Prusac Fort (BH_18)
Country or territory: Bosnia and Herzegovina
Name of organisation compiling the information: Commission to Preserve National Monuments
Contact name: Mirela Mulaluć Handan
Email address: mirela.m.handan@kons.gov.ba
Name and address of building(s) or site: Historic site of the Prusac fort
Inventory reference number(s): 06-6-1045/03
Building type(s): Military – Fort
Main date(s): Antique / nineteenth / beginning/ nineteenth
Works were carried out on the Old Fort throughout its history until the early nineteenth century.
Current use(s): Historical site
Significance
During the course of archaeological excavations conducted in the 1980s on the hilltop, within the citadel walls, prehistoric material from the Eneolithic, Bronze and Iron ages was discovered. There was a hill fort settlement here, which was destroyed by later building works in the mediaeval and Ottoman periods.
Prusac was in the mediaeval župa of Uskoplje, which was divided into Upper and Lower Uskoplje. There are no surviving documentary sources on Prusac in the mediaeval period.
During the fighting between the Ottomans and the Hungarians over the establishment of the Jajce banate the border in Uskoplje župa was a shifting line. The Ottomans probably took the fort in 1463, but it did not remain under their control. In the autumn of that year the army of Herceg Vladislav, which operated in Uskoplje župa, helped to liberate Jajce from the Ottomans. It was then, most likely, that Prusac came under mediaeval Bosnian rule.
Prusac was finally conquered by Skender-paša’s son Mustaj-beg in 1502.
The fort was abandoned in 1838. When the Austro-Hungarian troops occupied Bosnia, the army stayed for a short while in the fort.
General information
The fort consists of three components: the fortress-citadel or acropolis on the hilltop, the bailey below it, and the lower fort. These were built one after the other. The old fort covers an area of about 22,000 sq.m.
Fortress-citadel
The approximate date, even, when the fortress and bailey were built is unknown, but it was probably in the late mediaeval period. The natural hilltop plateau on which the fortress was built measures 20 x 20 m and lies south-west/north-east. The size and shape of the fortress is perfectly adapted to the rocky terrain and fortification principles. The fortress is quadrilateral in plan with the north side cut off and terminating in a triangle (40°). To judge from its form it is of relatively late date, in the 15th century. Exposed as it was to attack from three sides, it is surrounded by thick ramparts. The entrance to the fortress is near the end of the north-east wall; it is now no more than a breach in the wall about 3 metres wide.
A quadrilateral tower of irregular shape was built on to the inside of the south end of the south-east wall. The south-east wall is 19 metres long, two metres longer than the north-west wall. The walls of the tower have survived to a maximum height of 6-10 metres, depending on whether one looks at them from the inside or the outside. The thickness of the walls varies. At some later date three apertures for cannon were built into the south-east wall, of which the one on the south corner survives, but the other two are filled with rubble. Mazalić found a heap of ruins outside the tower to the right and left of the entrance, suggesting that there was once a building of some kind there (Mazalić, 1951, 173).
Diagonally from the tower, at the end of the north-west wall, is a smaller guard tower, with a well beside it.
The guardhouse stood on the highest point of the terrain. It was of irregular shape. The entrance wall has not survived.
Bailey below the fortress
The fortress was surrounded on the outside, where it was easily approachable – from the western to the end of the south-eastern wall – by a moat 3-4 m deep and up to 6 m wide, with a bridge over it. The moat is now partly filled in, and the access to the fortress is covered with earth. Parallel to tower I, the outer, southern part of the moat, which is hollowed into the rocky ground at this point, is surrounded by a thin wall about 1 metre thick, built later,in which two apertures for firearms have survived and are visible from the exterior.
The main entrance to the bailey stands about 1.5 metres from tower II. The location of the entrance is well defended from both towers. The entrance is now merely a gap in the wall, much of which is crumbling. All that survives is the core and a few remains of the exterior revetment by tower II. Here too are the remains of a loophole, now buried on the inside.
Tower II is octagonal in shape, and forms part of the defensive structure of the bailey below the fortress. The present height of the tower is about 7 metres on the outside, while inside the ground has been filled in and levelled, to at least half the height of the ground floor. The entrance to the tower was from the north-east, but there is no surviving trace of the door jambs, merely an opening about 2 metres wide. Mazalić found the remains, or the rubble, of a building in the bailey between the entrance and tower II, measuring 12 x 6-8 m (Mazalić, 1951, 175). Local tradition claims that these are the ruins of the Bajazidija mosque. A surviving tarih or chronogram of the renovation of the mosque in 1601 records that a mosque (the Bajazidija) was built in 1488 by Skender-paša in the Prusac fort and dedicated to the Sultan of the day, Beyazit II (1481-1512). During archaeological works conducted as part of the project entitled “Uskoplje Župa in the mediaeval and early Turkish periods (to the 17th century)”, part of the foundation walls of a building lying west-east were uncovered under the rubble of the building that tradition holds are the ruins of the Bayazidija mosque. The building measured 10.9 x 5.9 m, with walls 0.6 metres thick, of cut stone, laid without great care in courses and bonded with a little lime mortar. At the western end of the south wall of the building that had been discovered, it was ascertained that a later building lying north-east/south-west had been built on the old wall. The walls of this later building were of good, regularly cut stone blocks. The different wall structures and orientation of the two buildings, and the local tradition that there was a mediaeval church here on which a mosque was later built in 1488, led the archaeologists to assume that the Carevica or Bajazidija mosque was built on the foundations of the church (Spaho, 1983, 33).
The bailey by the fortress was surrounded by a wall to the east and north-east. All that remains of this wall is some minor remains between tower I and bastion I, and some of the walls of “bastions” II and III. The bailey covers an area of about 3,000 sq.m., with a length of 50 m and a width of 60 m.
Chronologically, the fortress was the first to be built, followed by the bailey below it with tower II and the three bastions.
There was another moat below the east wall of the bailey, running along its entire length. The moat was 6-10 m wide and about 3 m deep. It began to erode in the 19th century. A clock tower was built in it, probably in the 18th century.
Lower Fort
Yet another bailey took shape on the eastern slope below the fortress – the Lower Fort, occupying an area of approx. 90 x 180 m and containing a settlement within ramparts. The outer perimeter walls of the entire complex of the old Prusac fort ran from the moat below tower I, to the south-east of bastion IV. The lower part of the perimeter ramparts ran from here south-west to tower IV to the north, at the foot of the slope on which the fort lay. The north wall of the bailey ran from tower IV in an irregular line to bastion III in the bailey. There were projecting towers (bastion III, towers III and IV) in the east bailey wall at the southern end, in the centre and at the northern end, each with three apertures for firearms, similar to those on the southern perimeter wall of the fortress, the south wall of the bailey and tower II. There was a moat about 10 metres wide outside this wall, now completely filled in.
The main gatehouse was in the south-west part of the lower fort. The fort was approached by a cobbled road; the main Prusac road was also cobbled. The access road was 3 metres wide and is now asphalted. There was a crossroads by the gatehouse, which was still being called “londža” (“meeting place”) by the older locals in the mid 20th century (Mazalić, 1951, 172). Prior to 1878 the main gatehouse to the fort with its oak doorframe and iron plates still stood. The Austrians removed it all and used it for other purposes. Around 1950 part of the doorjamb of the gatehouse still lay by the town mosque (Mazalić, 1951, 167), but it is now no longer there.
The lower fort and the south-western perimeter wall were probably built in the late 15th century. Later repairs to parts of the wall are to be seen. Repairs to the entire fort are known to have been carried out during the time of the Bosnian beylerbey Melek Ahmed-pasha in the second half of the 17th century (Mazalić 1951, 167). Prusac was an important site in the early Ottoman period, as it was again later in the 17th century. Although it always remained a duchy, from the 16th century on people from the Klis sancak and Bosnian governors encamped there from time to time, guarding the frontier and launching incursions into Venetian and Austrian territory.
There was a moat outside the gates to the fort, cut into the rocky soil, with a drawbridge. Çelebi found 80 soldiers’ houses in the fortress, and particularly notes that there was no imperial mosque, armoury, granary or anything else there (Çelebi, 1979, 132).
Research and conservation and restoration works
- 1958 – repairs to the Clock Tower in Prusac.
- 1982-83 – archaeological excavations conducted as part of the project entitled “ Uskoplje Župa in the mediaeval and early Turkish periods”, led by the Republic Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments and the Natural Heritage of BiH. The results were set out in a report to the Self-Managing Cultural Association of RbiH, but the only part that was published was the section relating to the prehistoric strata in the Prusac fort (Marijanović, 2001).
- The archaeological material excavated during these works in 1983 in the Prusac fortress consisted of metal and pottery items and part of a capital, probably from the mosque. The metal items are in the National Museum of BiH in the mediaeval collection, and all the rest, which remained in the Republic Institute for the Protection of the Cultural, Historical and Natural Heritage of BiH in Sarajevo, disappeared during the 1992-95 war.
Categories of Significance
- Of outstanding national importance.
Categories of ownership or interest
- Of national interest.
Documentation and bibliliographic references
Documentation
The following documentation is in the possession of the Commission to Preserve National Monuments
- Documentation on the location and current owner and user of the property (copy of cadastral plan and copy of land registry entry).
- Data on the previous and current condition and use of the property, including a description and photographs, data of war damage if any, data on restoration or other works on the property if any, etc.
- Historical, architectural and other documentary material on the property, as set out in the bibliography.
Bibliography
- Documentation of the Commission to Preserve National Monuments.
- Çelebi, Evliya. Putopis (Bosnian translation of his Travelogue). Sarajevo, Veselin Masleša, Cultural Heritage Editions,1979.
- Dinić, Mihajlo. “Zemlje hercega sv. Save” (Lands of Herceg St. Sava) in: Srpske zemlje u srednjem veku (Serbian lands in the mediaeval period). Belgrade, 1978, 178-269.
- Kreševljaković, Hamdija. Prilozi povijesti bosanskih gradova pod turskom upravom (Contributions to the history of Bosnian towns under Turkish rule), Contributions for oriental philology and the history of the Yugoslav people under Turkish II/1951. Sarajevo: 1952, 119-184.
- Kreševljaković, Hamdija. “Sahat-kule u Bosni i Hercegovini” (Clock towers in BiH), Naše starine IV. Sarajevo: 1957, 17-32.
- Kreševljaković, Hamdija. “Stari bosanski gradovi”, (Old Bosnian forts) Naše starine I. Sarajevo: 1953. 7-45.
- Marijanović, Brunislav. “Prusac (Biograd) - prapovijesno višeslojno nalazište” (Prusac [Biograd] – a prehistoric multistrata site), Journal of the National Museum in Sarajevo (Archaeology), new series, svVoleska 48/49. Sarajevo: 2001, 92-99.
- Mazalić, Đoko. “Biograd-Prusac, stari bosanski grad“ (Biograd-Prusac, old Bosnian fort), Journal of the National Museum in Sarajevo, new series no. VI, Sarajevo: 1951, 147-189.
- Pašalić, Esad. Antička naselja i komunikacije u Bosni i Hercegovini (Antique era settlements and communications in BiH), Special publication by the National Museum. Sarajevo: 1960.
- Šabanović, Hazim. Bosanski pašaluk, postanak i upravna podjela (Bosnian pashaluk, genesis and administrative division). Sarajevo: Svjetlost, 1982.
- Spaho, Fehim. “Župa Uskoplje u srednjem vijeku i ranom turskom periodu (do 17.st) sa posebnim osvrtom na utvrđene gradove Vesela Straža, Susjedgrad i Prusac” (Uskoplje Župa in the mediaeval and early Turkish periods – to 17th C), Institute for the Protection of Cultural Monuments and Natural Sites of BiH Sarajevo. Research project SIZ studies BIH. Sarajevo, 1983, 1- 366.
- Truhelka, Ćiro, Naši gradovi, opis najljepših sredovječnih gradova Bosne i Hercegovine, (Our forts, description of the finest mediaeval forts of BiH). Sarajevo: 1904. 64-69.
- Truhelka, Ćiro. “Tursko-slovijenski spomenici dubrovačke arhive” (Turko-Slav monuments in the Dubrovnik archives) Journal of the National Museum in Sarajevo XXIII. Sarajevo: 1911, 1-162.
- Vego, Marko. Naselja srednjevjekovne bosanske države (Settlements of the mediaeval Bosnian state). Sarajevo: 1957.
Condition
1. Very poor
An on-site inspection conducted on 27 November 2003 ascertained the following:
- About sixty years ago Mazalić visited the fort and described it in detail. By comparison with the plan of the fort and the ruined sections that he drew, the present situation is markedly worse. Parts of the walls are overgrown with vegetation. The moats were used in part in the 1992-95 war, and trenches were dug in the bailey.
- Fortress
- The revetment has fallen from the surviving sections of the perimeter ramparts. The entrances to the building are merely gaps, with no structural elements remaining. The interior revetment of the walls of tower I and the guardhouse has fallen away in part. In some areas inside tower I only the lower courses of the revetment survives. The revetment of the outside walls of both buildings has partly fallen away, mainly at the corners. The well has since been repaired, with parapet walls and a top slab.
- Bailey
- The wall between tower II and bastion I have suffered badly. In parts there are simply ruins, with no surviving revetment, on parts of the retaining wall. The exterior revetment of tower II has also suffered badly, as has that of the perimeter walls extending from the tower in both directions. The entrances to the bailey and tower II are mere gaps in the wall.
- During the 1992-95 war a trench was dug in the bailey at right angles to the mediaeval moat, ending at the southern end of the moat with an opening that was closed off by a kind of “door” made of planks.
- Lower Fort
- The gatehouse has been completely destroyed. The perimeter wall from the south-west corner to the place where the gatehouse formerly stood is fairly ruinous and overgrown. All that remains of bastion IV is the corner that projected furthest outwards. The height of the perimeter wall varies, up to two metres, but the wall has almost completely disappeared in some places. The section of the perimeter rampart from the gatehouse to the northern corner and tower IV has partly survived to a height of about 1.5 metres over a length of several metres. In some places it is overgrown with vegetation.
- Building of houses and the development of mahalas began long since at the base of the Lower Fort and in the south-western part of the bailey (from the access road to the fortress), which is now packed with houses and courtyards. The moat that formerly encircled the ramparts of the Lower Fort has long since been filled in and a street now runs there.
- The upper section of the south-western perimeter rampart is completely ruinous, with only the retaining walls on the slopes surviving. A little of the wall remains at the angle from which the Lower Bailey and the inhabited area begins. From there to bastion IV the above-ground parts of this wall, which is thinner than the others, have survived in part.
Amount of war or associated damage:
2. Repairs needed
Risk
- The site is at risk of rapid deterioration as a result of lack of maintenance and failure to implement even minimal protection measures.
Condition risk
G. Immediate risk of further rapid detorioration or loss of fabric, solution agreed but not begun.
Technical assessment and costing
The following protection measures are to be applied to the national monument, which consists of the site of the fortress-citadel, the bailey below it and the moat with clock tower, known as the Upper Fort of Prusac:
- all works on the monuments comprising the architectural ensemble are prohibited other than conservation and restoration works, including those designed to display the monument, with the approval of the Federal Ministry responsible for regional planning and under the expert supervision of the heritage protection authority of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereinafter: the heritage protection authority);
- all works that could have the effect of altering the site are prohibited, as is the erection of temporary facilities or permanent structures not intended solely for the protection and presentation of the national monument;
- the removal of stone and any further damage to the site are prohibited;
- the dumping of all kinds of waste is prohibited.
In the area of the lower fort in which, houses and mahalas (residential quarters) have been built and the central mosque is located, the following protection measures are to be applied:
- the dismantling of the parts of the ramparts surrounding the lower fort and the removal of stone there from are prohibited;
- all new construction and extensions/alterations to existing buildings by the walls of the fortifications are prohibited;
- a green belt shall be instituted alongside the fortifications as a buffer zone;
- all new buildings and extensions/alterations to existing buildings must conform to the townscape values of the buildings of the architectural site (maximum two storeys, i.e. 6.5 metres to the base of the roof frame, hipped roofs, stone and white-washed plastered walls); and must have the approval of the heritage protection authority;
- the erection of billboards, advertisements and signs that spoil the view and block the view of the fortifications is prohibited;
- the breaching of the ramparts to lay access roads to properties is prohibited;
- the dumping of waste is prohibited.
The Government of the Federation shall be responsible in particular for implementing the following measures:
- clearing the walls of vegetation that poses a danger to the structure of the monument;
- repairing the walls.
The removal of the movable heritage items, which are placed in the mediaeval archaeological collection of the National Museum of BiH in Sarajevo, from Bosnia and Herzegovina is prohibited.
By way of exception to the provisions of the movable heritage items, the temporary removal from Bosnia and Herzegovina of the archaeological finds for the purposes of display or conservation shall be permitted if it is established that conservation works cannot be carried out in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Permission for the temporary removal of the archaeological finds from Bosnia and Herzegovina under the conditions stipulated in the preceding paragraph shall be issued by the Commission to Preserve National Monuments, if it is determined beyond doubt that it will not jeopardise the items in any way. In granting permission for the temporary removal of the items, the Commission shall stipulate all the conditions under which the removal may take place, the date by which the items shall be returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the responsibility of individual authorities and institutions for ensuring that these conditions are met, and shall notify the Government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the relevant security service, the customs authority of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the general public accordingly.
Summary of stages, proposed in the Preliminary Technical Assessment and Feasibility study, is as follows:
Description of activities Cost (€)
Urgent interventions 304 898
Research works, assessment of the condition of materials and structures 18 450
Archaeological research 8 000
Draw up overall project documentation for the repair and restoration of the property
22 000
Maintenance and Management Plan for Prusac 20 000
Integration of the monument into tourism sector 6 750
Capacity building 2 000
TOTAL 382 098
As part of the “Transfer for Cultural Heritage,” the Government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina allocated 10,000 KM in 2005 for drawing up protection measures. The geodetic survey of the fort has been completed.
Since 2008, funds have been allocated from the budget of Federal Ministry of Culture & Sport, Tourist Association of CBC and FBiH – 76.600 KM. In 2008 the European Union provided 132.000 KM and Federal Ministry for Regional Planning provided 132.000 KM.
Conservation is under way in line with projects and under the expert supervision of the Federal Institute for Protection of Monuments
Ownership
- Public property – the Fort.
- Private – houses in civilian settlement that took shape below the Fort – lower fort.
Occupation
- No occupancy – the fort.
- Fully occupied in regular use - houses in settlement below the fort.
Management
The provisions relating to protection and rehabilitation measures set forth by the Law on the Implementation of the Decisions of the Commission to Preserve National Monuments, established pursuant to Annex 8 of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Official Gazette of the Federation of BiH nos. 2/02 and 27/02) apply to the National Monument.
The Commission to Preserve National Monuments is a state-level institution of Bosnia and Herzegovina established pursuant to Annex 8 of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina and by Decision of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and is responsible for adopting decisions designating movable and immovable properties as national monuments, applying the criteria for the designation of national monuments (Official Gazette of Bosnia and Herzegovina no. 33/02). The Commission’s decisions prescribe the basic provisions and protection measures pertaining to each national monument.
The Government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina is responsible for ensuring and providing the legal, scientific, technical, administrative and financial measures necessary to protect, conserve, display and rehabilitate the national monument.
The Government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina is responsible for providing the resources needed to draw up and implement the necessary technical documentation for the rehabilitation of the national monument.
The Ministry of Regional Planning of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina is responsible for the implementation of legally-prescribed protection measures. It is responsible for issuing planning approvals and permits for all works and construction in the protected area on the basis of planning and technical documentation approved by an authorised professional institution.
The Institute for the Protection of Monuments of the Federal Ministry of Culture and Sport is also involved in these activities by verifying whether the conditions set out in the technical documentation have been met. The Institute is responsible for expert supervision, as prescribed by the Decision of the Commission to Preserve National Monuments, and for the implementation of projects or parts thereof financed by the Government of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Decisions designating national monuments are forwarded to the authorities responsible for town planning and cadastral affairs in order to implement the measures prescribed by these decisions, and to the competent municipal court for entry in the Land Register.
Prusac Municipality is responsible, through its various departments and the buildings and planning inspectorate of the Federal Inspectorate Authority, for overseeing and controlling on-site activities.
The Municipality is required to append all its plans and documents pertaining to the protected area of the national monuments to the decisions issued by the Commission to Preserve National Monuments. The Municipality is required to refrain from all activities detrimental to the national monuments, and to co-operate with the Commission to Preserve National Monuments and the Entity institutions in the process of implementing the Commission’s decisions.
Pursuant to the Decision of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Commission to Preserve National Monuments is authorised to perform activities of international co-operation in the field of heritage. The Commission is responsible for the implementation of the project in accordance with the Rules for the implementation of donor funds earmarked for the renovation or protection of the endangered cultural and historical heritage of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Summary
The archaeological excavations conducted in the 1980s on the hilltop revealed the prehistoric material within the citadel walls. There was a hill fort settlement here, which was destroyed by later building works in the mediaeval and Ottoman periods. Fortifications were intensively built during the independent Bosnian state, particularly in the 14th and 15th centuries. The fortification is a developed form of the mediaeval old town, which further developed with a suburbium during the Ottoman rule. It is an important fortification with preserved morphological and defence details. The current condition of the Historic site Prusac Old Fort could be described as poor. It is proposed to restore it to its authentic appearance. Following revitalisation, this could become an important tourist destination.
The priority level of intervention is HIGH.
NOTE:
Condition
1. Very poor
Condition risk
B. Immediate risk of further rapid deterioration or loss of fabric, solution agreed but not begun.
Sign. and date
Silvana Ćobanov, archaeologist
Mirela Mulaluć Handan, architect
2010
|
