Crkvene institucije u srednjovjekovnoj praksi

Thearticle sought to put the social and political agency of the Trogir Canons inthe period from 1300 to 1360 into the wider context of political conflicts thattook place between opposing noble factions within the Trogir commune in the14th century. However, before commencing with the analysis, the author gives abasic insight into the status and infrastructure of the Trogir ecclesiasticalorganization, situated in its respective Dalmatian- Croatian and Hungariancontext. Starting with the normative definition of a Cathedral Chapter, whichexists to assist the Bishop and engage in the pastoral care of its human flock, thearticle compares the idea with the practical dealings of the Trogir Canons. Itis highlighted that their dealings were almost primarily concerned withthese-worldly matters. On the other hand, and on the basis of tracking severalTrogir 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 someothers, which are heavily exposed in the primary sources, it is argued that theTrogir Cathedral Chapter was not functioning in practice as an independent churchcorporation, rather than the Canons were in one way or another involved in the factionalstrifes. More precisely, the considered canons were deeply connected with the noblefamilies, from which practically all of them originated, and sequentially withthe informal factions. Therefore, the Canons exploited the existinginstitutional (corporate) framework and material resources of the CathedralChapter in the pursuit of their own individual or factional goals. In thatrespect, the Cathedral Chapter cannot be considered as an entity separate fromthe activities of the city lay authorities, regardless of the actual distinctionin political and judicial jurisdiction between ecclesiastical and secularinstitutions. The Case of Trogir provided very fruitful material, whichallowed the unraveling of social and political networks and the role ofindividual participants in the collective (political) agency. In other words, thepaper put the focus more on individual agency, and less to structures, bearingin mind that individual agency is exactly that which shapes the institutions inthe end.