Crkvene institucije u srednjovjekovnoj praksi

Abstract

The article sought to put the social and political agency of the Trogir Canons in the period from 1300 to 1360 into the wider context of political conflicts that took place between opposing noble factions within the Trogir commune in the 14th century. However, before commencing with the analysis, the author gives a basic insight into the status and infrastructure of the Trogir ecclesiastical organization, situated in its respective Dalmatian- Croatian and Hungarian context. Starting with the normative definition of a Cathedral Chapter, which exists to assist the Bishop and engage in the pastoral care of its human flock, the article compares the idea with the practical dealings of the Trogir Canons. It is highlighted that their dealings were almost primarily concerned with these-worldly matters. On the other hand, and on the basis of tracking several Trogir Canons, namely Jacob son of Peter (Vitturi), John son of Peter (Castrafoci), Stephan son of Michael (Cega), Lampredius son of Jacob (Vitturi), Kazarica son of Martin (Kazarice), Albert son of Marinus (Andreis) and some others, which are heavily exposed in the primary sources, it is argued that the Trogir Cathedral Chapter was not functioning in practice as an independent church corporation, rather than the Canons were in one way or another involved in the factional strifes. More precisely, the considered canons were deeply connected with the noble families, from which practically all of them originated, and sequentially with the informal factions. Therefore, the Canons exploited the existing institutional (corporate) framework and material resources of the Cathedral Chapter in the pursuit of their own individual or factional goals. In that respect, the Cathedral Chapter cannot be considered as an entity separate from the activities of the city lay authorities, regardless of the actual distinction in political and judicial jurisdiction between ecclesiastical and secular institutions. The Case of Trogir provided very fruitful material, which allowed the unraveling of social and political networks and the role of individual participants in the collective (political) agency. In other words, the paper put the focus more on individual agency, and less to structures, bearing in mind that individual agency is exactly that which shapes the institutions in the end.