Diskussion:Stećak

Übertrag des unverständlichen ersten Satzes im Abschnitt Herkunft

„Die berühmten "stećci" wurden berücksichtigt als typisch Vlach erbe“

---

---

---

Tut mir leid aber diesen Satz verstehe ich auf vielen Ebenen nicht.

• Wer oder was ist „Vlach“? Ich vermute mal das ist eine Bezeichnung für eine Volksgruppe, Ethnie oder Religionsgemeinschaft???
• „erbe“, gemeint ist wohl Erbe
• Worauf soll sich typisch beziehen?

Auf Vlach? Was soll typisch Vlach bedeuten?

Oder auf Erbe? Dann bitte typisches Erbe.

• In diesem Zusammenhang passt das Verb „wurden berücksichtigt“ nicht. Gemeint ist wohl eher „wurden angesehen“ oder „wurden gehalten für“.

Irgendwie scheint es ja um die Interpretation oder die Zuordnung der „stećci“ zu gehen.

• Passt das Tempus des Verbs? Warum die Vergangenheitsform?

War das so in der Vergangenheit, dass die „stećci“ den „Vlach“ zugeordnet wurde? Und was ist jetzt?

Die Verwendung der Vergangenheitsform in diesem Zusammenhang impliziert, dass dies jetzt nicht mehr so ist. Wenn also die Zuschreibung der „stećci“ zu den „Vlach“ jetzt nicht mehr so vorgenommen wird, warum soll das dann überhaupt im Artikel erwähnt werden?

• „Die berühmten "stećci" wurden...“ Nur die berühmten "stećci" oder betrifft die Aussage, die zu machen versucht wird, die "stećci" allgemein?
• Die genannten Quellen sind aus den 60ern. Da würde ich annehmen , dass die neuere Quelle von 1996 eher den Stand der Forschung bzgl. der Interpretation wiedergibt. Wahlweise könnte man ja auch mal Nachsehen, was in den Unterlagen zum Welterbe zitiert wird. Diese wurden von den vier UNESCO-Vertragsstaaten gemeinsam erarbeitet. In diesen Unterlagen sollte der aktuelle Stand der Forschung zu finden sein.

Kurz und gut, der Anfangs genannte Satz ist in seiner jetztigen Form unverständlich. Darum ist der auch wieder draußen. Bitte hier erklären, was der Satz bedeuten soll, und her einen Verbesserungsvorschlag erarbeiten. In verständlicher Form können gerne weitere Information zu Herkunft und Interpretation in den Artikel eingebaut werden.

Wenn Du IP das englische Originalzitat mit etwas mehr Kontext hier nachreichst, helfe ich auch beim Übersetzen. --Wiki Surfer BCR (Diskussion) 23:52, 25. Jan. 2018 (CET)

Please read "Ethnic origin" and "Vlach" sections of the "Stecak" (article in English in wikipedia) (Plese excuse me for not knowing German)

Ethnic origin:

Until now the most dominant, but still not fully accepted,[76] theory relates them with the autochthonous Vlach communities in the Balkan.[26][90]

Vlach:

The autochthonous Vlachian theory was proposed by Bogumil Hrabak (1956) and Marian Wenzel (1962), and more recently was supported by the archeological and anthropological researches of skeleton remains from the graves under stećci.[95]

( The example of the Vlachs perfectly illustrates the complex processes related to cultures which were overwhelmingly subjugated by their neighbours and lost the fight. Vlach heritage in Western Balkans is often marginalized and is sometimes even stripped of its right to be called „heritage” and the minorities this heritage belongs to are forced to live in conditions which are close to assimilation.)

(nicht signierter Beitrag von 79.118.80.96 (Diskussion) 08:43, 26. Jan. 2018‎)

Dear anonymous user, thanks for your effort to reply on this discussion page.

Please allow a few comments: In principle the English Wikipedia article, cannot be used as source within the wikiversum, but certainly I am willing to read the article as some kind of introduction and check the sources therein. As the sources you quote are from the 60th, I will think about, how I could incorporate them. Probably it could go between the interpretation from 1888[4] and what is labelled as today's interpretation but in fact is from 1996[1]. I am also curious what is written in the documentation for the Nomination as UNESCO world heritage site, which presumably was compiled in 2010 and later years. Before I'm going to edit the article, I would like educate myself a bit more, so just don't be disappointed, when I take my time. --Wiki Surfer BCR (Diskussion) 18:47, 26. Jan. 2018 (CET)

PS.: The following German articles might be helpful to explain the term "Vlach": Walachen, Maurowalachen, ...

With that in mind, I could imagine adding a sentence like the following, maybe at the end of the section "Herkunft":

„Auch die Möglichkeit, dass die Stećci ein kulturelles Erbe der romanische Volksgruppe der Maurowalachen sind, wurde/wird in Betracht gezogen.“

But before adding this, I really would like to do some more reading on this topic.

Best regards, --Wiki Surfer BCR (Diskussion) 19:12, 26. Jan. 2018 (CET)

References of authors who wrote about Vlach origin of "stecci":

1. Marian Wenzel, Bosnian and Herzegovinian Tombstobes-Who Made Them and Why?" Sudost-Forschungen 21(1962): 102-143

2. John V. A. Fine,, The Late Medieval Balkans: A Critical Survey from the Late Twelfth Century, University of Michigan Press, 1994, p.19

3. Lovrenovic, Dubravko (2013). Stecci: Bosansko i humsko mramorje srednjeg vijeka [Stecci: Bosnian and Hum marbles from Middle Age] (in Croatian). Ljevak. ISBN 9789533035468. pages 52, 72, 176, 307.

4. Cebotarev, Andrej (1996). "Review of Stecci and Vlachs: Stecci and Vlach migrations in the 14th and 15th century in Dalmatia and Southwestern Bosnia". Povijesni prilozi [Historical Contributions] (in Croatian). Zagreb: Croatian Institute of History. 14 (14) page 322

5. Miloševic, Ante (1991). Stecci i Vlasi: Stecci i vlaške migracije 14. i 15. stoljeca u Dalmaciji i jugozapadnoj Bosni [Stecci and Vlachs: Stecci and Vlach migrations in the 14th and 15th century in Dalmatia and Southwestern Bosnia] (in Croatian). Split: Regionalni zavod za zaštitu spomenika kulture. p. 8

6. Kurtovic, Esad (2013). "Vlasi i stecci" [Vlachs and stecci]. Radovi (in Bosnian). Sarajevo: Filozofski fakultet.

7. Kurtovic, Esad (2015). "Vlasi Drobnjaci i stecci (Crtica o Nikoli Raškovicu i njegovim nasljednicima)" [Drobnjaci Vlachs and stecci (A remark about Nikola Raškovic and his heiress)]. Godišnjak (in Bosnian). Sarajevo: ANUBiH (44): 303–316.

8. Benac, Alojz (1967). Stecci. Mala istoria umetnosti Jugoslavija (Serbian), Paperback

9. Malcom, Noel (1994). Bosnia: A Short History (Vlachs in Bosnia). Reprinted by permission of the author and New York University Press. New York University Press. ISBN 9780814755204.

10. A. P.Vlasto, The entry of the Slavs into Christendom, Cambridge, University Press, 1970, p.234, ISBN 978-0-521-07459-9

11. Arthur Evans, Antiquarian researches in Illyricum : Part I-IV, Nichol and Sons, 1883, p.33

12. Mužić, Ivan (2009). "Vlasi i starobalkanska pretkršćanska simbolika jelena na stećcima". Starohrvatska prosvjeta (in Croatian). Split: Museum of Croatian Archaeological Monuments. III (36): 315–349.(nicht signierter Beitrag von 79.112.20.31 (Diskussion) 08:28, 27. Jan. 2018 (CET))

The most dominant theory ist es m.E. jedenfalls nicht. --j.budissin^+/- 11:43, 27. Jan. 2018 (CET)

Ja in der Tat, an The most dominant theory glaub' ich auch nicht. Aber die Darstellung im Artikel ist schon so sehr verkürzt, dass es fehlerhaft ist. Siehe gleich hierunter. --Wiki Surfer BCR (Diskussion) 13:25, 27. Jan. 2018 (CET)

Dear anonymous user,

thanks again for your effort you put into compiling this compilation of literature. I am quite optimistic that at least a few of the titles are available at the Munich libraries (e. g. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Universitätsbibliothek der LMU München, ...). While my knowledge of Slavic languages is quite limited (I am barely able to understand the titles) the English titles will do, if there is need to go to that depth.

Meanwhile I tried to catch up a bit and went to the Website of the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, in particular the following documents:

• WHC: Stećci Medieval Tombstone Graveyards auf der Website des Welterbezentrums der UNESCO (englisch und französisch).

providing a brief summary and a gateway to the detailed documentation of the world heritage cite

• EVAL: Stećci – Medieval Tombstones (Bosnia Montenegro, Serbia) No 1504. (PDF, 3.7 MB) Advisory Body Evaluation (ICOMOS). UNESCO World Heritage Centre, 2016, abgerufen am 27. Januar 2018 (englisch). 

A 15 page document discussing the essentials of the World Heritage Nomination.

• NOM: Stećci – Medieval Tombstones. (PDF, 1.2 GB) Nomination file. UNESCO World Heritage Centre, 2016, abgerufen am 27. Januar 2018 (englisch). 

The 1500 page compilation of documents for the UNESCO world heritage nomination.

So here are a few short passages which I would like to discuss:

• From WHC: The stećci are notable for their inter-confessionality, used for burial by all three medieval Christian communities, including the Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church and the Church of Bosnia (which lasted for about three centuries until the second half of the 15th century).

To me this first of all proves that the article is at error, when in section "Herkunft" it kind of exclusively attributes the stećci only to the Bosnian Church. On the other hand the cited passage let me doubt, whether the stećci could/should be referred to as a Vlach heritage exclusively.

• From EVAL page 134 left (pdf page 9): The stećci present a vast resource and focus for research. Inventorying of the stećci has occurred for over a century, but mostly in the post-World War II period, and especially since the 1970s. There is now a significant regional literature about the stećci. Despite this long period of interest, there is still a sense that there is considerable research and documentation yet to be done.

In short: Research is still ongoing, it is too early to reach a final conclusion on the origin of the stecci. Literature before the 1970s may be a bit out of date. Don't worry, I noticed that you also provided much more recent sources.

• From EVAL page 131 right (pdf page 6): The diverse range of forms, reliefs and inscriptions in the selected sites are considered to provide an exceptional historical source and testimony to European medieval culture. The States Parties consider that the stećci therefore represent the cultures and history of the medieval states in this region (Serbian, Duklja-Zeta, Hungaro-Croatian and Bosnian), the growth of the Dubrovnik Republic and the communes on the Adriatic coast under Hungaro-Croation and Venetian rulers, the establishment of feudal regulations and vassal relations, the emergence of upper and lower nobility and ecclesiastical authority, and the emergence of the Ottoman Empire.

So here a variety of cultures and states are listed, confirming my conclusion that one should not refer to the stecci as an heritage from one single origin. So what about the Vlachs? They are not listed in the cited passage above. Well as you already pointed out above, Vlachian heritage is often marginalised. To my knowledge, in the period when the stecci were erected, the Vlach did not have a state of their own and were soon after assimilated. Thus the Vlachs are ignored in the cited listing. However when I dig a bit deeper into the Nomination File (unfortunately the download of the 1 GB is not complete yet) of course I also find references to the Vlachs.

• references to Vlach, examples from NOM

page 155: ... and to new insights into burial rites and the expansion of the Vlach population during the Middle Ages to the Dalmatian inland.

page 158: Inscriptions appear on five stećci and provide information on some family members of Hrabren Miloradović, who were Vlach katuns, (Vlachs called Donji Vlasi) and on Radimlja where ...

page 158 Duke Stipan died around 1470 and Duke Petar is mentioned in the context of 1477 as elder of Vlach katun Hrabren.

page 170: Members of the Boljuni – Vladisalić group that belonged to Donji Vlasi (Lower Vlachs) were also buried there.

(still waiting for the download to complete, expecting more findings)

So here is my conclusion: The article as is ignores important aspects, among others the Vlach heritage which definitely should be mentioned. The documentation provided by the UNESCO-WHC will help to substantiate the necessary improvement of the article. Although at the start I was a bit annoyed by your edit just dropping an unintelligible sentence into the article, in the end I am thankful that you did it, as it started this exchange and in the end will lead to a rectification of the article. Just allow for some time to work on this improvement. --Wiki Surfer BCR (Diskussion) 13:25, 27. Jan. 2018 (CET)

Many thanks for your fair work. Usually UNESCO promotes minorities but in this case, the minority heritage was neglected. The proposal of the Slavic countries hid the Vlach contribution.