Naslov
Neka pitanja o splitskom đakonu Dobri (kraj XI. – početak XII. stoljeća)
(Some Problems about the Deacon Dobre of Split in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries)

Autori
Matijević Sokol, Mirjana

Vrsta, podvrsta i kategorija rada
Poglavlja u knjigama, znanstveni

Knjiga
Spomenica Ljube Bobana 1933. – 1994.

Urednik/ci
Kolar-Dimitrijević, Mira

Izdavač
Zavod za hrvatsku povijest Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu

Grad
Zagreb

Godina
1996

Raspon stranica
61-71

ISBN
9531750831

Ključne riječi
splitski đakon Dobre/Dobro, srednji vijek, Split
(Split Deacon Dobro, Split, Middle Ages)

Sažetak
Historical sources from Split and the surrounding areas from the early Middle Ages recorded the name of Deacon Dobre in several different ways. These are two epigraphic monuments and several diplomatic sources. Furthermore, the historian Thomas, the Archdeacon of Split, mentions an archdeacon, Dobre son of Ditius (Ditus), who played a very important role at a specific time in the history of the church in Split at the eginning of the twelfth century. This paper tries to resolve some of the problems that have arisen in historiography related to Deacon Dobre. One of the problems concerns the actual person of “deacon” Dobre. Some authors (D. Farlati, I. Ostojić) believed that Dobre, the author of the verses in the epitaphs of Petar Crni, and the abbot of St. Steven’s Monastery in Split were one and the same person, i.e. that Petar Crni and Abbot Dobre were brothers. Other authors (Lj. Karaman, V. Novak) proposed the theory that Deacon Dobre, son of Ditius, the scribe who wrote the notitiae in the Supetar Cartulary, was also the author of the verses, and that he also governed the Split Archdiocese at the time of the vacancy of the episcopal see at the beginning of the twelfth century. The author of this paper accepts and further explains this second position. The second problem refers to the reading of the so-called scriptura contigua in the third verse of the epitaph of Petar Crni ...VIGUITERROR... The school of historiography led by Bulić, Novak and Karaman proposed the solution ....viguit error..., trying to explain the word error, while Ćorović and Marković proposed ...vigui terror..., recognizing the epigraphic sepulchral phraseology that draws its origins from antiquity. Some new findings seem to confirm this opinion. The third problem is related to a notitia dated 1040, which was supposedly written by Deacon Dobre. A diplomatic analysis ascertained that it is a forgery made for the monastery of St. Benedict, later St. Raynerius, in the twelfth century. This solves the problem of Deacon Dobre from 1040, as he couldn’t have existed at that time.

Izvorni jezik
Hrvatski

Znanstvena područja
Filologija, Povijest

POVEZANOST RADA