Zeuxippus ware production centre, in:

Proceedings of the International symposium trade and production through the ages, eds. E. Doksanalt,

E. Aslan, Konya 2008, 115–128.

Kilikoglou, Vekinis, Maniatis 1995 – V. Kilikoglou, G. Vekinis, G. Maniatis, Toughening of

Ceramic Earthenwares by Quartz Inclusions: An Ancient Art Revisited, Acta Metallurgica et

Materialia 43/8 (1995), 2959–2965.

Linton 1944 – R. Linton, North American Cooking Pots, American Antiquity 9 (4), 369–380.

Maritan et al. 2006 – L. Maritan, L. Nodari, C. Mazzoli, A. Milano, U. Russo, Influence of

firing conditions on ceramic products: experimental study on clay rich in organic matter,

Applied Clay Science 31 (2006), 1–15.

Megaw 1968 – A. H. S. Megaw, Zeuxippus Ware, The Annual of the British School at Athens 63

(1968), 67–88.

Megaw 1989 – A. H. S. Megaw, Zeuxippus Ware again, in: Recherches sur la céramique byzantine,

Bulletin de Correspondance Hellènique, Supplement 18, eds. V. Déroche, J.-M. Spieser,

Athens 1989, 259–266.

Megaw, Jones 1983 – A. H. S. Megaw, R. E. Jones, Byzantine and Allied Pottery: A Contribution

by Chemical Analysis to Problems of Origin and Distribution, The Annual of the British

School at Athens 78 (1983), 235–263.

Mini} 1998 – D. Mini}, Circles Painted with White Slip on Medieval Pottery in Serbia,

Starinar XLIX/1998 (1999), 229–236.

Mini}, Vukadin 2007 – D. Mini}, O. Vukadin, Srednjovekovni Stala}, Beograd 2007.

Morgan 1942 – C. H. Morgan, Corinth XI. The Byzantine Pottery, Cambridge Mass. 1942.

Papadopoulos 1992 – J. K. Papadopoulos, ΛAΣANA, Tuyeres, and Kiln Firing Supports,

Hesperia 61/2 (1992), 203–221.

Papanikola-Bakirtzis 1987 – D. Papanikola-Bakirtzis, The Palaeologan glazed pottery of

Thessaloniki, in: L’art de Thessalonique et des pays balkaniques et les courants spirituels au XIV e

siècle, eds. D. Davidov, R. Samardì}, Belgrade 1987, 193–204.


Papanikola-Bakirtzis 1989 – D. Papanikola Bakirtzis, Medieval pottery from Enkomi, Famagusta,

in: Recherches sur la céramique byzantine, Bulletin de Correspondance Hellènique, Supplement

18, eds. V. Déroche, J.-M. Spieser, Athens 1989, 233–246.

Papanikola Bakirtzi, Dauterman Maguire, Maguire 1992 – D. Papanikola Bakirtzi, E.

Dauterman Maguire, H. Maguire, Ceramic art from Byzantine Serres, Urbana, Chicago 1992.

Papanikola-Bakirtzi, Maurikiou, Bakirtzis 1999 – D. Papanikola-Bakirtzi, Ph. N. Maurikiou,

Ch. Bakirtzis, Byzantine Glazed Pottery in the Benaki Museum, Athens 1999.

Popovi} 1978 – M. Popovi}, La résidence du despote Djuradj Brankovi} dans le châtelet de

la fortresse de Smederevo, Balcanoslavica 7 (1978), 101–112.

Rice 1981 – P. M. Rice, Evolution of Specialized Pottery Production: A Trial Model, Current

Anthropology 22/3 (1981), 219–240.

Rice 1987 – P. M. Rice, Pottery Analysis: A Sourcebook, Chicago 1987.

Roux 2019 – V. Roux, Ceramics and Society: A Technological Approach to Archaeological

Aessemblages, Cham 2019.

Rye 1981 – O. S. Rye, Pottery Technology, Washington D. C. 1981.

Schiffer, Skibo 1987 – M. B. Schiffer, J. M. Skibo, Theory and Experiment in the Study of

Technological Change, Current Anthropology 28/5 (1987), 595–622.

Skibo 1992 – J. M. Skibo, Pottery Function: A Use-Alteration Perspective, New York 1992.

Skibo 2013 – J. M. Skibo, Understanding Pottery Function, New York 2013.

Skibo, Blinman 1999 – J. M. Skibo, E. Blinman, Exploring the Origins of Pottery on the

Colorado Plateau, in: Pottery and people, eds. J. M. Skibo, G. M. Feinman, Salt Lake City 1999,

171–183.

Smith 1985 – M. P. Smith, Toward an Economic Interpretation of Ceramics: Relating Vessel

Size and Shape to Use, in: Decoding Prehistoric Ceramics, ed. B. A. Nelson, Carbondale 1985,

254–437.

Stark 1999 – M. T. Stark, Social Dimensions of Technical Choice in Kalinga Ceramic Traditions,

in: Material Meanings: Critical Approaches to the Interpretation of Material Culture, ed.

E. S. Chilton, Salt Lake City 1999, 29–30.

[ari}, Biki}, Eri} 2018 – K. [ari}, V. Biki}, S. Eri}, Microstructural, mineralogical and petrographical

characteristics of the Medieval ceramics from the Studenica Monastery (UNESCO

world heritage site): Implications on the pottery technology and provenance of the raw

material, Microscopy and Microanalysis 24 (2018), 744–761.

Ting et al. 2019 – C. Ting, A. Vionis, T. Rehren, V. Kassianidou, H. Cook, C. Barker, The beginning

of glazed ware production in late medieval Cyprus, Journal of Archaeological Science:

Reports 27 (2019), 101–963.

Vionis 2012 – A. Vionis, A Crusader, Ottoman and Early Modern Aegean Archaeology, Leiden

2012.

Waksman, Spieser 1997 – S. Y. Waksman, J.-M. Spieser, Byzantine ceramics excavated in

Pergamon: archaeological classification and characterization of the local and imported productions

by PIXE and INAA elemental analysis, mineralogy and petrography, in: Materials

Analysis of Byzantine Pottery, ed. H. Maguire, Washington D. C. 1997, 105–33.

POREKLO ILUSTRACIJA

Fotografije: Arheolo{ki institut, Beograd; Narodni muzej u Beogradu; „KOTO d.o.o.“

Planovi: Arheolo{ki institut, Beograd; Narodni muzej u Beogradu; „KOTO d.o.o.“

Karta: N. [uleti}, sl. 1.

SOURCES OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Photographs: Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade; National Museum in Belgrade; “KOTO d.o.o.”

Plans: Institute of Archaeology, Belgrade; National Museum in Belgrade; “KOTO d.o.o.”

Map: N. [uleti}, fig. 1.

CIP – Katalogizacija u publikaciji

Narodna biblioteka Srbije, Beograd

725.182(497.11)"13/14"

904:738"653"(497.11)

POPOVI], Marko, 1944–2020

Utvr|ewa sredwovekovnog grada Novog Brda / Marko Popovi}, Gordana Simi} ; [prevod Verica Risti} ; crteì Gordana Simi} ; obrada

crteà Svetlana Vukadinovi}]. – Beograd : Republi~ki zavod za za{titu spomenika kulture, 2020 (Zemun : BiroGraf). – 345 str. : ilustr. ; 30 cm. –

(Studije i monografije / Republi~ki zavod za za{titu spomenika kulture, Beograd ; 20)

Na spor. nasl. str.: Fortifications of the Medieval Town of Novo Brdo / Marko Popovi}, Gordana Simi}. – Uporedo srp. tekst i engl. prevod. – Tira`

500. – Bibliografija: str. 270–276. – Sadrì i: Metode i tehnike za{tite zamka Novog Brda / Gordana Simi}, Slobodan Radovanovi}. Keramika

Novog Brda – pogled na tehnologiju, upotrebu i stil keramike u kasnom sredwem veku / Vesna Biki}.

ISBN 978-86-6299-038-9

1. Simi}, Gordana, 1950– [autor] [ilustrator]

a) Novo Brdo – Tvr|ava – 14v–15v

COBISS.SR-ID 20303881

Novo Brdo Fortifications

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?