Medieval Dobrun

Abstract

An interesting and highly structured medieval complex, Dobrun has been attracting attention of scholars for a long time. Unlike the ruins of medieval fortifications, the remains of wall-painting in the former monastery church received most of the attention. A series of problems have, however remained open. Some of them have escaped observation, and there are hypotheses that ought to be reassessed. The Dobrun complex is not a matter of local or regional significance. It is a surviving testimony to the events and processes that marked the century preceding the final Ottoman occupation of Serbia and Bosnia. After outlining the research work done to date and analyzing the original historical documents and physical remains, this paper brings the author's views of the issue and some reflections aimed at suggesting directions of further research. The Dobrun complex is situated on the fringe of a hospitable landscape in the lower Rzav valley, not far from Višegrad. It is a region of present-day Republika Srpska on the border with Serbia. The medieval fortifications high up on cliffs above either side of the river controlled the entrance to the gorge, a natural border between western Serbia and Podrinje (the Drina river basin). About a kilometer downstream, on a plot of flat land above the right riverbank, surrounded by rocky hillsides and opening onto a gully cut by a mountain stream, sits the monastic complex of Dobrun with the Church of the Annunciation. The discussion of the structural remains of the complex (Fig. 2) proceed from the multipart whole, which consists of fortifications on the rocks above either bank of the Rzav, built in such a way as to take full advantage of the terrain for defence purposes. The steep slopes and inaccessible rocks complete with walls and towers form a fortress considered at the time of building to be virtually unassailable. Fortification elements were laid out on the western edge of the gorge, which was and still is an important communication route leading from the west towards the interior of Serbia – the illustrious "Bosnian route". Blocking the entrance to the gorge, the Dobrun fortifications were of strategic importance for the defense of the eastern territories against attack from the west. The central and undoubtedly the oldest part of the fortified complex are the remains on the cliffs overlooking the right bank of the Rzav – a castle of an elongated plan closely following the natural features of the terrain (Fig. 3). With most of the walls built on the cliffs somewhat easier access was only possible from the southwest. The interior of the castle was divided into three independently defendable wards. In the absence of archaeological investigation, only chance finds are available. The only surviving remains of its intramural structures are those of a sunken stone-built room left of the gate, presumably a cistern. The walls were built of rough-hewn stone bound with relatively poor lime mortar (Figs 4 and 5). Laid down on the very rock, they show a varying thickness of 1.10 to almost 2 meters. Also fortified, the zone on the eastern slope below the castle was for the most part defended by steep slopes. Apparently of a somewhat later date its walls were built more solidly than the castle (Figs 6 and 7). There are traces of a path, with occasional rock-cut steps, climbing from the gate to the castle. In this ward, functioning primarily as the front line of defense of the castle, traces of houses are observable. The eastern part of the fortification above the left riverbank consisted of protruding towers on the summit of a rocky hill surrounded on three sides by the bending river (Fig 8). Surviving are the ruins of two towers and traces of a third. They stood in alignment and, not being interlinked by a rampart, were conceived as free-standing structures. Between Towers 2 and 3 passed the old road leading from the Rzav bridge towards the east. The outlying settlement grew by the river below the castle. Its central part seems to have occupied a piece of flat land at the hill foot on the right bank, where in the mid-nineteenth century streets and traces of houses were still discernible. According to research by Đ. Mazalić, part of the settlement was on the left bank as well in the area known as Podrogovi and stretching from the former mosque towards the Budimlija creek. Unlike the walls and towers of Dobrun, occasionally quite well preserved, of the nearby monastic complex only the vestiges of the church narthex have survived till this day. The church kept its original appearance until the end of the nineteenth century, when it was thoroughly altered. Eventually, its main part was blown up by German mines in early 1945 (Fig. 9).From earlier documentation and the surviving physical remains it is obvious that the building of the monastery church at Dobrun went through several phases (Fig. 10). The original church, erected in 1343 as an endowment of župan Pribil, as inferable from the now gone ktetor's inscription, was a one-nave edifice with a semicircular apse. It was barrel-vaulted and had no dome, while its walls were of limestone blocks Besides the foundations, considerable and well-preserved areas of the original floor have survived. In the middle of the central bay the ambo rosette still stands (Fig. 11). Especially interesting are the stone slabs next to the south church wall. The one in the west bay apparently covers the ktetor's grave. Two similar slabs in the central bay may also be interpreted as grave markers. In a later phase, presumably not long after the building of Pribil's endowment, the church received a narthex. A peculiarity of its architecture is a shallow arched porch on the west front, an unusual element in Serbian medieval architecture. Subsequently added to the narthex, an open exonarthex was torn down during the late-nineteenth-century rebuilding. A northern annexe, divided into two smaller rooms and connected with the apse by a door, may also be considered an addition. The purpose of the two rooms the position of which corresponds to that of the prothesis, is not clear. Of the wall-paintings only those in the narthex have partially survived (Figs 12–14). Despite damage, especially that inflicted in 1945, from the surviving fragments, old photographs and descriptions the original arrangement of scenes can be largely reconstructed, as well as the features of this, as it seems, valuable work of Serbian painting from the first half of the fourteenth century. Especially important is the ktetor's composition discussed on several occasions, showing župan Pribil with his sons Petar and Stefan, and protovestiar Stan. The impressive traces of dormitory cells and other buildings, indicative of a larger monastic community, are observable around the church. The churchyard included a cemetery with numerous gravestones, especially of the stećak type (Fig. 15), of which almost none have survived. Depictions in relief or carved on the rock some hundred meters to the northeast of the church are a curious discovery (Figs 16–17). In their immediate vicinity are vestiges of ascetic cave cells, registered also in the wider surroundings of Dobrun Castle. Approaches to the Dobrun complex have mostly been partial, their focus, understandably enough, being on the church with its remains of wall-paintings. Any solution to a series of problems that arise here would, by contrast, require an integrated approach to the complex given that it constituted a whole, initially at least. Regrettably, the research results achieved so far cannot lead to final conclusions, but rather to working hypotheses expected to inspire further research. Of particular significance as the starting-point for such exploration is Dobrun Castle – the walled core of the later fortress with the outlying settlement. In a region that was the westernmost zone of the state of the Nemanjić, župan Pribil with his sons seems to have controlled the lower Rzav valley, his hereditary domain. If that was the case, the castle on a rocky hill at the exit from the gorge that was an east-bound route may be regarded as Pribil s fortified residence. The same function must have been fulfilled by the frontier castle of Višegrad, the remains of which are still awaiting researchers. The role of Stan – titled a protovestiar in the Dobrun portrait – as its possible owner is yet to be examined. Responsibilities of the holder of this title, high-ranking at the court of Stefan Dušan, included that of customs supervisor. Officials holding this title had been known in the Serbian administration even before that date. It is perhaps with this duty that Stan's presence on the western state border, in an area crossed by an important trade route, may be related. It would help clarify his relationship with Pribil, a local hereditary lord, who seems to have been his son-in-law. If we accept that Dobrun Castle was the fortified residence of a provincial lord, it remains to examine the circumstances leading to the building of Pribil's endowment, i.e. to the foundation of the monastery. The interrelationship in the Serbian lands of the castles of local lords and the churches they founded is one of the issues that are yet to be studied. This practice, traced back to the fourteenth century, is characteristic of the period preceding the Ottoman conquest. Yet another interesting phenomenon is involved here – the development of anchoretic monasticism at the side of fortified sites, whether fortresses or castles of sovereigns and lords. Some well-known examples occur in the territory of Bulgaria, while in our parts the phenomenon is evidenced by a cave laura below the walls of the Fortress of Ras, the Monastery of the Archangel Michael, as well as by some other sites that are yet to be explored. The function of ascetic cells clinging to fortresses and castles, like that of warrior-saints portrayed on the walls of the Morava churches, was spiritual militancy and they were considered as part of the general system of defence from the enemy of a different faith. The case of Dobrun raises a query that is yet to be resolved – whether the hermitages surrounding the castle preceded the building of the monastery or developed according to the brotherhood's needs. The distribution of these hermitages as well as the traditional pattern of evolution of anchoretic monasticism from lauras to cenobitic communities tends to favor the first explanation, but it is quite certain that they were in use even later. What can be deduced from the frescoes at Dobrun indicates that the central role in the entire process of building Pribil's endowment was played by a respected and learned monk, undoubtedly the subsequent hegumen Jefrosin. Whether he lived his ascetic life in one of the nearby cells and thus won great respect remains open to conjecture. What seems incontestable is his influence of a spiritual guide on the župan's family. It does not seem erroneous to presume that he was the architect of Pribil's undertaking. Obviously, the relatively modest monastery church, also intended as the ktetor's sepulchral church, was built first. A cenobitic community was probably soon founded next to it, with Jerfrosin as its head, the first hegumen. Pribil's endeavor was continued by his younger son Petar, undoubtedly during his father's lifetime. The church does not seem to have received its wall-paintings before the addition of the narthex, as evidenced by the scene on the narthex wall that shows Pribil holding the model of the original church. The fresco programme was apparently devised by Jefrosin, who is likely to have passed away before the works were completed. The place of his posthumous portrait (Fig. 13), next to his patron saint, was even more distinguished than the ktetor's. We are inclined to believe that it also marks his grave. At any rate, Jefrosin was paid especial respect. With the painters still at work, Petar, the ktetor of the narthex became a monk, as shown by the now destroyed inscription above the portal. Jefrosin's personality, ideas and messages are clearly reflected in the surviving wall-paintings. On the one hand, prominence is given to ascetics, to the most consistent followers of earliest Christian anchoretic practice. Among them, and that is remarkably important, is figured for the first time in our wall-painting a Serbian protagonist of this orientation – St Peter of Koriša. On the other hand, the ecumenical councils are also given a prominent place and, enclosed in medallions next to them, as many as seven bishops that took part in them, as well as the established advocates of the true faith: Sophronius, patriarch of Jerusalem, an adversary of Monothelitism, and Peter, bishop of Damascus, a fighter against Manichean heresy. Someone in the milieu of Dobrun, on the delicate western frontier with Bosnian heretics – the learned hegumen in our opinion – obviously found such a painted programme important for the defence of Orthodoxy. The means of conveying the message was well-known – an emphasis on unswerving faith and ascetic deeds. This goal, firmly rooted in earlier periods, was certainly accomplished at Dobrun. There are no reliable data about the destiny of Dobrun in the second half of the fourteenth century. Along with the surrounding areas it belonged to Nikola Altomanović for a while. After this noble s fall in the autumn of 1373 and the unfortunate partitioning of Serbian lands, the consequences of which can still be felt, Dobrun s position is unclear. Together with Polimlje (the Lim Valley), it might have passed into the hands of the Bosnian ban. To judge by its geo-strategic position, however, it would be reasonable to assume that the Serbian sovereign kept it. This falls among the issues that require separate discussion. Of relevance to our subject is a usually neglected piece of information from the Pomenik (Memorial Book) of Kruševo that despot Stefan with his mother was the ktetor of the monastery. This contemporary information would lead to the conclusion that the early fifteenth century still saw the monastery within the Serbian state borders Whether it remained so till the end of despot Stefan s rule is yet to be established. In 1433 Dobrun already was the domain of vojvoda Radoslav Pavlović. Perhaps it was briefly held by despot Đurađ, contemporaneously with nearby Višegrad (1448), but at the time of the Ottoman conquest it was a fortress on the lands of the Pavlović. Leaving aside the as yet undecided issue of borders, we should touch upon the subsequent structural development of Dobrun. To begin with, there is the query about what despot Stefan's contribution to the growth of the monastic complex was. The Serbian sovereign must have made donations to the monastery, but for the time being only guesswork is possible as to whether he had any structures built. The open exonarthex, which earlier researchers dated by the surviving fragments of wall-paintings in the porch to the end of the sixteenth century, should not be ruled out in this regard. Renovations of and donations to the monastery would have been consistent with despot Stefan's efforts to bolster up Orthodoxy in the border zone of his state. It was under his rule that in the regions bordering on heretical Bosnia, where an increasing influence of the Roman Church had support of its Catholic rulers, the old Serbian dioceses were restored and some new established, especially important being the Metropolitan of Srebrenica. The growth of Dobrun from a castle into a fortress may have taken place in the turbulent last decades of the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries. Considerably enlarged by the addition of ramparts the defended zone could now accommodate a much larger garrison. The same period saw the growth, under protection of the fortress, of a commercial urban settlement, an important station on the road connecting Bosnia and Serbia. The fortress of Dobrun reached the peak of its prosperity in the fifteenth century. As one of the main strongholds in the domain of the Pavlović, the fortress received further additions. From that period, in our opinion, date the defences above the left bank of the Rzav, i.e. the protruding circular towers similar to developments in military architecture in the Kingdom of Bosnia. Dobrun retained its importance under Turkish rule as a checkpoint on the so-called "Bosnian road". The question as to how long a Turkish garrison stood guard over the walls of Dobrun cannot be reliably answered; perhaps until the momentous events in the last decade of the seventeenth century, when the settlement by the Rzav and the nearby monastery had to be abandoned.