Audiobook: The Republic of Ragusa: An Episode of the Turkish Conquest by Villari, Luigi

The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Republic of Ragusa, by Luigi Villary

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.

Title: The Republic of Ragusa An Episode of the Turkish Conquest

Author: Luigi Villary

Translator: William Hulton

Release Date: August 10, 2017 [EBook #55332]

Language: English

Character set encoding: UTF-8

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE REPUBLIC OF RAGUSA ***

Produced by Turgut Dincer and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)

THE REPUBLIC OF RAGUSA

All rights reserved

[Illustration: Marino Caboga.]

THE REPUBLIC

OF

RAGUSA

AN EPISODE OF THE TURKISH CONQUEST BY LUIGI VILLARI

[Illustration: BYZANTINE DOOR-KNOCKER, RECTOR’S PALACE]

WITH MANY ILLUSTRATIONS BY WILLIAM HULTON

LONDON: J. M. DENT & CO. 29 & 30 BEDFORD STREET, W.C. MCMIV

Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & CO. At the Ballantyne Press

PREFATORY NOTE

Various accounts of Dalmatia have been written in English, many of which include a historical survey of Ragusa; but the only special histories of the town itself are in German or Italian, and even those are not by any means complete. The best is undoubtedly Professor Gelcich’s little book, Dello Sviluppo Civile di Ragusa, a perfect mine of valuable information, of which I have availed myself largely in the present volume. But it deals principally with the internal development, the archeology, and the architecture of the town, and does not dwell on its international position, which for foreign readers is its most important aspect. Engel’s Geschichte des Freystaates Ragusa is useful and fairly accurate, but it is somewhat dry, and more in the nature of a chronicle of events than a real history. The works of the local historians and chroniclers, such as Resti, Ragnina, Luccari, Gondola, and others, although they contain some interesting details and picturesque descriptions, traditions, &c., are written without a notion of historical accuracy, and are inspired by a strong bias which admits no facts unfavourable to Ragusa. That of the Tuscan, Razzi, is more reliable, but by no means wholly to be depended on, and it only brings us down to the end of the sixteenth century. The safest guide to the subject is to be found in the original records of the town, a large portion of which have been published by the South-Slavonic Academy of Agram, by the Hungarian Academy, and various other collections of documents on the history of the Southern Slaves, such as Miklosich’s Monumenta Serbica, Marin Sanudo, the works of Theiner, Počić, Farlati, &c. The modern works on the history of Ragusa of which I have made the most use, besides the above-mentioned work of Professor Gelcich, are the same author’s pamphlets, La Zedda and I Conti di Tuhelj; T. Graham Jackson’s Dalmatia for the chapters on Ragusan architecture; Paul Pisani’s Num Ragusini, &c., for the Venetian period, and his large work La Dalmatie de 1797 à 1815 for the end of the Republic; Klaić’s Geschichte Bosniens for the relations between Ragusa and Bosnia; Heyd’s Histoire du Commerce du Lévant and Professor Jireček’s Handelsstrassen und Bergwerke for Ragusa’s commercial development; Horatio Brown’s Venice for Venetian history; and Puipin and Spasowicz’ history of Slavonic literature. A fuller list of authorities consulted is appended.

I must express my especial indebtedness to Professor Gelcich for the assistance and encouragement which he afforded me in preparing this volume. I also received valuable aid from Signor V. Adamović, who kindly placed his library at my service during my stay at Ragusa; to Signor A. de Serragli, who gave much information on the topography and archeology of the town; to the Padre Bibliotecario of the Franciscan Monastery, who assisted me in my researches; and to Signor Giovanni Saraca. I may say that during my visits to Dalmatia I always found the natives courteous and kindly, and willing to assist me in every way, especially at Ragusa. Of the many features which Dalmatia has in common with Italy, the one which I must call attention to is the fact that in every Dalmatian town there is always at least one local antiquary who has made a life-study of the history and archeology, working with no other thought than the love of the subject, and always willing to assist other students.

I am also indebted to Mr. Herbert P. Horne, who kindly assisted me in the chapters dealing with architecture and painting.

In the spelling of the Slavonic names I have adopted the Croatian orthography, as being the most convenient and the most accurate. The following letters have a peculiar pronunciation:—

C = ts in bits. Thus Cavtat is pronounced Tsavtat.

Č = ch in which. Thus Miljačka is pronounced Miljachka.

Ć is almost identical to the above, but is used only at the end of a word when preceded by an i. Thus Gundulić is pronounced Gundulich.

G is always pronounced hard, as in gig.

H is like the German ch in Buch.

J = y in yet. Thus Jajce is pronounced Yaytse. When at the end of a word and preceded by the letters l or n it softens them into something like the French l in mouillé and the French gne in signe. Thus Sandalj and Sinj.

The letter r is sometimes a semi-vowel, and is pronounced like eurre in French, but less definitely. Many syllables have no other vowel. Thus the name Hrvoje.

S = s in since (never like s in nose).

Š = sh in shave. Thus Dušan is pronounced Dushan.

U = oo in boot.

Z = z in blaze.

Ž is like the French j in jour.

In the case of well-known names and words which are usually spelt in another way, I have adhered to the common orthography. Thus I have written Miklosich instead of Miklosić, and Tsar instead of Car. Dalmatians of Italian sympathies, but having Slavonic names, invariably use the ch in the place of č or ć.

For the spelling “Slave,” instead of the more common “Slav,” my authority is Professor Freeman, who in a note on p. 386 of the Third Series of his Essays gives the following reasons for it: “First, no English word ends in v. Secondly, we form the names of other nations in another way; we say a Swede, a Dane, and a Pole, not a Swed, a Dan, or a Pol. Thirdly, it is important to bear in mind the history of the word—the fact that slave in the sense of δοῦλος is simply the same word with the national name.”

CONTENTS

CHAP. PAGE

I. INTRODUCTION 1

II. THE FOUNDATION AND EARLY HISTORY OF THE CITY (656-1204) 15

III. VENETIAN SUPREMACY: I.—THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS (1204-1276) 58

IV. VENETIAN SUPREMACY: II.—SERVIAN AND BOSNIAN WARS (1276-1358) 90

V. THE TRADE OF RAGUSA 115

VI. ART IN THE THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH CENTURIES 149

VII. RAGUSA UNDER HUNGARIAN SUPREMACY—THE TURKISH INVASION (1358-1420) 163

VIII. THE TURKISH CONQUEST (1420-1526) 219

IX. TRADE AND INTERNAL CONDITIONS DURING THE HUNGARIAN PERIOD 263

X. RAGUSA INDEPENDENT OF HUNGARY (1526-1667) 278

XI. RAGUSAN SHIPS AND SEAMEN IN THE SERVICE OF SPAIN 306

XII. FROM THE EARTHQUAKE TO THE NAPOLEONIC WARS (1667-1797) 317

XIII. ART SINCE THE YEAR 1358 339

XIV. LITERATURE 370

XV. THE FALL OF THE REPUBLIC 382

LIST OF BOOKS ON THE HISTORY AND TOPOGRAPHY OF RAGUSA 417

INDEX 421

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PORTRAIT OF MARINO CABOGA (Photogravure) (From the Galleria di Ragusei Illustri) Frontispiece

BYZANTINE DOOR-KNOCKER, RECTOR’S PALACE Title-page

PAGE

ENTRANCE TO THE HARBOUR OF RAGUSA 1

VIEW OF RAGUSA (From P. G. Coronelli’s “Views of Dalmatia,” 1680) facing 15

ONOFRIO’S FOUNTAIN IN THE PIAZZA 41

THE QUAY AND HARBOUR GATE facing 54

RAGUSA FROM THE EAST facing 58

TORRE MENZE 66

GENERAL VIEW OF RAGUSA, FROM THE WEST 83

BAS-RELIEF OF ST. BLAIZE, NEAR THE PORTA PLOCE 95

PLAN OF RAGUSA facing 97

FORTIFICATIONS OF STAGNO GRANDE 99

CLOISTER OF THE FRANCISCAN MONASTERY facing 108

COURTYARD OF THE SPONZA (CUSTOM HOUSE) 121

FAÇADE OF THE SPONZA (CUSTOM HOUSE), AND CLOCK TOWER 131

CAPITAL IN THE FRANCISCAN CLOISTER 152

CAPITAL IN THE FRANCISCAN CLOISTER 153

FAÇADE OF THE RECTOR’S PALACE facing 168

APOTHECARY’S GARDEN, FRANCISCAN MONASTERY 189

ENTRANCE TO THE FRANCISCAN MONASTERY facing 196

TERRACE OF THE FRANCISCAN MONASTERY, WITH THE TORRE MENZE IN THE BACKGROUND 207

CLOISTER OF THE DOMINICAN MONASTERY 231

SKETCH MAP OF THE TERRITORIES OF THE RAGUSAN REPUBLIC facing 240

THE ORLANDO COLUMN 249

BIRD’S-EYE VIEW OF RAGUSA AND THE NEIGHBOURHOOD (From an Old Map, 1670) facing 263

SKETCH MAP OF THE ENVIRONS OF RAGUSA facing 272

FORTE SAN LORENZO 289

GARDEN NEAR RAGUSA 299

ISOLA DI MEZZO 313

COURTYARD OF THE RECTOR’S PALACE 325

MOSTAR, IN THE HERZEGOVINA 334

“ÆSCULAPIUS” CAPITAL, RECTOR’S PALACE 340

SCULPTURED IMPOST, RECTOR’S PALACE 345

SCULPTURED BRACKET, RECTOR’S PALACE 349

CHURCH OF THE CONFRATERNITY OF THE ROSARY 355

TRIPTYCH BY NICCOLÒ RAGUSEI IN THE DOMINICAN MONASTERY facing 363

GIOVANNI GONDOLA (From the Galleria di Ragusei Illustri) facing 375

TORRE MENZE AND THE WALLS 389

TERRACE OF THE VILLE BRAVAČIĆ, NEAR RAGUSA 405

MAP OF DALMATIA, BOSNIA, AND THE HERZEGOVINA facing 417

MAP OF THE BALKAN PENINSULA facing 418

[Illustration: ENTRANCE TO THE HARBOUR OF RAGUSA]

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

The eastern shore of the Adriatic from the Quarnero to the Bocche di Cattaro is a series of deep inlets and bays, with rocky mountains rising up behind, while countless islands, forming a veritable archipelago, follow the coastline. The country is for the most part bare and stony. The cypress, the olive, the vine grow on it, but never in great quantities. Patches of juniper and other bushes are often the only relief to the long stretches of sterile coast. Here and there more favoured spots appear. At Spalato and in the Canale dei Sette Castelli, on the island of Curzola, in the environs of Ragusa, the vegetation is luxuriant, almost tropical. But Dalmatia is always a narrow strip, and as one proceeds southwards it becomes ever narrower, the mountain ranges at various points coming right down to the water’s edge. The land is subject to intense heat in summer, and is free from great cold, even in the middle of winter. But it suffers from fierce winds, from the bora, which, whirling down from the treeless wastes of the Karst mountains in the north-east, sweeps along the coastline with terrific force. Another curse from which it suffers is the frequency and severity of the earthquakes, which from time to time have wrought fearful havoc among the Dalmatian towns.

But in spite of these disadvantages, along this shore a Latin civilisation arose and flourished which, if inferior to that of Italy, nevertheless played an important and valuable part in European development. Many wars were fought for the possession of Dalmatia. Roman, Byzantine Greek, Norman, Venetian, Hungarian, Slave, and Austrian struggled for it, and each left his impress on its civilisation, although the influence of two among these peoples far surpassed that of all the others—the Roman and the Venetian.

Dalmatia has at all times been essentially a borderland. Geographically it belongs to the eastern peninsula of the Mediterranean, to the Balkan lands. But this narrow strip of coast, as Professor Freeman said,[1] “has not a little the air of a thread, a finger, a branch cast forth from the western peninsula.” In its history its character as a march land is still more noticeable, and this feature has always been manifested in a series of civilised communities in the towns, with a hinterland of barbarous or semi-civilised races. Here were the farthest Greek settlements in the Adriatic, settlements placed in the midst of a native uncivilised Illyrian population. Here the Romans came and conquered, but did not wholly absorb, the native races. Then the land was disputed between the Eastern and the Western Empires, later between Christianity and Paganism, later still between the Eastern and Western Churches. The Slavonic invasion, while almost obliterating the native Illyrian race, could not sweep away the Roman-Greek civilisation of the coast. Again Dalmatia became the debating ground between Venetian and Hungarian, the former triumphing in the end. When Christianity found itself menaced by the Muhamedan invasion, Dalmatia was the borderland between the two faiths. A hundred years ago it was involved in one phase of the great struggle between England and France. To-day, under the rule of a Power which may be said to be all borderland, it is the scene of another nationalist conflict between two races. As before we still have a civilised fringe, a series of towns, with a vast hinterland inhabited by Slaves, by a race less civilised, yet wishing to become civilised on lines different from those of the Latin race. It is still the borderland between the Catholic and the Orthodox religions, and also between the two branches of the South-Slavonic people—the Croatians and the Serbs.

The Dalmatian townships had many features in their development similar to those of the towns of Italy, especially of the maritime republics. But, unlike their Italian sisters, they were always on the threshold of barbarism, and this fact imparts to their history its peculiar character. They were essentially border fortresses, keeping watch and ward to save their civilisation from being swept into the sea by the advancing tide of Slave and Turk.

Of all these towns, that in which this feature is most marked is Ragusa. Ragusa’s development shows in every way a stronger individuality than that of any other. For three characteristics above all is this city remarkable, characteristics which enabled it to attain and preserve such a peculiar position in the Adriatic. The first is its geographical situation. Ragusa was, as it were, the gate of the East, the meeting point of Latin and Slave, of the Eastern and Western Churches, of Christian and Muhamedan. One of the chief commercial highways from the coast to the interior had its terminus at Ragusa, while the sheltered position of its harbour, and of that of the neighbouring Gravosa, indicated it as meant by nature for a great commercial centre. Here the Slaves from the interior found their nearest market, and the nearest spot where civilisation and culture flourished. Ragusa was the means of spreading the beginnings of progress among the benighted Servian lands, for with the caravans of Western goods which made their way into the Herzegovina, Bosnia, and Servia, Western ideas penetrated as well, and to Ragusa came the sons of Slavonic princelings and nobles to be educated. Here there were schools where learned professors and famous men of letters from Italy taught. Italy came to impart Italian culture to the Ragusans and the Slaves.

Even to-day, when trade follows other routes, and Ragusa, no longer a great commercial centre, is reduced to a humble position, it is still the meeting point of many races. Italians, Bosnians, Herzegovinians, Montenegrins, Albanians, Turks, and Greeks throng its streets and piazzas on market days, filling them with brilliant costumes. Now that the railway from Mostar and Sarajevo has reached Gravosa, there is reason to hope that the ancient city of St. Blaize may once more become a trading centre of some importance. The prosperity of the hinterland which Austria-Hungary has reclaimed to civilisation cannot fail to have a favourable effect on Ragusa. Had not the Turkish invasion swept over the Balkans in the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries, Ragusa’s position as a civilising influence would have been still more considerable. Later its rôle changed to that of intermediary between the Christian Powers and the Sultan, and in its history we see reflected on a small scale the vast struggle which convulsed Europe for four hundred years.

The second characteristic of Ragusa is its natural position. It is one of nature’s fortresses, being surrounded by the sea on three sides, and the rocks on which it is built drop sheer down to the water’s edge. It seemed indeed a suitable spot on which to erect a city, in days when security was the first, almost the only, consideration. As we approach Ragusa from the south, it stands out a mass of rocks rising up from the sea, crowned with towers, bastions, and walls, which have defied ages of storm and stress, still imposing, still beautiful.

A third feature intimately connected with the last is Ragusa’s character as a haven of refuge. While all around there was chaos and strife, at Ragusa there was peace. The original inhabitants had fled from the ruins of Epidaurum and Salona, and fortified themselves here; subsequently other refugees from all parts of the country helped to increase the population, for the hospitality of its walls was denied to none. The Ragusans were ever ready, as they proved many a time, to undergo any risk rather than give up those who had placed themselves under the protection of the rock-built city. Even in recent times Ragusa remained true to its past; when in 1876-77 there was revolution in the Herzegovina, and the savage Turkish soldiery were at their accustomed work of massacre and torture, the luckless Christian rayahs found shelter and protection at Ragusa, as their ancestors had done before them.

Ragusa was a small city, and its history is all on a small scale. At best she can only be regarded as a second-class city of the first rank. In size, wealth, and intellectual and artistic development she was far inferior to the city republics of Italy; but her close proximity to a world of barbarism, and the vastly important events in which she played a part, however small, make it loom large. Moreover, while the other republics of Dalmatia, with the exception of the tiny Poljica, were all absorbed by Venice, while those of Italy were a constant prey to civil wars, and lost their freedom and even their independence after a few centuries of chequered existence, Ragusa, after two hundred and fifty years of Venetian tutelage with internal autonomy, remained free, now under the nominal protection of this Power, now of that, for 450 years, actually surviving her mighty rival of the Lagoons.

The beginnings of Dalmatian history are purely legendary, and very little is known of the ethnographical character of its original inhabitants. Wanderers from pre-Homeric Greece are said to have settled along its shores, followed later by the Liburnii, who had been driven from Asia, whence part of the country was called Liburnia by the Romans. In the seventh century B.C. a Celtic invasion took place.[2] In the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. a number of Greek colonies were planted among the islands at Issa (Lissa), Pharos (Lesina), and Kerkyra Melaina (Curzola), and others along the coast at Epidamnos (Durazzo), Epidauron (Ragusavecchia), and Tragyrion (Traù). In the third century Illyria[3] was welded by a native ruler into a powerful kingdom, which ere long came into contact with the Romans. The latter made several attempts to conquer the country, but met with a most stubborn resistance before they finally subdued it. In the year 180 B.C. the Dalmatians, a people inhabiting the middle part of modern Dalmatia,[4] revolted from the Illyrian kingdom and became independent. Their territory was comprised between the rivers Naro (Narenta) and Titius (Kerka); beyond the latter Liburnia began. During the second and first centuries B.C. the Romans waged no less than ten wars in Illyria, which was not completely reduced until the year A.D. 9.

In the meanwhile a number of Latin colonies had been settled along the coast, supplanting those of the Greeks. Their splendour and importance may be gauged from the magnificent Roman remains, especially those of the great palace built by Diocletian, himself an Illyrian, at Spalato, and of Salona,[5] the ancient capital of the province.

Roman Dalmatia included besides the modern region of that name the whole of Bosnia, the Herzegovina, Montenegro, and parts of Croatia and Albania. Diocletian divided it into two provinces, Dalmatia proper to the north, and Prævalis or Prævalitana to the south. At the time of the partition of the Roman Empire Dalmatia was apportioned to the Western division, the neighbouring provinces of Dardania, Mœsia Superior, and Prævalis to the Eastern. When the barbarian hordes began to pour down into Southern Europe the latter province remained under Roman rule until early in the sixth century, but Dalmatia was conquered in 481 by Odovakar, and added to the Gothic kingdom of Italy. Both these facts emphasise Dalmatia’s character as an outpost of the West in the Eastern world. But the Slaves, the last of the barbarians to march westwards and southwards, soon began to press ever more closely against the Roman settlements, and the colonists were driven from the interior to the coast towns. From the letters of Pope Gregory I. we see that at his time (590-603) Epidaurum, Salona, Doclea, and a few other Roman cities still survived. But in 600, in a letter to the Bishop of Salona, he expressed great sorrow that Dalmatia was hard pressed by the barbarians. “De Sclavorum gente, quae vobis imminet, affligor vehementer et conturbor.”[6] The whole province was becoming desolate. In 535 the Byzantine Greeks reconquered it from the Goths together with Pannonia. In 539 it was overrun by Huns, Bulgarians, and Slaves, liberated by Narses in 552, and added to the Exarchate of Ravenna. Later it was made into a separate Exarchate; but after the death of the Emperor Maurice the Slaves became masters of the greater part of the country.

When the Eastern Empire was divided into themes, the remaining fragments of the Roman colonies on the Illyrian shore were erected into the Themes of Dalmatia and Dyrrhachium. The former is described at length by Constantine Porphyrogenitus in his De Administrando Imperio,[7] written in 949; it consisted of little more than a few cities and islands, all the rest of the land being peopled by barbarians.

The capital of the Dalmatian theme was no longer Salona, which together with Epidaurum had been destroyed by the Avars in the seventh century, but Jadera or Zara. The other towns of the theme were: Veglia, Arbe, and Opsara (comprising Cherso and Lussino) in the Quarnero; Tragurium, Spalatum or Aspalathum, and Rhagusium, founded by refugees from Salona and Epidaurum; Decatera (Cattaro), Rosa (Porto Rose), and Butova (Budua). The theme was governed by a Greek Strategos residing at Zara (Jadertinus Prior), and by inferior officials (dukes) in the smaller centres. But their authority hardly extended beyond the town walls.

The inhabitants of these cities in the themes of Dalmatia and Dyrrhachium were the remains of the Roman provincials from all parts of Illyria. Porphyrogenitus calls them Romans, as distinguished from the Ῥωμαῖοι or Byzantine Greeks. In spite of all subsequent Slavonic incursions Latin, and later Italian, always remained the official language; it was also the common language of the people all down the coast, save at Ragusa, where Slavonic was also spoken at an early date.[8] Other fragments of the Roman population were to be found perhaps among the shepherds of the mountains, who were either Latins or Latinised descendants of the native Illyrians. The Slaves speak of them as together with the town-dwellers as Vlachs, which word signifies Italians or Rumanians to this day. The townsmen described these shepherds as Maurovlachs, i.e. “Sea Vlachs” or “Black Vlachs.”[9]

The other Dalmatian towns and all the country outside the towns were occupied, as we have said, by the Southern Slaves. Of these the two principal tribes were the Serblii or Serbs and the Chrobatians or Croatians. The latter settled in the northern part of the country; their frontiers were the Save, the Kulpa, the Arsia, and the Četina. Their settlement seems to have preceded that of the Serbs. They came from the land beyond the Carpathians, with the name of which theirs may have been connected. Croatia was divided into fourteen Župe or counties, each governed by a Župan. The various Župans owed a somewhat shadowy allegiance to a Grand Župan, whose title was afterwards changed to that of king. The Serbs, who issued forth from what is now Galicia, settled in the land to the south and east of that of the Croatians, i.e. the modern kingdom of Servia, Old Servia, Montenegro, Northern Albania, and Dalmatia south of the Četina. For many centuries they recognised no central authority, but were divided into tribes, of which the most important were the Diocletiani or Docletiani, who occupied what is now Montenegro and part of Albania; the Terbuniotae, whose country, called Terbunia or Tribunia or Travunia, centres round the modern Trebinje, with the semi-independent southern district of Canale or Canali;[10] the coast north of Ragusa up to the Narenta was occupied by the Zachloumoi of Constantine Porphyrogenitus, and was called Zachlumje, Zachulmia, Hlum, or Chelmo. It corresponds to the Herzegovina.[11] About the Narenta was the land of the Narentani (the Ἀρεντάνοι or Παγάνοι of Porphyrogenitus), notorious for their piratical exploits. This tribe was converted to Christianity much later than the other Serbs, whence their name of Pagani. Inland was Bosnia, inhabited by various tribes. Still deeper in the interior was the territory of the Serbs proper.[12]

Thus by the eighth century we have a series of coast towns and a few islands peopled by Latins still under the rule of the Eastern Roman Empire set in the midst of a country whose inhabitants, if we except the Latin or Latinised shepherds, were all Slaves. Imperial influence over these townships gradually declined, and at an early date they constituted themselves into city-states of the Italian type.[13] As they grew rich and powerful they acquired territory, developed their trade, both sea-borne and with the interior, until they were finally absorbed by the Venetian Republic. Their conditions are, therefore, in many respects similar to those prevailing in the maritime republics of Italy during this period. In Italy there was a Latin civilisation, overwhelmed by hordes of pagan or partly pagan barbarians. Italy, like Dalmatia, is reclaimed to Latin culture by Greek arms, and the Greeks rule over it, although constantly fighting the armies of the invaders with varying success. There, too, city-communities arise on or near the sites of Roman cities, modelling their institutions and their laws on those of Rome, with certain modifications due to barbarian influences. But here the parallel ends. In Italy the barbarian hordes never settled in such large numbers as wholly to absorb the Latins, whereas the Slaves in Dalmatia far outnumbered the colonists, and, save for the Latin fringe, the land soon became a Slavonic land. Whereas in Italy, Latins and barbarians soon amalgamated—in fact, one may say that the former absorbed the latter—in Dalmatia, Latins and Slaves have remained distinct and separate to this day, in language, character, and ideals. The Latin cities were like islands in a Slavonic sea. The relations between the Latins and the barbarians in Italy, even before they amalgamated, were different from what they were in Dalmatia. In Italy the feudal system arose among the Germanic peoples, and Germanic lords had Latin subjects and serfs, whereas the Slavonic chieftains of Dalmatia had no Latin dependents to speak of. The causes of this division of race and language, which exercised so deep an influence on the history and development of the Dalmatian municipia, are not very apparent. They are probably to be sought in the different proportions of barbarians to Latins in the two countries. In Italy the number of invaders who settled permanently in the country was never very great compared with that of the Latin inhabitants. The conquered were, therefore, soon able to absorb the conquerors, having civilisation as well as numbers on their side. But in Dalmatia the Slaves were, as we have said, far more numerous than the Latin burghers; and while the former could not absorb the communities of the coast, because they were more civilised, the latter, being so few in numbers, failed to absorb the Slaves. It should, moreover, be remembered that even the Latins were originally colonists from another land, and that the native Illyrians, of whom no trace now remains in Dalmatia, may perhaps have been merged in the Slaves, and helped to swell their numbers.

[Illustration: VIEW OF RAGUSA

(From P. G. Coronelli’s “Views of Dalmatia”, 1680)]

CHAPTER II

THE FOUNDATION AND EARLY HISTORY OF THE CITY (656-1204)

We have alluded to the destruction by the Avars of Salona and Epidaurum,[14] and the flight of their inhabitants to the new settlements. Of Salona extensive ruins remain, but with regard to the site of Epidaurum there is a division of opinion among archæologists. It is generally held that the remains at or near the village of Ragusavecchia, a few miles to the south-east of Ragusa, are those of the ancient Epidaurum. In the neighbouring valley of Canali (Slavonic, Konavli) there are the ruins of a Roman aqueduct. The name Ragusavecchia corroborates the tradition that it was the original home of the Ragusans; while its Slavonic name, Cavtat, is undoubtedly derived from the Latin civitas. Some archæologists, however, have doubts as to this point, and Professor Giuseppe Gelcich, than whom no greater authority on Dalmatian history exists, is of opinion that Epidaurum must be sought for somewhere on the Sutorina promontory in the Bocche di Cattaro. Fragments of Roman brickwork and mosaic pavement have been found there too; and according to Professor Gelcich, the Canali aqueduct is so built that it must have served a city farther south than Ragusavecchia. On the other hand, the statements of the classical writers, especially of Pliny, seem to bear out the general opinion, which is, in fact, based on them.

The exact date of the incursion of the Avars and of the destruction of Epidaurum has also been the subject of controversy. According to some writers, among whom are the native historians of Ragusa, the city was destroyed by the Goths in the third century A.D. But documents written between the third and the seventh centuries mention it as still existing. Constantine Porphyrogenitus speaks of Ragusa as having been founded by refugees from Salona five hundred years before his own time, i.e. about 449.[15] But Pope Gregory I. is the last writer who alludes to Epidaurum, so that it was evidently not destroyed before 603. The geographer of Ravenna, who flourished in the eighth century, is the first to mention Ragusa. The Avars made their first appearance in Dalmatia in the year 597-598.[16] They belonged to the same Tartar group as the Huns, and their path was marked with the same ruin and destruction. At one time they were in the service of Justinian, but under his successors they became so powerful and insolent that the Greek emperors might almost be regarded as the vassals to the Chagan of the Avars. In 597 they raided Dalmatia and destroyed over forty towns; and during the next thirty years they conquered the whole country, with the exception of some of the coast settlements, unimpeded by the Greeks, who were then occupied with the Saracens. In 619 they destroyed Salona, whose inhabitants, or at least such of them as escaped from the fury of the barbarians, for the most part took refuge in the walls of Diocletian’s palace at Spalato. But a few wandered southwards and established themselves on an island rock, where Ragusa now stands. About the year 656 the Avars swept down on Epidaurum and razed it to the ground, the surviving inhabitants flying to Ragusa. This year is generally accepted as the date of the city’s, birth. In all probability, however, it was not founded at any definite period, but arose gradually through the influx of refugees from all parts of Southern Dalmatia, from a fishing village into a town. The original settlers were nearly all Latins, and it was not until later that a certain number of Slaves were admitted.[17]

The traditional origin of the name Ragusa is connected with the situation of the town on a precipitous ridge. According to Porphyrogenitus, it is derived from λαῦ, a precipice, and was originally Lausa. The L changed to R, and it became Rausa or Rhausion. According to Professor Jireček,[18] this derivation is quite inaccurate. The rocky seaward ridge, even in the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth centuries, were called Labe or Laue, from the Latin word labes, a downfall or precipice. The form Ragusa is found in William of Tyre, and in the Arabic writer Edrisi (1153). Later we find the form Rausa, and in the fifteenth century Raugia, and occasionally Ragusium. The Slavonic name Dubrovnik is said to be derived from dubrava, a wood. This etymology does not sound unlikely, as there is a wood in close proximity to the town, a rarity in this part of the world. But Professor Jireček says that from Dubrava the original form should have been Dubravnik, and this appears nowhere. The Presbyter Diocleas writes: “Dubrounich, id est silvester sive silvestris, quoniam quando eam aedificaverunt, de silva venerunt.” Whatever may be the philological value of these traditions, they indicate the double character (i.e. Latin and Slavonic) of Ragusa in the early, if not in the earliest times.

Ragusa is situated on the coast of Southern Dalmatia, about forty kilometres to the north-west of the Bocche di Cattaro.[19] It is built partly on a precipitous rocky ridge jutting out into the Adriatic, and partly on the mainland, ascending the steep slopes of the Monte Sergio. The original town was limited to the seaward ridge, which was formerly an island divided from the mainland by a marshy channel where the Stradone now runs. There was also a settlement of Bosnians or Vlachs on the Monte Sergio opposite. The ridge slopes gradually up from the channel, but drops sheer down on the side towards the sea. In an old drawing preserved in the library of the Franciscan monastery at Ragusa we see the town as it was when it only occupied the ridge. It is surrounded by a wall, and divided into two parts by another wall. Three extensions of the walls are recorded previous to the beginning of the twelfth century, rendered necessary by the number of fugitives who took refuge within its walls in ever-increasing numbers. “The original city,” writes Professor Gelcich, “was limited to the centre of the northern slope of the ridge now called Santa Maria, which, separating from the Monte Sergio, stretches forth in an opposite direction to that of the neighbouring peninsula of Lapad; it comprised the quarter of the town between the diocesan seminary and the street leading from the Chiesa del Domino to the summit of the ridge.”[20] The earliest extensions were the suburbs of Garište and Pustijerna, the former on the western side, the latter to the east, reaching as far as the harbour. Thus the whole rock was occupied and surrounded by a wall. The channel which divided it from the mainland soon became a marshy field, and finally dried up. As a protection against the Slavonic settlement on the Monte Sergio a castle was built by the sea, on the site of the present rector’s palace, guarding the bridge to the mainland.[21] Later the Bosnian colony was also absorbed, and the town walls were extended to the circuit which they now occupy.

Of the various groups of refugees who settled within the hospitable walls of Ragusa we have fairly reliable accounts. Porphyrogenitus mentions the earliest of these immigrations, and also gives us the names of the most prominent among the newcomers: Arsaphios, Gregorios, Victorinos, Vitalios, Valentinos the archdeacon, and Valentinos the father of the Protospathar Stephen. All these have unquestionably a Latin sound; they were probably Roman provincials from the minor Dalmatian townships destroyed by the barbarians. Besides the Latin refugees, at an early date a certain number of Slaves, who preferred the quiet life and safety of Ragusa to the constant turmoils and disorders among their own people, added to the population. The Anonymous Chronicle of Ragusa[22] describes several of these immigrations:—

“690. Many people came to Ragusa with all their goods from Albania and the parts of Bosna, because many in Bosna were partisans of Duchagini,[23] and wished to save themselves from being accused (punished).”

This evidently refers to a civil war, but the date given is much too early: it is not likely that the Ragusans would have admitted barbarians within their walls so soon after the destruction of Epidaurum:—

“691. There came to Ragusa the men of two castles on the mainland, from Chastel Spilan and Chastel Gradaz,[24] and they all made their dwellings on the coast, for they were of the race of Epidaurum destroyed by the Saracens.”[25]

This obviously refers to the Latin colonists mentioned by the Imperial historian:—

“743. Many people came from Bosna with much wealth, for the king, Radosav, was a tyrant, and lived according to his pleasure: Murlacchi from the Narenta also came, and Catunari,[26] among whom there was a chief above all the others; they came with a great multitude of cattle of all sorts: to them was assigned the mountain of Saint Serge as a pasture, for it was so covered with trees that one could not see the sky, and so much timber was there that they made beams for their houses.”

Of the first two centuries of Ragusan history little is known. The town, like the other Latin communities of Dalmatia, at first formed part of the Eastern Empire. Heraclius had abandoned all the rest of the country to the Slaves, and even in the coast towns Imperial authority was becoming ever more shadowy. Under Michael II Balbus they were granted what practically amounted to autonomy, and they constituted themselves, as we have said, into municipia of the Italian type, while inland Dalmatia became part of Charlemagne’s Empire (803), to whom also some of the coast towns, including Zara, owed allegiance.[27] Ragusa, although still small, was increasing. At that time, with a world of barbarism all round, with everlasting wars between the various Slavonic tribes of the interior, there was indeed an opening for such a haven of refuge as this city offered.

We can picture it to ourselves as a small settlement where all that was civilised in Southern Dalmatia congregated—the scattered Latins from ruined townships and the more progressive Slaves. It was a beacon in the darkness, a spot where the peaceful and the industrious might pursue their avocations in safety. Of the internal constitution of the community in these early days, of its laws and customs, we have the meagrest information. The only account of them which we possess is that given in the Anonymous Chronicle, a not very reliable document of a much later date than the events recorded. The chief passage on the subject is as follows:—

“In Ragusa a division of all the people was made.... Those who were the richest were (appointed) chiefs and governors.... Each family had its own saint, some San Sergio, some this saint, some that.... And when men had come from Lower Vulasi (Wallachia),[28] a division of the citizens was made, each class for itself. Many Wallachians were rich in possessions—gold, silver, cattle, and other things: among them were many Chatunari, each of whom considered himself a count, and had his own Naredbenizi (stewards). One was master of the horse, another looked after the cattle, another after the sheep and goats, another managed the household, another commanded the servants. But there was one chief above all the others, called the Grand Chatunar.... These Chatunari formed the Sboro (Council or Parliament), and for their convenience divided the population into three parts: the first was of gentlemen, the second of burghers, the third of serfs. Many serfs had come from Wallachia with cattle, and it seemed to them a mean thing to be called even as the shepherds.[29] Some attended to the house, some to the horses, some to the person of their master, but the latter were few in number. The third part was of gentlemen; for at the beginning there were many who had fled from Bosna and Albania, and who were not men of low condition, but of much account, having been captains or counts or Naredbenizi, and these were of noble origin.... Those who were gentlemen were made governors of the land or were given other offices, and they alone entered the Sboro or General Council. The other part was of the people, populani, from pol vilani, or half villeins,[30] for although those villeins were of low condition, some were in the houses of gentlemen as guardians, and therefore enjoyed benefits.”

This account is somewhat confused and difficult to understand. As far as we can make out, the people were divided into three classes; i.e. the nobles, who alone formed the Grand Council, and were either the descendants of the original Latin refugees from Epidaurum and Salona, or those among the newcomers who were of noble birth; the middle class, consisting of non-noble burghers, the stewards, and chief retainers of the nobles, and the men of small property; the third class, which was composed of serfs and of the poorest citizens. Over the general assembly presided the head of the State, the Byzantine Duke, Prior, or Præses. After Ragusa had made submission to Venice in 998 we find Venetian counts instead.[31] During the intervals when the city was independent, and no foreign rulers were appointed, the head of the Government was chosen by the Council, as it was in after times. But even when sent from Venice or Constantinople he does not seem to have exercised much direct influence on the internal affairs of the Republic.

Besides the Count and the General Council, there was the assembly of the people, or laudo populi, to whom the decisions of the Council in all the more important cases had to be submitted. Lampredius, præses of Ragusa in 1023, sanctioned a decree “una cum omnibus ejusdem civitatis nobilibus,” “temporibus Sanctorum Imperatorum Basilii et Constantini.” Petrus Slabba, prior in 1044, issued another decree, “temporibus piissimi Augusti Constantini scilicet Monomacho ... cum parited nobiles atque ignobiles.”[32] Thus we have the aristocratic principle represented by the council of nobles, and the democratic principle by the assembly of the people, who were summoned “cum sonitu campane.”[33] As the constitution evolved, the laudo populi gradually dropped into disuse, and Ragusa finally developed into a purely aristocratic community on Venetian lines.

Next in authority to the head of the State was the bishop,[34] by whom the acts of the Government had to be countersigned. The question as to who should appoint this dignitary was frequently a subject of dispute between the Ragusans and the Venetians, on account of his political influence.

The Ragusans provided for the defence of their city by surrounding it with walls, “un muro di masiera e travi,”[35] as Ragnina says, and these fortifications stood them in good stead by enabling them to hold out against the Saracens, who in 847-848 besieged Ragusa for fifteen months. The citizens implored help from the Emperor Basil the Macedonian, and he at once sent a fleet, under Nicephorus, which relieved the beleaguered city from the raiders.[36]

The Greek Emperors wished to pursue the Saracens into Apulia, where they had established themselves, and the rendezvous for one part of the expedition was Ragusa. A large force of Serbs and Croatians in the pay of the Empire congregated there, and were transported to the Italian shore on Ragusan ships. The expedition was successful, Bari being recaptured, and the Saracen power in Southern Italy broken.[37] This is the first mention we have of Ragusan shipping, which was afterwards to play so large a part in the history of the Levant trade.

Of all the Slavonic tribes settled in Dalmatia, the most lawless and uncivilised were the Narentans, the Arentani or Porphyrogenitus. This hardy race of mariners occupied the land about the mouth of the Narenta[38] and the coast,[39] between that river and the Četina, besides the islands of Brazza, Lesina, Curzola, Lissa, Meleda, and Lagosta. Connected by racial ties with the Serbs and the Croatians, they obeyed the laws of neither. The ancient Illyrians were famous for their piracy, which first called the attention of the Romans to the country, and the Narentans proved worthy successors of the aborigines. The conformation of the coast with its numerous inlets, well-sheltered harbours, safe refuges, and countless islands lends itself to this species of occupation. The Narentans ravaged the coast towns of Dalmatia with their swift galleys, plundered peaceful merchantmen, and so harried Venetian trade that the Republic was forced to pay them blackmail for a hundred and fifty years. On more than one occasion it sent its fleets to attempt their subjugation, at first with but little success. At the beginning of these wars Ragusa was a friendly harbour for the Venetian galleys, their most southern port of call in the Adriatic, where they could revictual and their crews rest from the fatigues of the voyage.[40] But the Ragusans very soon began to look askance at the Venetians as a possible danger to their own independence, and adopted the practice of secretly, or even openly, supporting the pirates against the Venetians. This naturally caused trouble later when the Venetians were strong enough to act energetically against the Narentans: it affords a curious insight into the policy of the Ragusans, who, while anxious to preserve their own civilisation and culture, were never averse to siding with barbarians, whether they were Narentans or Turks, against Christian Powers, especially against Venice.

As early as the reign of the Doge Giovanni Particiaco I. (829-836) the pirates of the Narenta had begun to seize Venetian galleys, and his successor, Pietro Tradonico (836-864), sent two punitive expeditions against them without definite result. After the Venetian fleet had been defeated by the Saracens, the Dalmatian corsairs were audacious enough to make a raid on the Lagoons. In 887 the Doge Pietro Candiano I. sent a first unsuccessful expedition against them, and a few months later led a second himself. This too was defeated, and the Doge killed. Probably there was another in 948 under Pietro Candiano III., and this time operations were directed against Ragusa itself, if we are to believe the native historians, the town being saved only through the special intercession of San Biagio,[41] who henceforth became the patron of Ragusa in the place of San Bacco.[42]

In the course of the tenth century Ragusa was again besieged by barbarians—they were Bulgarians this time, under the Tsar Simeon (not Samuel, as had been stated), who invaded the western provinces of the Eastern Empire. According to Cedren, his attack on Ragusa failed,[43] whereas the Presbyter of Doclea writes that the town was burnt.

It was during this same century that Ragusa first began to acquire territorial possessions. The account of the manner of these acquisitions is in part legendary; but, according to Prof. Gelcich, it has some substratum of fact. Paulimir Belo or Belus, King of Rascia,[44] having been deposed and exiled, took refuge in Rome, and married a Roman lady. In 950 he returned to Illyria, and landed at Gravosa, near Ragusa, with a large suite of Roman nobles. The Ragusans received him with great honours, and he in return helped them to enlarge their city, and sent a number of his followers, including some Romans, to increase the population. After this he returned to Rascia and regained his throne. As Prof. Gelcich observes, Rome is evidently a mistake for Rama, a country which forms part of the Herzegovina, and takes its name from a small river tributary to the Narenta. A few years later Stephen, Banus of Bosnia, and his wife, Margaret, came to Ragusa in order to fulfil a vow which the former had made to St. Stephen when his wife was ill, that he would visit the saint’s church in the city if she recovered. As a reward for the welcome accorded to him by the citizens he gave them the districts of Breno, Bergato (Brgat), Ombla, Gravosa, Malfi, and part of Gionchetto.

Nearly fifty years had passed since the last Venetian expedition to Dalmatia; but when the great Doge Pietro Orseolo came to the throne in 991, he determined to put an end to the depredations of the Narentans once for all. The annual tribute which the Venetians had been forced to pay to the freebooters only secured a very imperfect immunity, and the Adriatic trade was never really safe. Orseolo suspended the tribute, and as the Narentans at once recommenced their molestations, an expedition under Badoer was sent out which destroyed the town of Lissa. The Venetian admiral took a great many prisoners, but failed to attack the pirates’ chief stronghold at Lagosta and the Narenta’s mouth. They retaliated on the Latin towns of the coast, and the latter, unable to obtain help from their natural protector, the Greek Emperor, placed themselves under the suzerainty of the Venetians, whom they implored to intervene once more. The Croatians, to whom the towns in the northern and central parts of the country had paid tribute, now declared war on all who obeyed the Venetians, ravaged the territory of Zara, and attacked the islands of the Quarnero. The Ragusans were then tributary to the Serbs, by whom they were surrounded, and fearing the Narentans, who were so close at hand, separated their cause from that of the rest of Latin Dalmatia, and maintained an ambiguous attitude.[45] The Croatians, not content with terrorising the towns, sent ambassadors to Venice to demand the tribute; but the Doge replied: “Non per quemlibet nuntiorum tributum remittere curo; sed ad hanc persolvendam dationem venire ipso non denegabo.” He at once fitted out another expedition on a large scale, which set forth under his command on May 9, 1000.[46] It reached Ossero on June 5, and the Doge claimed the homage of the Dalmatians as their protector; this was paid both by the Latins and by a number of the Slaves. He then proceeded to Zara, which recognised his authority, and the bishops of Arbe and Veglia came to swear fealty to him, promising that his praises should be sung in the churches after those of the Emperor. Negotiations with the Narentans were now opened; the pirates agreed to forego all tributes, and swore to infest the Adriatic no longer; but the moment the Doge’s back was turned they recommenced their depredations. Orseolo then sailed with the fleet for Beograd[47] (Zaravecchia), the residence of the Croatian king. The terrified inhabitants paid him homage, and he prepared to strike a decisive blow at the Narentans. He sailed down the coast and received the submission of Traù and Spalato, and on hearing that forty Narentan “nobles” (pirate captains) were returning from Apulia, some of his galleys lay in wait for them, and captured them off the island of Cazza. The Narentans then sued for peace, which was granted them on a promise of future good behaviour, and all the prisoners were liberated save six, who were retained as hostages. The pirates on the islands of Curzola, Lesina, and Lagosta still held out. The first two were easily captured, but the Lagostans, hearing that the Doge meant to raze their stronghold to the ground, made a desperate resistance. The Venetians and their Dalmatian allies attacked the town, poured in through a breach in the walls, and put all the inhabitants to the sword. After the capture of this important fortress the power of the Narentans was broken, and the whole of Dalmatia lay at Orseolo’s feet.

With regard to the subsequent proceedings and the dedition of Ragusa there is considerable divergence of opinion between Venetian and Ragusan writers. The latter wish to prove that their city remained independent, at all events until the beginning of the thirteenth century, whereas the Venetians affirm that in 998 (1000) Ragusa made full submission to Venice.

The first account of this dedition is that of Johannes Diaconus, who writes: “This (the capture of Lesina, Curzola, and Lagosta) having been accomplished, the victorious prince repaired to the church of St. Maximus; there the Archbishop of Ragusa and his suite came and did great homage to the said prince, all partaking of the sacrament.” Dandolo uses almost identical language, and Sabellico adds that the Archbishop and the Ragusan envoys made formal submission to the Doge and the Venetians,[48] and that counts were appointed to govern the Dalmatian towns, Ottone Orseolo being chosen for Ragusa. To this a Ragusan writer, calling himself “Albinus Esadastes de Vargas” (whom Pisani declares to be Sebastiano Dolci,[49] a Ragusan monk of the seventeenth century), in a work entitled Libertas perpetua reip. Ragusine ab omni jure Venete reipub,[50] replies that the church of St. Maximus must mean that of Masline at Lesina, and that this island is so far that the Ragusan envoys would hardly have come there to tender their submission. Jadesta, which is also alluded to, does not exist. The Ragusans, who had resisted other attacks, both by the Venetians and the Saracens, so valiantly, would not have surrendered now without striking a blow; and, moreover, the Greek Emperors, Basil and Constantine, would not have authorised the submission. With regard to the first and third objections, it is most probable that when the fate of Lagosta had become known to the Ragusans they would have gone to tender their submission to Orseolo wherever he happened to be. Jadesta is simply an old name for Lagosta. As for the Greek Emperors, they were far too much occupied in holding their own against the Bulgarians to be able to make any objections. The former attacks on Ragusa had all been on a small scale, whereas this expedition was a large and well-equipped force, against which it would have been madness for the tiny Ragusa to resist. Then “Esadastes” shifts his ground, and asserts that the envoys went to the Doge merely to reclaim a ship captured by the Venetians, and that they actually threatened reprisals on the part of the Emperors if satisfaction were refused. But it is most unlikely that for so trifling a cause the Archbishop and chief citizens would have been sent to the Doge. This version, however, is accepted by Mauro Orbini.[51] Ragnina does not even mention the expedition. Resti[52] says that Ottone Orseolo was sent to Ragusa merely to make a commercial treaty; but as Pisani observes, if the magistrates appointed to the other Dalmatian towns were sent to govern them, there is no reason to suppose that an exception was made for Ragusa. There is, on the whole, the strongest evidence that Ragusa did actually submit to Venetian supremacy, together with the other coast towns, in 1000, and received a Venetian governor. Local usages and laws, however, were respected, according to the Venetian practice of the time; nor was Imperial authority wholly disregarded, and prayers for the Emperor continued to be sung in the churches of Ragusa.

Venetian rule was not of long duration. On the death of Pietro Orseolo in 1008, his son Ottone became Doge; and during this reign a strong opposition to the house of Orseolo was aroused, which ended with Ottone’s expulsion in 1026. During the reign of his successor, Pietro Centranico, faction feuds broke out, greatly weakening the Republic, and the Dalmatian towns revolted, as Venetian suzerainty was of use to them only so long as Venice was powerful. Some of them went over to Dobroslav, prince of the Tribunian Serbs, and elsewhere Byzantine authority revived. Thus in 1036, instead of a Venetian count at Zara, we find Gregory, Jadertinus Prior, Pro-consul and Imperial Strategos for all Dalmatia.[53] But his authority was disputed by the Croatians, whose sovereign now proclaimed himself King of Dalmatia.[54] Against this act the Venetians issued a protest, and the Doge Domenico Contarini (1043-1071) reasserted the authority of the Republic.

In the year 1071 the Normans from Apulia made their first appearance in Dalmatia; they crossed the Adriatic, and threatened the Eastern Empire. The Emperor Alexius Comnenus having implored the help of the Venetians, the Doge Selvo set sail for Dyrrhachium in command of a fleet. Alexius had also asked help of the Ragusans, who were now practically independent; but they feared the Normans more, and cast in their lot with them. The Græco-Venetian fleet encountered the Normans off Dyrrhachium; but in spite of the valour displayed by the allies they were defeated, and the town fell into the enemies’ hands. It is said that the Ragusan contingent distinguished itself by hurling clouds of arrows, which wrought much havoc among the Venetians.[55] As a reward they obtained important commercial privileges in Southern Italy. In 1085 the Venetians again attacked the Normans, and partially defeated them at Corfu, for which action Alexius granted the Doge Vitale Falier the Golden Bull, conferring upon him the title of Protosebastus, and created him Duke of Dalmatia and Croatia. Thus the Republic regained all its lost influence on the eastern shore of the Adriatic.

Yet another Power now begins to interfere in the affairs of Dalmatia, a Power which was to play a most important part in its subsequent history. In 1091 Ladislas, King of Hungary, was summoned by the Slaves of inland Croatia, who as usual when quarrelling among themselves called in foreign aid, and they willingly recognised him as their king. He did not wait to be asked a second time, but at once entered the province and appointed his nephew, Almus, Count of Cismontane Croatia. On his death in 1094 he was succeeded by another nephew, Koloman, who in the following year crossed the Velebit mountains and invaded Maritime Croatia. He defeated and killed the Croatian king, Krešimir, at Petrovogora, became master of the littoral from Istria to the Narenta, and prepared to conquer the Serb states of Rascia and Tribunia. By marrying Busita, daughter of King Roger, he allied himself with the Normans, and enlisted their help for his schemes. At Beograd he crowned himself King of Dalmatia and Croatia. These conquests were not at all to the taste of the Ragusans, who had every interest in the maintenance of a number of weak but independent Slavonic buffer States at their back, whereas they dreaded the advance of a powerful military monarchy like Hungary. At first they tried to conciliate Koloman with gifts,[56] but as this availed them little they applied to their old enemies, the Venetians; the latter made a treaty with the Hungarian king, by which the Latin municipalities of Dalmatia were recognised as outside the Hungarian sphere. But it was not respected for long. The Emperor Alexius, annoyed with the Venetians for their action in the First Crusade and in the Levant generally, intrigued with Koloman, and induced him to violate his pledges. The Magyar king needed but little pressure, as the conquest of the Dalmatian seaboard was one of his chief ambitions. When the Venetians sent their fleet to Palestine in 1105 he occupied Zara, Traù, and Spalato, and forced the citizens to swear fealty to him. The Ragusans were not disturbed, but they sent him another deputation. The Venetians, exhausted with their last efforts in the Holy Land, were unable to do anything for the moment.[57]

In 1116 hostilities recommenced, and ended in 1118 with the defeat of the Venetians, who agreed to a five years’ truce with Hungary. War broke out again in 1124, and lasted for several years, with varying success. Bela II., who succeeded to Koloman, while the Venetians were occupied elsewhere, crossed the Narenta and conquered the Serb principalities of Tribunia, Zachulmia, and Rama, and tried to induce the coast towns to rebel against Venice. The Ragusans once more applied for Venetian help, and even requested that Venetian counts should be sent to govern them. Both requests were granted.

Of the next twenty-eight years of Ragusan history there is little to tell. “Esadastes” mentions the names of four Venetian counts—Marco Dandolo, Cristiano Pontestorto, Jacopo Doseduro or Dorsoduro, and Pietro Molina. Resti mentions a plague in 1145, which, he says, carried off three-quarters of the inhabitants, evidently an exaggeration. In 1148, according to the same writer, the Servian Prince Dessa, ancestor of the Nemanjas, granted the island of Meleda to three Benedictine monks, with the provision that its civil government should be entrusted to Ragusa. This is the most distant possession which the Republic had as yet acquired.

In 1152 the series of Venetian counts came to an end,[58] the last of them having apparently received notice to quit from the Ragusans themselves, who sent him home in one of their own galleys, with many gifts, as a reward, “Esasdastes” says ironically, for having ruled the city so well for thirty years; but he adds the following extract from an early chronicle:—

“These counts had begun to tyrannise, and, moreover, Ragusa being at war with the Bosnians, five hundred soldiers who had come from Venice to aid us outraged our women and committed countless robberies. To free the city from them the Council ordered them to be so placed in the van of the army that they should all be killed. This stratagem having succeeded, they sent the Venetian rector back to Venice.”

Whether this story be true or not, it is characteristic both of the customs of the time and of the feelings with which the Ragusans ever regarded the Venetians. For the latter and their government no native historian ever has a good word to say.

The reason why the Venetians submitted so tamely to being turned out of Ragusa lies in the general situation of affairs in Dalmatia. In 1148 Venice had formed an alliance with the Emperor Manuel Comnenus against the Normans, whose incursions in the Adriatic constituted a menace for both Powers; but Venetians and Greeks were on the worst of terms, and at the siege of Corfu the Emperor’s name had been grossly insulted. Manuel vowed vengeance on his allies, and sent emissaries to stir up the Dalmatians against Venice. The latter was at war on the mainland with Hungary and in Syria, and therefore found it expedient to ignore the Dalmatian question for the time being. Venetian authority, however, did not cease altogether even at Ragusa, where Venetians continued to be appointed as archbishops. Thus in 1150 or 1151 the dignity was conferred on a certain Domenico of Venice, and in 1153 on another Venetian named Tribuno; the latter in 1155 made formal submission to the Patriarch of Grado, with the consent of the clergy and people of Ragusa.[59] The town continued, in fact, to be regarded as one of those under Venetian protection, or, at least, as friendly to the Republic of the lagoons.

In 1169 Manuel Comnenus determined to conquer Dalmatia, and even Italy. He sent a squadron up the Adriatic to molest Venetian shipping, and encouraged corsairs to do the same. The Imperial fleet occupied the towns protected by Venice, treating them as conquered territory. Ragusa too was occupied, and was doubtless not unwilling to get rid of all Venetian authority; the Imperial standard was raised on a tower expressly built for the purpose. On March 7, 1171, the Emperor had all the Venetians at Constantinople arrested and their property seized. Venice immediately declared war, and, in spite of the scarcity of men and money, a fleet of one hundred and twenty ships, to which ten Dalmatian galleys were added, was fitted out in a hundred days.[60] It set sail in September under the command of the Doge Vitale Michiel, and most of the Dalmatian towns willingly returned to Venetian suzerainty.[61] Ragusa too surrendered, though not without resistance, and the event is thus described in the Cronaca Altinate:[62]—

“The Ragusans, who, like the others (Dalmatians), were under oath of fealty to the lord Doge, would not go forth to do him homage, but they came out in arms as though to insult the host. Wherefore the Venetians, in high dudgeon, marched against them, and pursued them even to the gates of the city. The same day, at the ninth hour, they began the attack with so much vigour that many of the citizens were killed, and, having stormed the battlements, they captured some of the towers, on which they raised the ducal standards. The assault was kept up with great energy until evening. At dawn on the following morning, while men and machines were being prepared for the battle, Tribuno Michiel, the Archbishop of Ragusa, issued forth from the city with the clergy and the nobles bearing crosses, and they cast themselves at the feet of the Doge, imploring mercy for themselves and all the citizens, and declaring that they and their city made full submission. The Doge, calm and prudent, was moved by pity, and on the advice of his followers received them. And all the citizens sang the praises of the Doge, and all who were above twelve years of age swore the oath of fealty to him and his successors. In addition, they provided money and wine for each galley, and in obedience to the Doge’s orders demolished part of their walls, that tower which had been expressly built for the Emperor. They consented that their archbishopric should be subject to the Patriarchate of Grado, provided that the Pope permitted it.[63] When these things had been accomplished the Doge appointed the noble youth Raynerius Joannes (Renier Zane or Zen) as Viscount, and set sail with his fleet for Romania.”[64]

[Illustration: ONOFRIO’S FOUNTAIN IN THE PIAZZA]

Dandolo’s account is almost identical, and so is that of Sabellico, save that the latter does not mention the actual storming of the town. He merely says that the Ragusans sued for peace through their archbishop, and that they themselves demolished the tower on which the Imperial standard had been raised. Whichever version we accept, it is clear that Ragusa again made full submission to the ducal authority, and came once more under Venetian supremacy. We must not forget that Tribuno Michiel, the archbishop, was a Venetian, and probably there was a Venetian party in the city as well as a Byzantine party. When it became evident that the Venetians were in earnest, the faction which favoured them at once prevailed. “Esadastes,” as usual, casts doubts on the whole story, because Dandolo and Sabellico do not agree as to the attack, but he does not even mention the account of the Cronaca Altinate. Resti denies the submission altogether. It should be remembered that whereas Dandolo and the author of the Altinate Chronicle wrote barely a century after the events related, the Ragusan historians flourished in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries, and wrote with the express purpose of combating all Venice’s claims over Ragusa.

But, as before, the surrender did not greatly affect the internal affairs of the city, which continued to be managed by the citizens themselves. Nor did Venetian suzerainty last long. The campaign against the Eastern Empire ended most disastrously; the fleet was decimated by disease, and returned to Venice in 1172 a complete wreck. Venetian influence in Dalmatia was greatly reduced in consequence, while that of the Empire revived proportionately, and lasted until Manuel’s death in 1180. The country was, however, regarded as still in a measure connected with Venice, and in the treaty of peace which the latter made with William of Sicily in 1175 he promised not to invade “the lands which are under the rule of the Doge of Venice and of the Venetians,”[65] and Dalmatia was included among these.

In the meanwhile Ragusa was developing international relations of a different character, i.e. with the Slavonic principalities of the interior. In the earliest times Ragusan territory was limited to a small part of the actual city, and for a long time did not extend beyond the walls. Constantine Porphyrogenitus informs us that it bordered on the two states of Zachulmia and Tribunia. The vineyards of the Ragusans were on the territory of these tribes, and the citizens paid a yearly tribute of thirty-six numismata (gold pieces) to the Prince of Zachulmia, and as much to the Prince of Tribunia.[66] As the population increased they gradually extended their cultivation to the whole of these districts. The Tribunian vineyards were in the Župa of Žrnovica (Breno); those of Zachulmia in the Župa of Rijeka (Ombla), as far as Malfi, and in that of Poljice.[67] The tribute which the Ragusans paid for this privilege was called margarisium or magarisium;[68] its value varied considerably. In 1363 that due to the Zachulmians was of sixty ipperperi, paid by the owners of the vineyards in proportion to the extent of their holdings. The Zachulmians, on their side, sent a cow, called the vacca di margarisio, which was divided between the Count of Ragusa and some of the boni homines (optimates) of the city. Later, instead of one animal, several were sent.[69] Besides the tribute, the Ragusans paid a tithe in kind to the Slave princelings. From time to time they made special treaties with their neighbours, usually of a commercial character. By one of these, which Resti dates 831,[70] Svetimir, King of Bosnia, agreed to send 50 oxen, 500 sheep and goats, and 200 loads of oats to Ragusa, and to treat the Ragusans in his territory as though they were his own subjects, while they were to send him fourteen braccia[71] of red cloth. This indicates the city’s economic position, which enabled it to send manufactured articles from the west into the Balkan lands, while it bought from the latter the cattle and foodstuffs which its own limited territory could not provide. Even in later times most of the grain consumed by the Ragusans was imported from abroad.

Relations with the Slaves, however, were not always of so peaceable a character, and the Ragusans were often engaged in little wars with their turbulent neighbours. The gradual extension of the Ragusan vineyards was a fertile source of dispute (lis de vineis),[72] as the Republic claimed and finally obtained by prescription the right to govern the territory in question. Another cause of dispute was the arrest and ill-treatment to which Ragusan merchants were often subjected when travelling in the interior. At other times the Ragusans aroused the ire of the neighbouring princes by giving shelter to their rebellious subjects. The story of Bodino, in spite of its legendary character, illustrates this very clearly. This Slavonic prince, having deposed his uncle, Radoslav,[73] and made himself King of Dalmatia and Croatia, conquered Bosnia and Servia. But he wished to get rid of Radoslav’s sons, who still ruled over a small territory on the river Drina. In this he succeeded by treachery, but their children managed to escape to Ragusa, and placed themselves under the protection of the Republic. Bodino demanded that they should be given up to him, and on the refusal of the Ragusans he besieged their city for seven years. At the end of this time, finding that his efforts were useless, he put his cousins to death, and retired with the bulk of his army. But in order to molest Ragusa he built a castle at the head of the bridge connecting the town with the mainland, and left a small containing force behind. The Ragusans obtained possession of this stronghold by the following stratagem. After having bribed the commanders of the garrison by promising them land and honours in the city, they allowed a large consignment of wine to fall into the hands of the enemy; while the latter were making merry on it the burghers issued forth and put them all to the sword. The castle was destroyed, and the church of San Niccolò in Prijeki[74] erected on its site. These events are recorded as having occurred some time during the eleventh or twelfth century, but the accounts are by writers who lived several hundreds of years later. Probably there were wars with the Slaves in which incidents of a similar character occurred, but the seven years’ siege is pure fiction, and the name of Bodino is not found in any history of the Serbs or Croatians.

Another Servian war, on which we possess somewhat more reliable information, is that which broke out in 1184 between the Ragusans and Stephen Nemanja, King of the Serbs. An army commanded by the King himself attacked the city from the land side,[75] while a fleet under his brother, Miroslav, attacked it by sea. The citizens, under Michele Bobali, completely defeated the besiegers, who were ignorant of siege operations and quite unprovided with necessaries. On the Feast of the Three Martyrs,[76] September 27, 1186, peace was concluded.[77] Both sides agreed to forget past injuries, and Nemanja granted the Ragusans permission to trade in all parts of his dominions, while his own subjects were to be protected at Ragusa; but it was also stipulated that rebels should be prevented from using the city as a place in which to conspire against their sovereign. There was another stipulation, that should the King or his brother ever need a safe refuge, Ragusa should be open to them—a clause found in many subsequent treaties.

Venice in all that concerned Ragusa’s relations with the Slave states allowed the citizens to do as they pleased, even during the period when Venetian counts presided over its government. It was only in questions concerning maritime affairs that the Queen of the Adriatic asserted her authority over Ragusa from time to time.

This same year the Normans made another raid into Dalmatia, and occupied Ragusa and several other coast towns. Norman rule lasted until 1190, and does not seem to have left any traces beyond a few documents. The treaty of peace, dated September 27, 1186,[78] was drawn up “at the court of the most glorious King William and of the lord archbishop Tribunus, in the presence of Tasilgard, the Royal Chamberlain, of all the nobles, of Gervase the count (of Ragusa), and of all the people.” This shows that Ragusa was under a Norman count. Document xxii. of the Monumenta spectantia Historiam Slavorum Meridionalium is a treaty of peace between Ragusa and the Cazichi (another name for the Narentan, pirates): “And on the side of the Ragusans, Gervase the count swore to preserve this peace, without prejudice to his sovereign lord.... In the year of our Lord (1190), in the month of February, on the day of St. Blaize (the 3rd), the Assembly having been summoned by Gervase the count to the sound of the bell, we decided,” &c. Document xxiii., dated June 13, 1190, is a treaty between this same count of Ragusa and Miroslav, Prince of the Serbs, in which Gervase promises that the latter should receive hospitality at Ragusa if he ever required it, salvo sacramento domini nostri regi Tancredi.

The occupation of Ragusa by the Normans is evidently an episode in the wars which they waged against the Eastern Empire, and the town was probably seized merely as a basis for further operations. Gervase, who ruled the whole time, does not seem to have been an absolute despot, as the consent of the Assembly was required for all the acts of the Government. Norman rule in Dalmatia did not survive the death of Tancred and the consequent collapse of the Sicilian kingdom in 1190. In documents of a date posterior to this, such as the treaty with Fano in 1199,[79] with Ancona[80] of the same year, with Bari of 1201,[81] and with Termoli of 1203,[82] no mention either of Venetian or Norman counts is made, so that we may conclude that for the time being Ragusa enjoyed freedom from foreign rulers.

But Venice was preparing to re-occupy the whole of Dalmatia, and the Fourth Crusade of 1202 provided her with the desired opportunity. The Crusaders began their expedition to the Holy Land by storming and sacking Zara, where they wintered. In 1204 they captured Constantinople, subverted the Greek Empire, and set up the ephemeral Latin Empire of the East in its place, with Baldwin of Flanders as Emperor. The Doge of Venice, Enrico Dandolo, the prime mover and leader of the expedition, became “lord of a quarter and a half of Romania.” In 1205 the Venetians, at the height of their power, demanded the submission of Ragusa, which was at once tendered. Dandolo (the historian) thus describes this fourth surrender:—

“Tommaso Morosini, who had been nominated Patriarch (of Constantinople) by Innocent III., returned to Venice, carrying the Pope’s letters; he set sail with a fleet of four triremes and made war against the city of Ragusa, who, at the suggestion of the Greeks, had rebelled against Venice. The citizens, no longer trusting in the strength of the Greeks, surrendered their city to the Venetians.”

Two other chronicles[83] give similar accounts of the event. The indefatigable “Esadastes” of course tries to prove that Ragusa did not surrender, because the people who had held out so bravely and successfully against the Saracens 340 years previously would not have tamely submitted to a squadron of four ships commanded by a priest. The Ragusan apologist, however, forgets the enormous prestige acquired by the Venetians as a consequence of their exploits in subverting the Eastern Empire, after which event Ragusa could not hope to oppose the greatest Power in the Adriatic with any chance of success.[84]

With this act of submission ends the first period of Ragusan history, during which the possession, or rather suzerainty over the city was a matter of dispute between the Venetians and the Greeks, with intervals of absolute independence, and four years of Norman rule. As, however, Byzantine influence, not necessarily political, predominates even in Venice itself, we may call this the Byzantine period. For the next hundred and fifty years, save for one short interruption, Ragusa remains under Venetian supremacy.

An important question in connection with the growth of Ragusa is its ecclesiastical history. Native historians have attempted to prove that the city was an archiepiscopal see from the earliest times, and that it succeeded to Salona, whence some of its first settlers had come, as the metropolis of all Dalmatia. This latter contention proving quite untenable (the Archbishop of Salona, together with the majority of the surviving inhabitants, took refuge at Spalato, which became an archiepiscopal see in consequence), they declare that the Ragusan archbishops had succeeded to those of Doclea. That city, they assert, had been destroyed by the Bulgarian Tsar Samuel, and its archbishop fled to Ragusa, which became ipso facto an archiepiscopal see. A more accurate account is that contained in the Illyricum Sacrum of Farlati. Doclea was destroyed, not by Samuel, who became Tsar of the Bulgarians in 976, but by Simeon. In fact Porphyrogenitus, who wrote in 949, mentions the event as having occurred during his own lifetime. According to the Illyricum Sacrum the exact date was 926. John (the archbishop) actually did take refuge at Ragusa, where, on the death of the local bishop, he succeeded to the see, retaining his superior title by courtesy. His successors wished to continue in the dignity, and even began to assume metropolitan authority, refusing to obey the archbishop of Spalato. The dispute lasted many years, and the bishops of the newly-created see of Antivari[85] claimed that they were the true successors to the archbishops of Doclea. Pope Gregory VII. apparently refers to these contentions in his Epistle to Michael, King of the Slaves.[86] The Roman Pontiff hereby summons “Peter, bishop of Antivari, the bishop of Ragusa, and other suitable witnesses, by means of whom the contention between the archbishop of Spalato and Ragusa[87] may be judicially examined and canonically defined,” to repair to the Holy See. What Gregory’s decision was we are not informed, but in the end the see of Ragusa was separated from that of Spalato and erected into an archbishopric with metropolitan authority. The same thing was done in the case of Antivari. Thus by the thirteenth century we find that Dalmatia was divided into three ecclesiastical provinces. The reasons why the Ragusans were so anxious to have an archbishopric of their own were political not less than religious. We have seen how important a personage the Ragusan bishop was in the constitution, and if he were to owe obedience to a prelate in a foreign and possibly hostile State, he might be induced to act in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Republic. The existence of a separate province, which lasted down to our own times, also constituted a further assertion of Ragusan independence.

The importance of the Ragusan Church was further enhanced by the conversion of the neighbouring Slaves, to whom Ragusa was the nearest religious centre. Ragusan missionaries went among them to preach the Gospel, and ecclesiastics from Constantinople made the city their headquarters and starting-point. The part which Ragusa played in these conversions explains the gifts which the Servian princes and nobles made to its churches.[88] In later times religious controversies arose between the citizens and their neighbours, in consequence of the heretical and schismatic sects which were spreading throughout the Balkan lands. Ragusa was nothing if not orthodox, and used all her influence to second the Papacy in trying to suppress these movements, which were often countenanced by the kings and princes of Servia and Bosnia. Bernard, archbishop of Ragusa at the end of the twelfth century, wished to bring the bishops of Bosnia under his authority, and the Banus Čulin, who at that time professed himself a Catholic, consented. But while Bernard was in Rome, Čulin abjured Catholicism for Bogomilism,[89] and set up Bogomil bishops in opposition to those consecrated by Bernard. Vulkan, Grand Župan of Chelmo (Zachulmia), did likewise, and convoked a synod at Antivari.[90]

In 1023 the Benedictine Order came to Ragusa from the Tremiti Islands under one Peter, and established itself on the island of Lacroma. Various Serb princes and Ragusan citizens made gifts of land to the monastery.

The Ragusans were essentially a commercial people, and trade, both inland and sea-borne, formed the chief source of their wealth. In the Byzantine period, however, we only find the germs of their future commercial development. We have already alluded to the part played by Ragusan shipping, first in the Greek expedition to Apulia in 848, and then at the battle of Durazzo. But the vessels were small, and the sea-borne trade of a very limited character. Navigation was of three kinds—coastwise traffic, navigation intra Culfum, and navigation extra Culfum.[91] Coastwise traffic was comprised between the peninsula of Molonta (a little to the north-west of the Bay of Cattaro) and the Canale di Stagno, a distance of about 70 kilometres in all, with ten harbours. Navigation intra Culfum, which extended from the Capo Cumano to Apulia and Durazzo, was of considerable importance even during the Byzantine epoch. Fine Milan cloths, skins, tan, and canvas for sails were brought on Ragusan ships from the ports of the Marche and Apulia, and forwarded to all parts of the Eastern Empire and the Slavonic lands. All trade to places situated beyond these limits came under the heading of navigation extra Culfum, but we shall defer a detailed account of its conditions to a later chapter, as it did not grow to important proportions until the thirteenth century. There was, however, apparently a Ragusan colony at Constantinople.

[Illustration: THE QUAY AND HARBOUR GATE]

The earliest recorded commercial treaty made by the Republic is the one of 1169 with Pisa. In 1168 the Republic of Pisa sent three envoys to Constantinople to settle a contention with Manuel Comnenus. On the way they stopped at Ragusa, and on May 13, 1169, signed a commercial treaty with the city, guaranteeing mutual immunities and other privileges. The Pisan envoys then proceeded on their journey, accompanied by the newly appointed chief of the Ragusan colony in the Imperial capital.[92] There were political as well as commercial reasons for this agreement, in the hostility of both Republics to Venetian supremacy in the Adriatic. About this time the Ragusans obtained the right of citizenship at Constantinople, granted to them by Manuel, and confirmed by his son, Alexius II. The original documents have not been preserved, but the privilege is frequently alluded to by later writers.

Many treaties with the other towns of Dalmatia, Istria, and Italy are published in the Monumenta spectantia Historiam Slavorum Meridionalium. Thus in 1188 a perpetual peace was concluded with Rovigno;[93] in 1190 an agreement with the Cazichi or Narentans[94] (also called Dalmisiani, from the town of Almissa); in 1191 a treaty with Fano, and others to which we have already alluded. These agreements were all similar in character, and their object being to insure mutual and commercial privileges. Some contained special clauses exempting the citizens of the contracting cities from certain taxes and customs dues.

Traffic with the Slavonic states also began early, but the great trade highways from the coast to the interior were not fully developed until the next century.

Artistic and intellectual development, in which Byzantine influence is conspicuous, was still in its infancy, and of the few buildings of this period with any architectural pretensions only the smallest traces remain. The town was built chiefly of wood, save for the walls and a couple of small churches. The oldest edifice of which anything remains is the Church of San Stefano, mentioned by Constantine Porphyrogenitus as the most important in the town. Four ruined walls in a court near the diocesan seminary are believed to have belonged to this very ancient building. The tradition is that it was erected by Stephen, Banus of Bosnia, or by his widow. Gelcich suggestively describes what the building must have been like: “In the church of St. Stephen at Ragusa we must picture to ourselves not a work of art, but a chapel capable of containing few beyond the ministers at the altar; low-vaulted, decorated internally, and perhaps externally, with frescoes; an apse just large enough for the altar, lit by such few rays of sunlight as could penetrate by an irregular number of holes piercing the stone slab which closed the single-arched window placed over the altar.”[95] On the outside wall there is a fragment of bas-relief of two arches, each containing a cross on a design of foliage. Close by is the area of a larger church, also in ruins, of a later date, to which Santo Stefano afterwards served as a sacristy.

Another church of the Byzantine period is that of San Giacomo in Peline,[96] on the slopes of the Monte Sergio, mentioned by documents of the thirteenth century as already very ancient. Seen from outside, there is nothing to tell one that it is a church at all, but internally it is in good repair, and it is still occasionally used for services. It is quite plain, and has round arches and vaultings. It consists of a nave, three bays, and an apse. The single window, which is a later addition, is to the left of the altar. A small painting of the fourteenth century is the only ornament. Two other churches—San Niccolò in Prijeki, and Santa Maria in Castello—although both of this epoch, were entirely rebuilt in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. The best—one is tempted to say the only—piece of Byzantine sculpture in the town is a handsomely carved doorway in a chapel near the Duomo. The design, though simple, is elegant and graceful. On the island of Lacroma an inscription marks the burial-place of Vitalis, archbishop of Ragusa from 1023 to 1047.

This, then, is the sum of Byzantine remnants at Ragusa. The name of Monte Sergio, as Prof. Eitelberger says, is the only relic of the Oriental Church; while the name of the west gate, Porta Pile or Pille, is apparently derived from the Greek Πύλαι.

Of literary production it is as yet too early to speak, for Ragusan literature only begins with the Renaissance.

CHAPTER III

VENETIAN SUPREMACY

I.—THE CONSTITUTION AND THE LAWS, 1204-1276.

During the next hundred and fifty years, save for two or three short interruptions between 1221 and 1233, Ragusa is admittedly a vassal state of the Venetian Republic, ruled by Venetian counts appointed by the Doge. Venice was, however, the protectress rather than the absolute mistress of the Dalmatian townships, which continued to enjoy a considerable measure of self-government. Venetian influence was useful to them as a protection both against the pirates which infested the Adriatic and the turbulence of the Slavonic princes, although as regards her relations with the latter, Ragusa, at all events, was free to manage even her foreign policy to a great extent. It will be well to examine the conditions of the Slavonic hinterland at this period.

[Illustration: RAGUSA FROM THE EAST]

During the twelfth century the Slave lands were beginning to assume a semblance of order, and early in the thirteenth century, out of the chaos of barbarous and more or less independent tribes, four principal states had taken shape. They were Servia or Rascia, Bosnia, Hlum or Hum, and Doclea. The most important of these was Servia, welded into a kingdom by the Nemanja dynasty, who had extended their frontiers southwards and eastwards at the expense of the Eastern Roman Empire. It included, besides modern Servia, as far as the Ibar and the Servian Morava, a part of Bosnia to the east of the watershed between the rivers Bosna and Drina, the district of Novibazar and Old Servia, and a part of Albania.[97] It had no regular capital in the modern sense, but the Kings resided usually at Prizren, at Scutari,[98] or at Skopje (Üsküb). It touched the sea-coast at the Bocche di Cattaro and in Albania; and the town of Cattaro was sometimes under Servian protection. The importance of the country does not begin until the reign of Stephen Nemanja (1143 or 1159). He extended his territory so as to include Bosnia in 1169, and reduced all the semi-independent župans (feudal lords) to subjection. He was still under Byzantine suzerainty, but after the death of Manuel Comnenus in 1180 he refused to pay tribute to his successor, conquered Niš, and made Priština[99] his capital. In 1185 he shook off all allegiance to the Greeks, and assumed the title of King of Servia, but was not crowned. In 1195 he abdicated in favour of his son, Stephen Uroš, who was crowned by his younger brother, St. Sava, the first archbishop of Servia. Stephen Uroš’s reign was peaceful, and Servia flourished under him. His brother, Vukan, had inherited the Zeta and part of Hlum from his father, but owed allegiance to Stephen Uroš. When the Latin Empire of Constantinople was established in 1205, Baldwin recognised him as independent King of Servia, Bosnia, and Dalmatia. Uroš died in 1224. His son, Stephen III., captured the town of Vidin or Bdin from the Bulgarians, and the district of Syrmia between the Save and the Danube. His brother, Ladislas, who succeeded him, abandoned Vidin on marrying the Bulgarian Tsar’s daughter. A third brother, Stephen IV. the Great, succeeded in 1237. With Stephen Uroš II. Milutin (succeeded 1275) Servia is almost at the height of her power. He conquered a large part of Macedonia, capturing the town of Serres, besieged Salonica in 1285, and invaded Albania. He added Bosnia, which had been under Hungarian vassalage, once more to Servia, by divorcing his first wife and marrying Elizabeth, the daughter of the King of Hungary, who gave him Bosnia as a dowry. His grandson, Stephen, who was called Dušan or the Strangler, because he had strangled his own father,[100] succeeded in 1331, and extended his power over the greater part of the Balkan peninsula. He conquered the rest of Macedonia and Albania, and reduced Bulgaria to a state of vassalage. In 1346 he had himself crowned “Tsar of the Serbs and Greeks.”[101]

Bosnia, which corresponded to the modern region of that name, minus the eastern districts under Servia and the north-west corner, was ruled by a Banus who owed allegiance to Hungary. The first Banus, whose name is recorded in authentic documents, is Borić, who reigned from 1154 to 1163. During the next twenty years the country was under Byzantine suzerainty, represented at times by Greek governors, at others by native princes with Imperial diplomas. In 1180 the great Banus Kulin or Čulin came to the throne, shook off Byzantine authority, and ruled the country wisely and well for twenty-four years. He cultivated friendly relations with his neighbours, including Ragusa.[102] “The days of Čulin” became proverbial in later and less happy times to indicate a golden age. After Čulin’s death the country’s prosperity declined, but revived to some extent under Matthew Ninoslav (1232). After the death of his successor in 1254 Bosnia fell once more under Hungarian vassalage, and was divided into Bosnia proper (afterwards Bosnia-Mačva) under native vassal Bani, and the district of Usora and Soli ruled by Hungarian magnates. After a short period under the Croatian house of Šubić the native prince, Stephen Kotromanić, became Banus under Hungarian suzerainty, and reigned until 1353, when his nephew, Stephen Trvartko or Tvrtko,[103] succeeded him and crowned himself king.

The land of Hlum or Hum had in early times formed part of the kingdom of Doclea, and included, besides the modern Herzegovina, Tribunia (or Travunia), the peninsula of Sabbioncello, a long stretch of Dalmatian coast, and part of Montenegro. In 1015 it was conquered by the Bulgarian Tsars, whose empire had spread to the Adriatic. The Greek Emperor, Basil II. (Bulgaroktonos), reconquered it in 1019, and in 1050 the native prince Radoslav drove out the Greeks, and made himself ruler of the country. Among his successors was Bodino, who is said to have besieged Ragusa. During the twelfth century the Servians attacked Doclea, and in 1143 King Radoslav II. asked the Greek Emperor for help against them; but in 1150 Hlum was conquered by Dessa (or Stephen Nemanja), brother of the King of Servia, reoccupied by the Greeks a few years later, and in 1168 added once more to the kingdom of Servia. From 1198 to the beginning of the thirteenth century it was connected with Croatia, after which it returned once more to the Servians. The latter were extremely anxious to possess Hlum, because it afforded them their best opening to the sea (to the north they were cut off by Bosnia and Croatia). In all probability it continued to form part of Servia until added to the Bosnian Banate by Stephen Kotromanić about 1320 or 1330, shorn, however, of Stagno by the Ragusans, as we shall see subsequently.[104]

Ragusa was thus surrounded on all her land frontiers by powerful Slavonic states, who at times were friendly, but envied her wealth, and above all her splendid port; of this they tried on more than one occasion to gain possession. Ragusa relied for safety on their own dissensions and on Venetian protection. In the meantime she made the most of her position by exploiting their territory for commercial purposes.

Of the first twenty years of Venetian rule there is little to record. Of the counts, only one name is mentioned between 1204 and 1222—Giovanni Dandolo,[105] who may have ruled during the whole period. But about this time there occurred a curious event in the history of the town, which is described as a Ragusan version of the story of Marin Faliero. It is variously represented as having occurred about 1221-1223 or 1230-1232. The earlier date appears to be more probable, for reasons which we shall explain. Apparently for a few years previously Ragusa had been enjoying what was practically absolute freedom, as no Venetian count had been appointed. In 1221 or thereabouts a certain Damiano Giuda or Juda was elected count by popular assembly. But instead of resigning the dignity after six months, which had been the usual period during the intervals of independence, he continued in office illegally for two years; he tyrannised over the people, subjected his enemies to arbitrary arrest, exile, and confiscation, and kept a bodyguard of mercenaries.[106] The citizens tired of this misgovernment, and were willing to call in the Venetians once more. A conspiracy was set on foot to bring about the tyrant’s downfall, under the leadership of his own son-in-law, Pirro Benessa. What increased the discontent among the Ragusans was the fact that since the rupture with Venice that Republic had ceased to protect them against piracy, and their maritime trade suffered in consequence. Giuda’s arbitrary proceedings had also caused trouble with the other Dalmatian towns. A group of nobles met to discuss the matter, and although some, including Vito and Michele Bobali, opposed any suggestion that Venetian aid should be resorted to, their objections were overruled, and it was decided to send a deputation to Venice, headed by Pirro Benessa himself. On its arrival it was well received, and the Government sent a squadron of six galleys down the Adriatic, ostensibly to escort the Patriarch of Constantinople. It weighed anchor at Ragusa, where Benessa landed and visited the tyrant, advising him to come and pay his respects to the Patriarch and the Venetian admiral. Not suspecting treachery Giuda agreed, and went on board the principal galley. He was instantly seized and loaded with chains, and the fleet sailed away. When he found himself thus outwitted, in a fit of rage and despair he committed suicide by beating his head against the sides of the vessel. In exchange for this deliverance the Ragusans agreed to readmit the Venetian counts.

How far this story is authentic we cannot decide, but in its main features it is probably true. It may be that Damiano Giuda was a patriot, whose object was to consolidate Ragusa as a free city, independent of all Venetian tutelage, but that he felt that the community was still too weak to stand alone unless ruled by a strong personal government. Or he may have been, as most historians make him out, merely an ambitious citizen, like those who made themselves masters of the various Italian city-republics. Be that as it may, the important point is the subsequent connection between Ragusa and Venice. There is a letter addressed to one Velcinno,[107] Podestà of Spalato, which alludes to “Zellovellus ragusiensis comes,” and to the story of Damiano Giuda. This Velcinno is probably the same as Buysinus, who was podestà from 1221 to 1223. This would indicate that the episode was over not later than 1223, and that Zellovellus had come as Venetian count. We know that Damiano tyrannised for two years, so he must have entered office at least as early as 1221. But as he had been elected by the people and not appointed by the Doge, Ragusa must at that time have been independent of Venice. Now there are documents of 1224 and 1226 in which the Ragusans are reprimanded for having failed to send hostages to Venice and otherwise fulfil their promises. The final treaty of submission regulating Venetian suzerainty over Ragusa is dated 1232. Pisani concludes from this that the Zellovello letter is a forgery; that Ragusa shook off Venetian supremacy between 1224 and 1226, remained free and independent until 1230, when Giuda became tyrant; and that the submission of 1232 was the price which the Ragusans paid for being freed from him.[108] Professor Gelcich, however, holds to the authenticity of the Zellovello letter,[109] but does not allude to the documents of 1224 and 1226 regarding the hostages and the prohibition to the Ragusans against trading with Alexandria.[110] It is, I think, probable that these documents refer to a later rebellion against Venetian authority. Venice had helped the Ragusans to shake off domestic tyranny, say, about 1223, exacting in exchange certain promises of allegiance and a number of hostages. These stipulations were not fulfilled; hence the protests referred to in the documents of 1224 and 1226. Venice, however, did not press her claims, and Ragusa remained more or less independent.[111] Finally, on finding that the city could not yet stand alone, or fearing that Venice was preparing to re-establish her authority by force of arms, the citizens made a voluntary submission in 1232. This view is corroborated by the fact that in the treaty of 1232 no mention is made either of Damiano Giuda or of Pirro Benessa, who headed the conspiracy against him and the deputation to Venice. The negotiations were carried on between the Venetian Government and two Ragusan nobles, Binzola Bodazza[112] and Gervasio Naimerio.

[Illustration: TORRE MENZE]

The treaty of 1232 fixes the terms of Ragusa’s dependence. “We, the envoys of Ragusa,” it begins, “seeing that it appears to us of great advantage that our country should be subject to Venetian domination, beg that you should grant us a Venetian count according to our desires.” Ragusa was always to have Venetian counts in future, who were to be chosen by the Doge with the majority of his councillors. “The count shall swear fealty to the Doge and to his successors, and thus will all future counts to all future Doges for ever. Also all the men of the county (of Ragusa) above thirteen years of age shall swear fealty to the lord Doge and his successors, and they shall renew their oath every ten years. They shall also swear fealty to the count and all his successors for ever, ‘salva fidelitate domini ducis ad honorem Venecie et salutem Ragusii.’” Should the Doge ever visit Ragusa he was to be honourably lodged in the Archbishop’s palace.

It was further agreed that the Ragusans should always choose a Venetian for their archbishop, namely, a man born at any place between Grado and Cavarzere, and that he should be subject to the authority of the Patriarch of Grado, if the Pope permitted it.[113] He, too, must swear allegiance to the Doge and his successors, whose praises the clergy must solemnly sing in the cathedral at Christmas, at Easter, and on the feast of San Biagio.

The treaty specifies the mutual obligations of the two cities in naval matters. When the Venetian fleet puts to sea for war beyond Brindisi and Durazzo, for every thirty Venetian galleys Ragusa must provide one, and the Ragusan ships are to remain in commission as long as those of Venice. Ragusa may levy the same tolls on all foreign ships as are levied at Venice, and the proceeds are to be divided in equal parts between the Count, the Archbishop, and the Commune. The friends of the Venetians are to be the friends of the Ragusans, and the enemies of the Venetians their enemies. They must not have any dealings with the Almissans, the Narentans, and other pirates. Whenever Venice sends a fleet against the pirates, Ragusa must provide at least one good ship with fifty men. As regards tribute, “the Ragusans must give 12 ipperperi to the Doge and 100 gold ipperperi of the right weight to the Venetian commonwealth on the feast of San Biagio. At the same time the Commune must give 400 ipperperi to the Count, as well as all the other usual revenues and honours, save the salt revenue. The Ragusans must send twelve hostages, belonging to as many noble families, to Venice; of these, half are to be changed every six months.” The Ragusans must pay 5 per cent. on all goods which they bring to Venice from the Eastern Empire, 20 per cent. on those from Egypt, Tunis, and Barbary; 2½ per cent. on those from Sicily. Merchandise from Slavonia was free of duty. Ragusa could only send four ships of seventy miliari[114] to Venice each year on these terms; all further traffic was subject to higher duties; the Ragusans could not trade with foreigners in Venice, nor with countries where the Venetians could not trade.

The document ends with renewed oaths of allegiance to Venice on behalf of the Ragusans.[115] “Esadastes” admits that Ragusa really did submit to Venice in 1232, but declares this treaty to be a forgery, having only seen it in Nani’s De Duobus Imperatoris Rasciæ Nummis, where it is incomplete. He bases his contention, first, on the fact that the provision as to the archbishops being Venetians was not always complied with. This, however, proves nothing, as there is no reason why Venice should not sometimes have allowed the Ragusans to choose some foreigner if no suitable Venetian were forthcoming. He adds that the Ragusan envoys had no authority to surrender the city without consulting the Grand Council, and as Damiano Giuda was then ruling, it could not be summoned. This is merely an ingenious quibble, and, if we admit that nine years had elapsed since the expulsion of the tyrant, the argument has no value at all. Then he changes his line, and insists that Ragusa merely contracted a fœdus or fidelitas, i.e. a treaty of friendship, with Venice, and not a deditio or true submission, and that in agreeing to have Venetian counts Ragusa did nothing more than what Florence and other Italian cities did when they chose foreigners for the position of podestà, without thereby prejudicing their liberty. It is easy to see that there is a considerable difference between the action of the Italian Republics, who chose their rulers now from one town and now from another, and that of Ragusa, who was obliged to accept Venetian counts appointed by the Doge.[116]

Venetian rule was now heavier than it had been previously; the Count made his influence felt more strongly, no important State business being transacted without his authority, and Ragusa was obliged to pay a tribute both in money and ships to the Dominante. The ceremonial observed on the arrival of the new Count was very elaborate; it is described in all its details in the statute-book of Marco Giustiniani (1272):—

“We decide that the lord Count who will come to Ragusa for a period, shall swear in the public assembly summoned by the sound of the bell to govern the city well, to maintain and guard its ancient constitutions and statutes, and to give judgment according to their provisions. After swearing this oath the standard of San Biagio, Pontiff and Martyr, shall be delivered into the hand of the said lord Count by the Commune of Ragusa, and thus will he be invested in the piazza with the countship and governorship. Afterwards he will immediately repair with the standard to the principal church, where he will receive holy water, incense, and a Bible, on which he shall renew his oath, from the cathedral chapter. Then one of the canons preaches a sermon praising the Doge and the Count. The latter returns to the piazza with the standard, to receive the homage of the people, who, after the standard of St. Mark has been raised, swear to maintain the pact made with the Venetian Republic. One citizen shouts, another shouts, all shout together: ‘Long live our Lord N.N., the magnificent Doge of Venice!’ and all and sundry in Ragusa and its territory vow to be loyal to the said Doge and the Commune of Venice for ever, gladly accepting the standard of the blessed St. Mark the Evangelist presented unto them by the lord Doge himself.”[117]

This account gives us a vivid picture of mediæval municipal life with all its picturesque splendour and its characteristic admixture of religion and politics. The piazza of Ragusa, with what was then the castle, the imposing church, the frowning walls, and the small wooden houses—for it was still mostly of timber—formed a suitable setting for the ceremony.

The Count was assisted by two lieutenants or viscounts, usually, but not invariably, Venetians, each of whom received a salary of fifty Venetian pounds, paid by the Ragusans, and two new suits of State robes every year. The Count remained in office on an average two years, and during his tenure he might not leave the city even for a single day. He could, however, obtain special permission from Venice to leave Ragusa for not more than eight days, but only on public business, such as arranging treaties with neighbouring princes.

Apparently there was another break in Venetian rule about 1235, as in a treaty of that year with Koloman, Count of Almissa,[118] and in another with Rimini,[119] no mention is made of the Venetian count. In January 1236 Ragusan envoys went to Venice to renew the treaty of 1232, but with modified conditions in favour of greater independence. The Signory, however, would not give way, and the treaty was reconfirmed in June on almost identical terms.[120] From this date Venetian overlordship continued without interruption and without modification until 1358.

As soon as the internal affairs of the Republic were settled the citizens proceeded to regulate their relations with their Slavonic neighbours. At this time the Banus of Bosnia, Ninoslav, was animated by friendly feelings towards Ragusa. In 1234 he had signed a treaty with the count confirming the privileges granted by Čulin in 1189. On March 22, 1240, he paid a solemn visit to the city with a splendid retinue of nobles, and renewed the old treaties with the following proclamation: “It was the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, and I, Matthew Ninoslav, the Grand Banus of Bosnia, had the good thought of coming to Ragusa to my old friends the nobles and commons; I came with my magnates, and we found Niccolò Tonisto, the Count of Ragusa. I, with my magnates, made oath to him of eternal peace and friendship.” He adds: “My subjects and my people and my officers shall love you, and with true faith protect you from the wicked.” He granted them full commercial freedom throughout his Banate. He alludes to a dispute between Stephen Vladislav, King of Servia, and promises not to abandon them should they actually have to make war. This treaty was renewed in 1249.[121]

The next few years were peaceful, save for a small religious dispute, and Ragusa continued to develop her resources quietly. The new Count, Niccolò Tonisto, however, complained to the Pope that the Archbishop Arrengerius was a Roman and not a Venetian,[122] and even accused him of heresy because he had consecrated a priest of Patarene tendencies as Bishop of Bosnia. Arrengerius was thereupon translated elsewhere, and succeeded by a Venetian named John, to whom the diocese of Antivari was assigned as well,[123] much to the gratification of the Ragusans. The clergy and congregation of this second diocese, however, were not so pleased, and refused to recognise his authority. John’s attempts to compel obedience only resulted in inducing Stephen Uroš, surnamed the Great, King of Servia, to take up the quarrel of Antivari and make a raid on Ragusan territory (1252). Uroš complained that the Ragusans were strengthening their fortifications—a very natural precaution—and on this pretext attacked the city. The new count Marsilio (or Marino) Giorgi[124] was sent as Venetian ambassador to expostulate with him, but on reaching Ragusa he refused to proceed further, and two citizens were sent in his stead.[125] The latter proceeded to stir up and doubtless bribe Uroš’s vassals, so that he thought it best for the present to renew their privileges, but hostilities soon broke out again. The Ragusans made an alliance with Michael, the Bulgarian Tsar, and with Radoslav, Count of Hlum, against the Serbs which brought Uroš to reason, and in 1254 the differences were settled by stanico.[126]

Radoslav had visited Ragusa in person that same year, and the treaty of friendship which was thus concluded is embodied in two documents. In the first the Ragusan commonwealth swears to the Župan Radoslav and his magnates that the city will be at peace with them according to ancient custom, and that they shall always have free access to its market. “And all this we wish to do and maintain to you and your people, without prejudice to our oaths to the Lord Doge and the commonwealth of Venice, and to the Lord Michael, Tsar of the Bulgarians.”[127] In the second document Radoslav promises to make war with all his strength against King Uroš, and to defend Ragusa by sea and land; he also added that he would remain at peace with Michael for so long as the latter’s treaty with Ragusa lasted.[128]

The archbishop, who had been the original cause of all the trouble, had naturally become extremely unpopular, and when in his zeal for Venetian supremacy he proposed to carry out the provision of the treaty of 1232 by placing himself under the authority of the Patriarch of Grado, his position became untenable, and he was forced to abdicate (1257). The Ragusans obtained from the Pope that his successor should not be a Venetian. Another Venetian, however, was appointed in 1276.

In 1266 the quarrel with Servia broke out afresh. The King was angry, according to Resti, because a number of his nobles quitted the country and settled at Ragusa. This statement, if true, is interesting, as it is the first immigration of Slaves on a large scale into the city after the early settlements between the seventh and the tenth centuries. But again the quarrel was settled by stanico, and the Ragusans agreed to pay Uroš the tribute of 2000 ipperperi in exchange for increased privileges and the confirmation of their rights over the disputed territories at Breno, Gionchetto, &c.[129]

The year 1272 is a very important one in Ragusan annals, as it is the date of the promulgation of the statute-book by the Count Marco Giustiniani. Hitherto the constitution and laws of Ragusa had been based on custom, altered and modified by statutes. Giustiniani codified all the existing sources of Ragusan jurisprudence into a corpus called the Liber Statutorum. Dalmatian law is based on a Roman substratum, with additions from local statutes, Slavonic customs, and certain commercial and maritime statutes. The contents of the new code are summed up in the following mnemonic distich:—

“Elligit officia comes civitatis in primo, Officiis fides datur sacrata secundo, Causa litis sequitur terno sub ordine libri, Conjugis inscripsit quarto dotalia bona, Ordo datur domibus quinto plateasque divisit, Judicis officium crimen exposit in sexto, Septimo navigii additur, et mercium ordo, Octavo in codice diversa colligit auctor.”

The introduction, which is full of generalities and abstract ideas, after the manner of the time, states that the object of the code was to collect the statutes of the Ragusan Republic, “to harmonise the discrepancies, suppress superfluities, supply omissions, explain obscurities, so that nothing superfluous, obscure, or captious should remain in them.” The first book defines the position, rights, and duties of the count and of the other chief functionaries of the Republic, and deals with sundry financial matters. The second book contains the formulæ and oaths of each officer of State; and in cap. xxiv. the salaries of the Ragusan envoys[130] to foreign countries were fixed. The third embodies the law of procedure and the judicial system, and sets forth the rules for the stanico, or international court of arbitration, to which we have already alluded. This institution was a peculiarly Serbo-Dalmatian one, and deserves examination. The statute of 1272 describes it as an antica consuetudo. It was of two kinds, the plenarium stanicum, or full court, and the parvum, or minor court. The full stanicum was agreed upon by the Government of Ragusa and that of some other State with whom the former had a dispute. Each side elected an equal number of judges, who met at some place easily accessible to both capitals, and, if possible, on neutral ground, i.e. in the territory of some State not concerned in the dispute. Thus in disputes between Ragusa and Zara the spot chosen was Santa Maria di Lesina, on the island of that name; for those between Ragusa and Sebenico, Traù, Spalato, Almissa, or Lesina, the stanicum met at or near Prevlaka (near Stagno); if the quarrel was with Hlum, at Malfi; if with the Serbs, at Gionchetto or Cresta; if with the Bosnians, at Trebinje, Popovo, or Canali. The dispute was settled by compromise rather than by arbitration, and each party was represented by State officials. The parvum stanicum was convened to settle private disputes between Ragusans and citizens of one of the Slave states (it was not resorted to in the case of disputes with the other Dalmatian towns). The presence of representatives of the two States was not necessary. But often when such disputes arose the parties would agree to defer settling them until the full stanicum met, provided that such a one was to take place shortly. It was not necessary that all private international disputes should be settled in this manner, and the plaintiff was free to summon his adversary before the latter’s own tribunal. He only resorted to it when he feared that he could not obtain justice from the foreign court. In proceedings by stanicum, the old Teutonic and Slavonic system of the conjuratio was applied, by which each party produced a number of relations and friends, who swore to the veracity of their kinsman; if any one was convicted of perjury, the curse fell on the whole clan alike. The institution exists to this day in Montenegro, Albania, and in certain districts of South Dalmatia and the Herzegovina.[131]

The fourth book deals with marriage, wills, and family affairs. The fifth deals with municipal regulations, building laws and contracts, land tenure, &c. The sixth is the criminal code, and also contains fiscal enactments and smuggling laws. The seventh regulates shipping, the relations between officers and crew, agreements for voyages, marine insurance, responsibilities and risks. The last book contains enactments on divers matters. It became law on May 9, 1272.

This code, although it is imperfect and not altogether well constructed, marks a great improvement on previous legislation, and compares favourably with the statutes of many of the more famous Italian Republics. The shipping and commercial enactments are often excellent, and parts of the code, especially those relating to land tenure and certain forms of contract, are still valid at Ragusa.

The Liber Statutorum was afterwards added to and enlarged, and numbers of new laws were enacted. Until 1357 these were incorporated in the Statute-book, but after the last Venetian count had left in that year a new code was begun, called the Liber Viridis or Green Book, which contains all the new laws down to 1460. Then the Liber Croceus or Yellow Book was begun, and continued down to 1791. The last laws of the Republic, from 1791 to its fall in 1808, are preserved in the Parti dei Pregadi. The deliberations and enactments of the various assemblies are contained in the Liber Reformationum, which was begun in 1306. Of all these collections of enactments, only the last has been published, but not in a complete form (see Bibliography). In addition, there are various minor collections containing the edicts of certain special bodies.

We shall now make a brief examination of the Ragusan constitution, which by this time had assumed the form which, with certain alterations, it preserved down to the fall of the Republic. Even the fact that in 1358 the Venetian counts were superseded by native Rectors did not change the internal constitution of the State to any considerable extent. The constitution since the early days of the city’s existence had undergone much the same transformation as that of Venice, and tended to become even more aristocratic. The laudo populi was still maintained,[132] but it was resorted to less and less frequently as years went by; and after having been an empty formality for some time, at the end of the period of Venetian suzerainty it had ceased to exist. The Liber Statutorum was confirmed “per populum Rhacusinum more solito (i.e. to the sound of a bell) congregatum,” but by that time all power was invested in the aristocracy. Only nobles might aspire to any but the humblest offices of the State, and every noble had a voice at least in the Grand Council. As at Venice there was the Golden Book, at Ragusa there was the Specchio, containing the names of all the noble families. These were as a rule the descendants of the original Latin colonists from Epidaurus and Salona, or, in a few cases, of those early Slave refugees who were nobles in their own country. The names themselves have an Italian sound, although most of them are unlike any real Italian names.[133] There was a fairly large part of the population of Slavonic origin, but the official, and to a great extent the popular, language was Italian. The laws and deliberations and official documents[134] are all either in Latin or Italian, and the general character of the community was prevalently Italian, modified to some extent by Slavonic influences. The latter tended to increase, especially after the end of Venetian suzerainty, and by the middle of the sixteenth century the bulk of the lower classes spoke the Servian language.

The head of the State, as we have seen, was the Count, who represented Venetian authority, summoned the councils, and signed all public acts. No act was valid without his approval, but, on the other hand, he could not make decrees without the assistance and consent of the councils. Of these there were three—namely, the Consilium Minus, the Consilium Majus, and the Rogati or Pregadi.

The Minor Council, which had in all probability existed in a rudimentary form from the earliest times, had now developed into an important body. It acted as the Count’s privy council, it arranged all official ceremonies, and gave audience to foreign ambassadors and envoys to Ragusa. It also acted as a sort of Court of Chancery, protected widows and orphans from injury, and watched over the morals of the citizens. It examined the deliberations of the other bodies on taxes, dues, and the rents, income, and real property of the State. On simpler matters it gave decisions, and others it referred to the Senate. It was an intermediary between private individuals and the State, and heard all complaints against the magistrates and other officials. It consisted of the Count and eleven members, of whom five formed the Corte Maggiore, or High Court of Justice, for all important cases.[135] The members were all men of mature age, and remained in office for a year only. Six made a quorum.

The Senate (Rogati) was the most influential of the three Councils, and transacted a great part of the business of the State. It imposed all taxes, tributes, and customs duties, decided how the money of the State should be spent or invested, and dealt with many other financial matters. It conducted the foreign affairs of the Republic, and nominated ambassadors and consuls. It was the Supreme Court of Appeal for criminal cases, and after 1440 for civil cases as well. It appointed a number of State officials, such as the Provveditori of the Arsenal, the financial secretaries, and the functionaries who attended to the supply of provisions. The number of Senators varied considerably. At the date of the Statute Book they were thirty-five;[136] later they rose to sixty-one. The body included the Count or Rector, the eleven Minor Councillors, various high functionaries, and a number of unofficial members. They met four times a week, and remained in office for a year, but might be re-elected, “for the Republic desires that her sons should exercise themselves in this kind of council, so that they may become Senators of judgment, and learn by long and continual experience the method and practice of governing excellently.”[137] By a decree of 1331[138] it was decided that thirty Senators made a quorum.

[Illustration: GENERAL VIEW, FROM THE WEST]

The Grand Council was the ultimate basis of the State, and was composed of all nobles above twenty years of age,[139] including the Minor Councillors, the Senators, and all the officials. Its numbers usually ranged from 200 to 300. It met in September, and the list of vacant offices were read out by the Count. The Secretary called up the Councillors one by one, drawing the numbers of all the seats from a bag. Each Councillor then drew a ball from an urn, which contained a number of gold balls equal to that of the offices to be filled; those who drew the gold balls took their seats beside the Count and Minor Council, and ordered the Secretary to nominate three Councillors for each office. As each name was called out the Councillor in question and his nearest relatives left the hall and waited outside. Then all the remaining Councillors were given linen balls, which they were to drop into another urn divided into two sections, one for the ayes and one for the noes. If none of the three candidates received more than half the votes recorded, the election was repeated. No one might refuse the office thus conferred upon him, save a small number of persons who could obtain a dispensation by paying a small fine.[140]

The Grand Council ratified all the laws of the Republic; it gave the final decision for peace or war, although the diplomatic function was reserved to the Senate; it could recall exiles, it received petitions, and it managed many of the daily affairs of the city. Sixty members (including the Count and the Minor Council) formed a quorum.

Besides the three Councils, there were a number of special bodies appointed for different purposes. Thus there was the Corte Maggiores or Major Curia, already alluded to, whose sentences in civil matters were without appeal until 1440; the Minor Curia or Lower Court, with special advocates attached to each; the Advocatores Comunis or Public Prosecutors, and many other functionaries. The three Camarlenghi kept the public accounts, and the Doanerii supervised the customs. The four Treasurers of Santa Maria had important fiscal duties in guarding the State treasury and paying out the public money according to the decrees of the Senate. They also had certain charitable duties, and spent the income of invested surpluses in providing poor girls with dowries, and later in ransoming Christian slaves from the Turks or the Barbary pirates. Private citizens, and even foreigners from Slave lands, often appointed them executors of their wills. Originally they had been the guardians of the relics and treasury of the Cathedral, but as they gradually came to have so large a share of the financial business of the Republic on their hands, in 1306 another board, called the Procurators Sanctæ Mariæ, was instituted to manage the affairs of the Church, and act with powers of attorney for various religious confraternities. A similar body was formed when the church of St. Blaize was erected in 1349. The notary of the Republic, who drafted all public acts, patents, diplomas, &c., was usually an expert Italian lawyer.

There were numbers of other officers for different departments of the administration and for the purposes of defence, such as those super sale, super blado comunis, super turribus, the capitani di custodia, who were elected every month, and the captains of the sestieri or six wards, into which Ragusa was divided. All the citizens in turn had to bear arms for the defence of the town, and certain nobles, who were changed very frequently, commanded the guard, and saw that the gates were securely fastened at night. The rest of the Republic’s territory was ruled by officers appointed by the Grand Council, called counts, viscounts, or captains. They governed despotically, and no native of the territory had any voice in the administration. In many cases the Government was very tyrannical and arbitrary. Ragusan ideas of liberty were not only restricted to a limited class, but did not extend a yard beyond the walls. Only the island of Lagosta, purchased in 1216 from Stephen Uroš, King of Servia, was permitted to retain its own customs and laws.

It will thus be seen that the Constitution was essentially copied from that of Venice, and was designed above all to make personal government impossible. None of the officials, save the Venetian Count, remained in office for more than a year, and the great majority of them could not be re-elected for two years afterwards. Everything was done to prevent individuals from acquiring undue influence, and to make the Government as collective as possible. All business was executed by boards and committees, and hardly anything by single individuals. Every detail was carefully regulated, so as to leave no loophole for tampering with the institutions or suspending the continuity of the Government. The result was from some points of view satisfactory. In the whole history of Ragusa only three or four revolutions are recorded—almost a unique distinction among the city-republics of Italy and other European lands, whose history is one long tale of civil wars and seditions. Venice alone enjoyed a similar though less complete immunity. On the other hand, it gave the Executive very little power of acting energetically and pursuing a bold, broad-minded policy, and prevented Ragusa from expanding into a first-class maritime State, as it had more than one opportunity of doing. At the same time, had it become really powerful, and acquired a hegemony over a large part of the Adriatic littoral and of the Slave lands, it would have run greater risks at the hands of the Turks. Venice, who felt the need of a swift and silent executive, instituted the Council of Ten, to which the Ragusan constitution offers no parallel. The Ragusan Senate was too numerous a body to act in the same way, and in it those who hesitated and doubted usually carried the day.

We realise the character of the Ragusan constitution from the fact that so few individuals have left their mark on the town’s history. We read of the various noble families whose names appear again and again in the public records, but hardly any single citizen emerges high above the others. The few names which are remembered are those of scholars, men of letters, or scientists. Even the ambassadors were always sent in pairs, although in the Middle Ages this was not peculiar to Ragusa.

Another aspect was that the three Councils who had to transact all the weightiest matters of the Republic were also overwhelmed with the petty details of municipal administration. This of course was difficult to avoid in the case of a small city-republic, but it constituted the radical failing of that type of state, for its Government was a parliament, a court of justice, and a town council all in one. The same body might be called upon to decide on an alliance with Hungary and on the seaworthiness of a carrack in the same sitting.

In diplomatic affairs, however, the Ragusans were past-masters. The Republic was in constant danger from the powerful enemies which surrounded it on all sides. The Venetians, who claimed the monopoly of the Adriatic, were ever anxious to increase their influence and to become absolute masters of the city, as they were of the other Dalmatian towns, and after their retirement from Ragusa in 1358 they made many attempts to reinstate their authority. On the mainland there was the King of Servia, the Banus of Bosnia, the Lord of Hlum, watching for an opportunity to occupy Ragusa, whose splendid harbour they envied. But the city fathers, by a policy which was often tortuous and not always straightforward, certainly achieved their object of preserving the Republic’s autonomy. Although Ragusa was never absolutely independent—for she either had a Venetian Count or paid a tribute to this or that Power—she was always free from foreign control in her internal affairs, and to a great extent in her external relations. The Government always knew when to give way and when to hold out; this feature became particularly conspicuous in the Republic’s dealings with the Turks.

Of the non-noble citizens we hear very little. They played no part in the Government, and were ineligible save for the very lowest offices. On the whole, they seem to have acquiesced in the oligarchical constitution, and apparently had little desire to take part in public affairs. They were ruled with wisdom and without oppression, free from faction fights, and their commercial interests, being identical with those of the aristocracy, were well cared for and protected by the Government. Both classes derived their wealth from trade.

CHAPTER IV

II.—SERVIAN AND BOSNIAN WARS, 1276-1358

To return to our story; in 1276 Ragusa was once more threatened from outside. The King of Servia[141] determined to make another attempt to convert Ragusa into a Servian seaport; he crossed the mountains with a large army and raided the territory of the Republic. A Ragusan force sent against him was defeated, and its leader, Benedetto Gondola, captured and hanged. Elated by this success, the King marched forward and tried to capture Ragusa itself by a coup de main. But the citizens were prepared, and the city put in a state of defence. The massive walls and well-armed battlements baffled the Servian king, and the Count Pietro Tiepolo, who had called in a Venetian contingent to stiffen the Ragusan levies, defeated the enemy. The Venetian Government sent a deputation to the King threatening him with severe reprisals if he dared to attack the cities under Venetian protection, whereupon the Servians retired and peace was made.[142] Ten years later the King of Servia, being offended with the Republic, harried and plundered its merchants, raided Ragusan territory, and tried to capture the city, but was again defeated.

Ragusa’s relations with Venice were on the whole satisfactory. There were occasional complaints on the part of the Venetian Government that the Ragusans did not fulfil their treaty obligations and failed to send the promised galleys to take part in the expeditions against the Almissan pirates and other enemies.[143] On other occasions they were blamed for delaying goods (chiefly grain) which passed through the city on the way to Venice. However, when in 1296 Ragusa was almost entirely destroyed by fire, the Venetians showed generosity in providing money and building materials,[144] and the Count Marino Morosini (1296-1298) issued a decree for rebuilding the city on a handsomer scale.[145] During the Genoese war Ragusa lent four galleys to the Venetians, which took part in the battle of Curzola, and after that disastrous defeat the Ragusan ships lent aid to the scattered remnants of the Venetian fleet (1298).

Ragusa had considerable intercourse with the neighbouring Dalmatian townships, especially with Cattaro, which was one of the oldest city-republics on the coast. But there were frequent quarrels between the two communities, partly through the intrigues of the Slavonic princes, and partly on account of commercial rivalries, both towns being competitors for the salt trade from the coast to the interior.[146] Cattaro had sometimes been under the protection of the Servian kings, who used it as their seaport, and sometimes under that of Venice. But in 1257 a treaty was made by which the Cattarini promised in the event of a war between the Serbs and Ragusa to do their best to harass the former without openly espousing the latter’s cause, and each Republic was to try and promote arbitration if the other was at war. We are not told how this curious compact was carried out, but it was not by any means an unusual arrangement among these semi-independent Dalmatian townships.

In 1301 or 1302 there was another Servian war, in which Venice and Ragusa co-operated, caused by a quarrel with Cattaro. This town was now under Venetian protection, but continued to hold underhand intercourse with the Slaves. The Venetians protested, and Stephen Uroš, who called himself “King of Servia, Melinia, Albania, Chelmo, Doclea, and the maritime region,”[147] made another raid on Ragusan territory, burning the houses, destroying the crops, and murdering many of the inhabitants and making prisoners of others.[148] The Venetians, however, came to the rescue, and ordered their Capitano in Golfo, or Admiral of the Adriatic, to remain with the fleet at Ragusa for so long as the city should be in any danger. The Serbs were defeated on several occasions, and finally induced to listen to the remonstrances of the Venetian ambassadors.[149] In 1302[150] peace was made, and as the Ragusans had suffered much during the war, and the devastating raids had caused a famine, they were allowed to retain the grain destined for Venice, and received loans and other favours.

For the next fourteen years there was peace, and Ragusa remained undisturbed save for one or two small disputes with Venice about certain prava statuta, which denied all value to the evidence of Venetian witnesses at Ragusa.[151] But in 1316 another quarrel broke out with Uroš, who arrested and plundered a number of Ragusan traders. Venetian attempts at conciliation proved fruitless,[152] and in 1317 war broke out. The Count Paolo Morosini wrote that “much serious damage has been done to the commune and people of Ragusa in their persons and property by Uroš and his people, who have again raided our territory.” Among other damage, the Franciscan monastery outside the Porta Pile was burnt.[153] The Venetians sold arms to the Ragusans, and deferred claiming payment until the following year. These arms were “many breast-plates, 100 cross-bows, 10,000 arrows, and 5000 falsatores.[154]

[Illustration: BAS RELIEF OF ST. BLAIZE, NEAR THE PORTA PLOCE]

We are not informed as to the outcome of this war; but apparently Ragusa was reconciled with Servia in 1322, as in that year Stephen Uroš IV.,[155] who succeeded his father in 1321, granted the city an accession of territory, i.e. the districts of Bosanka and Osoinik.[156] A far more important acquisition obtained during the next few years was that of Stagno and the peninsula of Punta, or Sabbioncello, as it is now called, which converted Ragusa from a city-republic, with only a few miles of territory beyond the walls and some small islands, into a fairly respectable territorial State. The Punta di Stagno is a long mountainous peninsula jutting out from the Dalmatian coast in a north-westerly direction, with a sort of spur or branch promontory stretching towards the south-east and forming a deep bay. Its length is 71.2 km., in breadth it varies from 3.1 km. to 7.1 km. Parts of the peninsula are very fertile, especially in vineyards. Its population is to-day over 10,000, and in the Middle Ages it was probably more considerable. It is joined to the mainland by a narrow isthmus 1½ km. across, with two small towns, Stagno Grande (Slav. Veliki Ston), looking towards Ragusa, and Stagno Piccolo (Mali Ston), on the north towards the Mare di Narenta, each with a good port. On both shores of the peninsula are other small harbours. On the southern coast, opposite the island of Curzola, rises the imposing mass of the Monte Vipera, with the town of Orebić at its foot. The importance of this territory for the Ragusans was partly strategical, as it formed a bulwark against invaders, from the north, whether by sea or by land, and partly commercial, on account of the valuable salt-pans of Stagno, which afterwards formed one of the chief sources of revenue for the Republic, and are still in use to this day. The Punta and the island of Curzola are the only spots in Europe where jackals are still to be found. This territory had formed part of the principality of Hlum, which, as we have seen, was originally joined to Doclea, and recognised Servian overlordship from about 1222 until some time between 1320 and 1330, when it was added to the Banat of Bosnia under Hungarian suzerainty. Hlum was divided into a number of župe, like the other Serb lands, under different feudal families. Stagno and the Punta was ruled by that of the Branivoj, with whom the Ragusans had hitherto lived on terms of friendship and commercial intercourse. The Republic sent them an annual gift of 100 ipperperi,[157] which may, however, have been blackmail to secure immunity from piracy, to which so many of the Slave tribes were addicted. It is probable that the Ragusans had had their eyes on this district for some time, and in 1320-21 they gladly obeyed the injunctions of the Venetian Senate to act against the pirates of Stagno and Cattaro.[158] About 1323, for some unrecorded reason,[159] a quarrel broke out between Ragusa and the Branivoj; and on April 8, 1325, instead of sending the usual gift, the Republic decreed warlike preparations against the lord Branivoj and his sons “qui fecerunt offensionis multas, depredationes, et rubarias contra comune et speciales personas civitatis Ragusii.” A few months later Ragusa sent envoys to Venice to request the Doge’s intervention on account of the King of Servia’s attitude, which appeared to be insincere.[160] Hostilities were commenced, and carried on with a barbarity unusual even for those times. The following year Braico, one of Branivoj’s sons, was captured at Sant’ Andrea in Pelago, and condemned to be exposed in a cage and starved to death. Some time afterwards his brother Grubaza or Grubeza was captured, and their mother, who had asked for Ragusan hospitality on her way to Bosnia, was detained as a hostage. The third brother, Branoe, was arrested by the King of Servia, who was now friendly towards the Ragusans. The latter requested him to hand the prisoner over to the commune of Cattaro, where he would have less chance of escaping. Uroš agreed, but the Republic was still unsatisfied, and private citizens offered rewards out of their own pockets for the heads of the surviving members of the Branivoj family. A certain Pasqua promised 500 ipperperi, and the Croce family 2000, to any one of the King’s barons who would kill Branoe on the way from Svezana (where he had been detained) to Cattaro![161] The Servian king apparently had another slight disagreement with the Ragusans about 1327; but when war broke out between him and the Bulgarian Tsar Michael, he required their help to obtain Italian mercenaries, and in return he favoured their projects on Stagno.[162] His successor, Stephen Dušan (1330-1355), was still more favourable, and through the two citizens of Cattaro, Trifone and Niccolò Bucchia, who held high positions at his court as Protospathar and Protovestiar, the Republic obtained his full support. Trifone was sent to arbitrate, but his sympathies were so thoroughly Ragusan that he actually contributed to the price on Branoe’s head. Niccolò finally induced the King formally to cede the coveted territory to Ragusa, and accompanied him on a state visit to that city. The Servian king was received by the citizens with their usual magnificence (1332), and Niccolò Bucchia was presented with wide lands and houses on the Punta, and a house in Ragusa itself. He was afterwards granted citizenship and a seat in the Grand Council, and became the founder of a famous family. The document ceding Stagno in exchange for a tribute is published in the Monumenta specantia Historiam Slavorum Meridionalium.[163]

[Illustration: PLAN OF RAGUSA.]

“We, Stephen Nemanja Dušan, by the grace of God, King of Servia, Dalmatia, Dioclia, Albania, Zeuta,[164] Chelmo, and the Maritime Region, ... concede and grant to the community of Ragusa by hereditary right to them and to their successors the whole Punta and coast of Stagno, beginning from Prevlaca to the confines of Ragusan territory, with all the towns and villages and houses therein contained, and also Posrednica[165] ... in exchange for which they must pay to us and to our successors annually on the day of the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ 500 soldi in Venetian grossi, on pain of paying double in case of delay.” In addition he was to receive a sum down of 2000 ipperperi, and Stephen Kotromanić, Banus of Bosnia, who had certain rights over the Punta, was to receive 600 ipperperi a year. According to Resti,[166] it was necessary for the Republic to bribe several of the King’s nobles and councillors so that they should influence him in favour of the grant, and they influenced the Banus of Bosnia through his secretary, Domagna Bobali, who was a native of Ragusa. The compact was carried out, save for the island of Posrednica, which the Ragusans were not allowed to occupy until 1345. What became of the Branivoj family, whether it was entirely wiped out or whether the surviving members were merely expelled, we are not informed.

The Republic at once set to work to partition the land in the new territory among its citizens. Three-quarters of it were granted to the nobles, and the rest to the burghers; the grantees were forbidden to sell any land to the Slaves. A colour of piety was lent to this conquest by the determination of the Ragusans to stamp out Bogomilism and schism from the peninsula, and the caloyers[167] and heretical priests were exiled, and their places occupied by Roman Catholics. At the end of the century the Franciscans were established as an additional bulwark of the Church. In order to protect Stagno from more earthly dangers an elaborate system of fortifications was begun, which were to serve the Republic in good stead on more than one occasion. Both Stagno Grande and Stagno Piccolo were surrounded with massive walls, and a castle was built in each. A third was erected at the top of the hill, between the two seas; a long wall with towers at intervals was carried right across the isthmus, and other walls from both towns to the castle on the hill. These defences may be seen to this day, and although in a woeful state of neglect and disrepair, still form a most conspicuous feature in the landscape.

[Illustration: FORTIFICATIONS OF STAGNO GRANDE]

The following year King Stephen rather repented his generosity, and demanded back the gift on the pretext that the Ragusans were incapable of defending it securely. But his envoys, who visited Stagno, being convinced by the sight of the Ragusan fortifications, and perhaps by that of Ragusan gold, that it was being rapidly made quite secure, induced him to confirm the grant. This he did, and forbade his subjects to attempt to enter the ceded territory. Another dispute with the fickle Servian king broke out in 1330, because the Ragusans had given shelter to the widow of the Bulgarian Tsar, who had been forced to fly after the defeat and death of her husband by the Serbs at the battle of Velbužd.[168] Stephen wished to secure the fugitive, and demanded her of the Republic. The latter refused the demand, in spite of promise of still further territories and privileges, and sent the Empress safely to Constantinople. Stephen then demanded back Stagno once more, and tried to take it by storm. But as it was too strongly fortified he limited himself to a raid on Ragusan territory on the mainland, until called away to defend his northern frontier against the Hungarians. Peace was made in 1335, and in 1336[169] a solemn Ragusan embassy was sent to honour him at Scutari.

The maritime trade of the Republic had brought great riches to the citizens, but contact with the East also brought the plague in its train, and in 1348 Ragusa, like the rest of Europe, was visited by the terrible scourge. It was probably introduced into the western world by the Tartars besieging Caffa in 1344, and although the town was saved, the relieving force caught the disease, which spread through Europe with lightning-like rapidity. The following document preserved in the book of wills in the Cathedral treasury at Ragusa, written by eye-witnesses, gives a vivid picture of the terror inspired by the fell scourge:—

“Our Lord God sent a terrible judgment, unheard of in the whole world, both on Christians and on pagans, a mortality of men and still more of women, through an awful and incurable disease, which caused the spitting of blood and swellings on various parts of the body, so contagious that sons fled from their fathers and still more often fathers from their sons; all the art of Apocrates, Galen, and Avizena proved useless, for no art or science availeth against Divine judgment. This disease commenced at Ragusa on the 15th day of December, in the year of our Lord 1348, and lasted for six months, during which 120 persons or more died each day; of the (Grand) Council there died 110 nobles.”[170] According to Gelcich, the total number of deaths in the town ranged from 7000 to 10,000, including 160 nobles and 300 burghers; it is impossible to conjecture how many died in the territory. It made its appearance at the same time at Spalato, preceded, according to the legend, by an eclipse of the sun, so complete that the stars were visible by day, and by a drought so great that the dust remained suspended in huge clouds in mid air.[171] Ragnina, who wrote more than a century after the event, declares that the belief that the Jews had poisoned the wells was very prevalent, while others believed that the cause of the disease was a conjunction of three planets under Jupiter and Mars.[172] At this time no sanitary precautions were taken against further visitations, but large sums were collected to build the votive church of San Biagio.

This same year there was another disagreement with King Stephen, as we find the Venetian Government authorising the Ragusans to purchase a further supply of arms;[173] in 1349 and 1350 Venetian embassies were sent to Servia to protest against his raids on Ragusan territory, a Venetian galley stationed in the harbour as a protection,[174] and two mangani or catapults were forwarded to the citizens.[175] Some of the Venetian documents on the subject allude to Bosnian as well as Servian raids. Klaić says that the Banus Stephen Kotromanić actually did make raids before 1345, but in that year made peace and never molested the Ragusans again. His nephews, however, the Nikolići counts of Hlum and Popovo, had many quarrels with Ragusa and raided her territory, and it is to them that the documents allude.[176] War now broke out between Servia and Bosnia, because the Banus would not consent to his daughter’s marriage with the King’s son, Uroš. The King invaded Bosnia on two occasions with a large army, and besieged the Banus in the royal castle of Bobovac, but could not capture him. These quarrels between Bosnia and Servia, like those between Servia and Bulgaria, were paving the way for the Turkish conquest, and the obscure battles in the Bosna and Drina valleys formed the prelude to the fatal day of Kossovo and the bondage of the South-Slavonic race. The Banus Kotroman died in 1353, and was succeed by his nephew, Stephen Tvrtko, who was the first King of Bosnia. He too was friendly to the Ragusans, and granted them important privileges.

The conditions of Venice in the middle of the fourteenth century were far from prosperous. The plague of 1348 had carried off three-fifths of the population, in spite of the most stringent precautions.[177] In 1350 the fratricidal war with Genoa was again renewed in consequence of disputes about the Black Sea trade. The battle of the Bosporus (1353) was indecisive; in that of Cagliari the Venetians were successful, but dared not attack Genoa, because the city had placed itself under the protection of the Visconti. But in the same year they were totally defeated at Sapienza in the Greek Archipelago and their whole fleet captured. In 1354 the conspiracy of Marin Faliero broke out, and kept the whole State in a turmoil for many months, until the execution of the Doge and his accomplices.[178] His successor, Giovanni Gradenigo, made peace with Genoa, and the Venetians set to work to rebuild their fleet and restore their exhausted treasury by means of new commercial enterprises in the Levant. But their possession of Dalmatia and the land frontier north of Treviso were now threatened by Lewis of Hungary. The latter allied himself with the Count of Gorizia and the Carraresi of Padua against Venice, and invaded the Trevisan march, defeating all the forces sent against him and capturing city after city. A five months’ truce was concluded in 1356, but when it expired hostilities broke out once more, and the treasury was soon empty. Merchandise might arrive by sea, but with the mainland in the hands of the enemy there was no outlet for its distribution.[179] New taxes were raised, causing much discontent, and the Republic was at last forced to sue for peace. Lewis made the cession of Dalmatia an express condition of his retirement from the Trevisan march. After much discussion and expostulation the Senate was forced to agree to these humiliating terms, and Dalmatia, which had been acquired and maintained at such great sacrifices, was now given up (Feb. 1358). The Republic had hoped to create a diversion by an alliance with the King of Servia, who had been fighting with the Banus of Bosnia, then a Hungarian vassal. But Stephen Dušan got more and more involved in the Greek war, and when the Hungarians invaded the Venetian terraferma he was marching towards Constantinople, but died on the way thither (1355).

The Ragusans were delighted at the successes of Lewis; they had received him with great honour when he touched at their city in 1349 on his return from the Neapolitan expedition,[180] and from that moment they began to contemplate the advisability of placing themselves under his protection. They had been afraid of the Hungarians when they threatened to conquer Bosnia and Hlum, but now there was little fear of that, and Hungary not being a great naval Power, could not threaten their liberties by means of the fleet as Venice could always do. When in 1356 the Venetians sent commissioners to claim the Ragusan contingent for the war, the Grand Council made professions of friendship, and agreed to send it. At the same time they were negotiating with the Hungarian king for the surrender of their city to him. On July 7, 1357, Lewis confirmed their possession of Stagno, which, having formed part of Bosnia, was in a measure under his authority, and it is probable that a preliminary treaty of dedition was signed at the same time. When, by the peace of February 1358, Venice gave up the whole eastern shore of the Adriatic, from the Quarnero to Durazzo, she attempted to retain her hold over Ragusa on account of that very claim to separation from the rest of Dalmatia which she had hitherto always combated. Blandishments were tried, and by a rescript of the Doge Giovanni Dolfin (Jan. 2, 1358) the Ragusans were granted Venetian citizenship and commercial equality with the Venetians.[181] But Ragusa had no wish to retain even a vestige of Venetian authority, and a few weeks later Marco Soranzo, the last Venetian Count, left the city by order of the Doge. The Ragusans treated him with courtesy and evinced no ill-feeling against him, whereas the Venetian officials in the other Dalmatian towns had departed amidst the jeers and curses of the inhabitants. A triumvirate of Ragusan nobles was elected by the Grand Council to carry on the government while arrangements with King Lewis were being completed. By a curious irony they sent commissioners to Venice in March to order “unum gonfalonem et aliquas banderias cum armis D. N. D. Regis Hungariæ pro galleis et lignis nostris,” and later “unum gonfalonerium ad modum penoni de sindone torto cum arma (sic) Regis Hungariæ cum argento albo et cum argentum (sic) deauratum pro duc. auri xxx.”[182]

On June 27 the final treaty was signed by Lewis of Hungary and Giovanni Saraca, Archbishop of Ragusa, at Višegrad. The Ragusans placed themselves under Hungarian protection, but were allowed to retain their own internal liberties more fully than under Venice. The King’s praises, instead of those of the Doge, were to be sung in the churches of Ragusa three times a year. The Hungarian standard was to be adopted as well as the banner of San Biagio, and 500 ipperperi a year were to be paid to the King. Should Hungary be engaged in naval warfare Ragusa must provide one galley for every ten Hungarian galleys whenever the Dalmatian fleet put to sea; if the Royal fleet alone were employed, Ragusa need only provide one for every thirty. The supreme government of the State was no longer to be vested in a foreign count, but in three native Ragusans (afterwards reduced to one) to be chosen by the Council. The only representative of the King was the captain of the Hungarian and Bosnian guard, but he too was really in the service of the Republic, and had no political authority. From this moment Ragusa may be considered an independent State, as Hungarian authority, save for the tribute, was little more than a formality.

During the Venetian epoch the territory of the Republic had expanded considerably, and when the last count departed it consisted of the following districts:—In the immediate neighbourhood of the city it possessed the valleys of Gionchetto (Šumet), Bergato (Brgat), and Ombla (Rijeka), with the bay of Gravosa and the Lapad peninsula, but the frontiers were very near, and on the crest of Monte Sergio, immediately behind the city, watchmen were posted day and night. Part of this territory had been acquired in the earliest times, but small additions had been made at intervals. Beyond the Ombla the citizens owned the stretch of coast known as Starea or Astarea.[183] Of the islands, they possessed in the thirteenth century Mercana—a small rock opposite the promontory of Ragusavecchia, with a monastery of St. Michael[184]—and Isola di Mezzo, Calamotta, Daksa, and S. Andrea of the group known to the ancients as the Elaphites Insulæ were added in 1080.[185] In 1218 the more distant island of Lagosta had been acquired, and at an early date that of Meleda had been granted by the Servian king to the Benedictine monks, with the condition that the civil government should be entrusted to the Republic. Stephen the First-Crowned gave them Giuppana in 1216. Between 1220 and 1224 Stephen, Nemanja’s son, granted the same monks a stretch of land about Žrnovica and Ombla. As a consequence of the Ragusan alliance with Michael Asen, the Bulgarian Tsar, against Stephen Uroš I., King of Servia, in 1254, the Republic’s southern frontiers were extended so as to include the vineyards of Breno and the peninsula on which the ruins of Epidaurus are said to lie.[186] Here a new town arose, which by a strange inversion of names was called Ragusavecchia. We have seen how in 1333-1334 Stagno and the peninsula of Sabbioncello and the coast as far as the Narenta’s mouth were acquired. In 1357 small additions were made about Breno and Gionchetto between the Ljuta stream and the village of Kurilo[187] (north of the Ombla). The districts of Carina and Drieno, although on the Ragusan side of the mountain above Breno, remained beyond the frontier: eventually they became Turkish territory, and such they remained until 1878.[188]

[Illustration: CLOISTER OF THE FRANCISCAN MONASTERY]

The Ragusan Church had also been increasing in wealth and dignity with the growth of the Republic, and a number of handsome ecclesiastical buildings were begun during the fourteenth century. In the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries the Slavonic princes gave the churches many valuable gifts of land, gold and silver ornaments, and relics. But in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries Bosnia, Hlum, and Servia were torn by religious wars owing to the spread of that strange and little known heresy called Bogomilism, on which it will be useful to say a few words. Of the origin of this heresy as of its tenets there is very little reliable evidence. In all probability it was an offshoot of Armenian Paulicianism, itself derived from the earlier Adoptionist creed.[189] Paulician colonies have been settled in Europe as early as the ninth century by the Emperor Constantine Copronymus, and the heresy spread to Bulgaria, Servia, Bosnia, and Macedonia. In his History of the Bulgarians, Prof. C. J. Jireček gives an account of the beliefs of the Bogomils according to the researches of various Slavonic scholars. They believed in the existence of two principles, equal in age and power, one good personified in God, and one evil personified in Satan. They recognised the New Testament, but not the Old. All matter and all the visible world were essentially evil; the body of Christ was only an apparent, not a real, body. The sacraments were corporeal, therefore evil. They had no hierarchy, but an executive consisting of a bishop and two grades of Apostles. Besides the ordinary Bogomils there was a special order of the Perfect, who renounced all worldly possessions, marriage, animal food, and lived like hermits. They had no churches or images. They had a deathbed ceremony, without which one went to hell. They did not believe in purgatory.[190] But, as Prof. Bury remarks, it is doubtful if this is a true presentation of the Bogomil creed. Hardly any of their books of ritual survive, and all the accounts of them which have been preserved are written by their prosecutors. It is more probable that they were a monotheistic sect, believing in one God only, and rejecting the Trinity. This view is supported by the fact that at the time of the Turkish conquest such numbers of Bogomils became Muhamedans. It was not merely that they went over to the conqueror’s creed from motives of mere self-interest; there was really more similarity between that religion and Bogomilism than between the latter and either the Eastern or the Western Church.

In the tenth century there was a bishopric of Bosnia, which until the eleventh century was in the ecclesiastical province of Spalato. In 1067 it was transferred to that of Antivari. Later in the same century it was added to the archbishopric of Ragusa. But the dioceses of Antivari and Spalato continued to dispute Ragusa’s supremacy, and in the conflict of authorities Bogomilism found scope to increase its adherents. The Bosnians were mostly Roman Catholics, although there were Orthodox Christians among them. Ban Čulin was himself a Catholic, but when in 1189 the Pope, at the instigation of the King of Hungary, Bela III., transferred the Bosnian bishopric once more from the Ragusan province to that of Spalato, he went over to Bogomilism, so as not to be in any way under Hungarian authority. His conversion gave the heresy a fresh impetus, and it spread all over Bosnia, Slavonia, Dalmatia, and Croatia, even to the coast towns. Pope Innocent III. had to induce the King of Hungary to make a crusade against the Bogomils in Bosnia, but Čulin declared that they were good Catholics, induced the Archbishop of Ragusa to go to Rome with several of the heretics to be examined by the Pope, and asked for a Papal envoy to be sent to Bosnia to study the question. The Pope agreed, and sent his chaplain, Johannes de Casamaris, to Bosnia in 1203. The heads of the Bogomil community, who were also heads of monasteries, met at Bjelopolje on the Bosna, and met the Banus, Casamaris, and Marinus, the Archdeacon of Ragusa, and presented an address in which they affirmed their orthodoxy and their attachment to the Roman Church,[191] and declared themselves ready to obey the Pope in everything. Čulin himself abjured all heresy. They renewed these declarations before the King of Hungary and the Banus at Pest. The Papal legate was quite content, and advised the Pope to erect some new bishoprics in Bosnia.

But in 1218 the heresy was again rampant, and Honorius III. sent a legate to Hungary and Dalmatia to preach a crusade against the Bogomils. But no crusade was organised, and the legate went alone to Bosnia, where he died in 1222. The quarrels between the Pope and Hungary gave the Bogomils a respite, and they became even more numerous in consequence. In 1222 Andrew II., King of Hungary, placed Bosnia under the ecclesiastical jurisdiction of Ugolin, Bishop of Kalocsa, on condition that he stamped out the heresy, and Pope Honorius confirmed the donation. But the crusade never came off, and the Bogomils became so powerful that they deposed the Banus Stephen and succeeded in placing their co-religionary Matthew Ninoslav on the throne (1232). James, the Papal legate, went to Bosnia and found that the greater part of the inhabitants were tainted with the heresy, including the Catholic bishop; the Archbishop of Ragusa knew of this and did not trouble about it, so that the legate reconfirmed the union of the bishopric to that of Kalocsa. He succeeded, however, in inducing Ninoslav to become a Catholic, and endow a new cathedral, which was to be in the hands of the Dominicans. Many magnates followed his example. But the Bogomils soon raised their heads once more, and the Banus was either unable or unwilling to extirpate them. A crusade was therefore proclaimed against them, which lasted from 1234 to 1239. Bosnia was ravaged with fire and sword, and finally conquered by the crusaders under Koloman, the King of Hungary’s son. In 1238 the Dominican Ponsa was made bishop of Bosnia, and by 1239 Bogomilism seemed to have been suppressed. But the moment the crusaders retired the heretics, who were supported by the nation, rose in arms once more and became independent of Hungary. In 1246 Innocent IV. ordered a second crusade, but this time without success. After Ninoslav’s death Bosnia again fell under Hungary, but no very severe measures were taken against the Bogomils. The Bogomil Church of Bosnia became an established institution, and the Catholic bishops themselves no longer resided in the country, but at Djakovar, in Slavonia. Various attempts to organise crusades against them failed. The Bani were afraid of persecuting them lest they should rise in arms and put themselves under the protection of the King of Servia, who as a Greek Christian was also an enemy to the Catholics. Moreover, the missionary efforts of the Catholic Church were hindered by the quarrels between the Franciscans and the Dominicans. Bogomilism spread to Croatia and Dalmatia, and found adherents even at Traù and Spalato. Pope Benedict XII. ordered the Croatian barons to make war on the heretics (1337), but they were too busy fighting among themselves to achieve much result. But the Banus Stephen declared himself a good Catholic in 1340, and protected the Roman Church in Bosnia once more, agreeing to the establishment of two more bishoprics. We hear little more of the heresy after this date until the crusade of 1360.[192]

The Ragusan Church suffered in consequence of the heterodoxy of so many of the Slave princes, and no longer received rich gifts from them. On the other hand, both on account of its convenient situation and because it was a stronghold of Catholicism, the town became the centre of all this missionary activity. In 1225 the Dominican Order was established at Ragusa, and occupied a small house attached to the church of S. Giacomo in Peline. When the Order became more numerous it removed to the Ploce quarter, where a large new church was erected for it in 1306, and a monastery about 1345. The Franciscans first came to Ragusa in 1235, twenty-eight years after the foundation of the Order by St. Francis of Assisi, who is said to have visited the city himself on his return from the Holy Land, although there is no foundation for the legend. In 1250 a monastery was built for them outside the Porta Pile; it was destroyed by the Serbs during the raid of 1319.[193] A concession of land was granted to them within the walls in the Menze quarter, and by the middle of the fourteenth century they were established in the large, handsome monastery which still exists, built partly at Government expense and partly by the munificence of private citizens, including the guild of Ghent merchants established there.[194] The two Orders gave battle to the heretics, and helped to organise crusades against them, which are among the most barbarous examples of religious persecution which history records. On the other hand, if we are to believe the Ragusan legend, the Bogomils themselves persecuted the Catholics in the Cattaro districts, and the bodies of three martyrs who were murdered by them were brought to Ragusa, where a church was built in their honour.[195] It is somewhat difficult to unravel the tangle of contradictory accounts on this subject, especially as Ragusan writers often confuse the Bogomils with the followers of the Oriental Church.

CHAPTER V

THE TRADE OF RAGUSA

The whole basis of Ragusa’s prosperity, as we have seen in the first chapter, was trade. The Republic’s territory was too small, and in part too arid, to provide sufficient foodstuffs for the population and three-quarters of the grain which it consumed annually were imported from abroad. Consequently it was upon trade and industry that the citizens had to depend for their means of livelihood. Manufactures, however, save shipbuilding, never assumed great importance at Ragusa, and it was not until the following century that any industries at all were established. Trade, on the other hand, both sea-borne and overland, received a great additional impetus from the extension of Venetian traffic and from the increasing civilisation of the Slave states. At Ragusa, as at Venice, Florence, Siena, and elsewhere in Italy, the aristocracy as well as the middle classes were all interested in trade. We find members of all the noble families in the Ragusan settlements in Servia and Bosnia and Albania, and no nobleman disdained to travel overseas with his own goods.

We have seen the division of Ragusan maritime trade into coastwise traffic, navigation intra Culfum, and navigation extra Culfum. This last now became of considerable importance, and Ragusan vessels were found in every port of the Eastern Mediterranean. A special form of trade which had now arisen is that described in the Statute-book as ultra marinis partibus, i.e. up the courses of navigable rivers like the Narenta and the Bojana.

The Levant trade became extremely active, and was no longer limited to the tract of sea between the Capo Cumano on one side, and Apulia and Durazzo on the other. From the commercial provisions contained in the various treaties between Ragusa and Venice, we learn that the former traded with all parts of the Eastern Empire. Syria, Tunis, Barbary, Italy, Sicily, and probably Egypt. At Constantinople the privilege granted by the Comneni were renewed by the Latin Emperors Baldwin I. and Henry. The Ragusans traded especially with the Morea and the feudal duchy of Chiarenza or Clarence,[196] whence they brought silk to Ancona and other parts of Italy. At the same time they kept up their connection with the Greek princes who held sway over the fragments of the Greek Empire, namely, the Emperors of Nicæa and Trebizond[197] and the despots of Epirus. After the capture of Constantinople by the Latins, Epirus continued to hold out against their arms, and was ruled by the despots Michael I. (who died in 1214), Manuel (1214-1241), and Michael II. (1241-1271), all of whom granted valuable privileges to the Ragusans.[198] When the Greek Empire was re-established in 1261 all the exemptions and privileges were reconfirmed, first by Michael Palæologus, and later, in 1322, by Andronicus II.[199]

With regard to Egypt, if for the word Rakuphia in Benjamin of Tudela we should read Ragusa, the citizens of St. Blaize also frequented the market of Alexandria. In 1224 Egypt was placed under interdict, and the Venetians forbade the Ragusans to trade there; Ragusan merchants before starting on a journey had to swear that they would not visit Egypt, but in all probability the prohibition was often disregarded.[200] Subsequent attempts to enforce the interdict were equally unsuccessful. The object of the prohibition was above all to prevent the Egyptian Sultans from obtaining timber and iron, which were rare in their own country, for military purposes. Traders were attracted, however, by the enormous profits of the venture, for which they were willing to brave ecclesiastical thunders. In 1304 three Ragusans were captured whilst engaged in illicit traffic with Alexandria; they were granted absolution by the Pope on condition that they devoted part of their profits to building the Dominican monastery in their native town.[201]

Another country with which Ragusa had commercial intercourse was Bulgaria. In the early days of the second Bulgarian Empire (established in 1186) the Venetians could not trade with it, as they were the supporters of the Latin Empire at Constantinople in withstanding Bulgarian inroads; the Genoese were equally cut off because the Venetians excluded them from the Bosporus. The field therefore lay open to the Ragusans alone, and they were very favourably received by the Tsar John Asēn II. (1218-1241),[202] who called them “his well-beloved and trusted guests.” The Bulgarian trade was partly carried on by sea and partly overland through the Balkans.

From Italy and Sicily the Ragusans obtained most of their breadstuffs, and in exchange they brought Eastern and Slavonian goods to those countries. Among the new treaties with Italian towns we may mention those with Rimini (1235),[203] with Taddeo, Lord of Ravenna and Cervia (1218-1238),[204] with Ancona in 1256 and 1292,[205] with Fermo in 1288;[206] with Trani, Bari, Molfetta, and Barletta the old treaties were renewed at various times, and in the Reformationes we find numerous allusions to the special envoys sent to Apulia to collect grain. A large storehouse was built in the city with fifteen large dry wells to contain an adequate provision of grain in time of war.[207] Constantinople, Smyrna, Durazzo, Antivari, the Bojana valley, and to a lesser extent the Slavonic principalities, were resorted to for the same purpose. With Florence, too, Ragusa traded, and although there was no regular commercial treaty between the two cities, the Bardis and other Florentine merchant princes sent agents to Ragusa from time to time.

Shipping was regulated by a number of minute enactments to ensure safety, to fix the relations between captain and crew, and to define the obligations and risks of the owner. The amount of cargo which each ship was to carry was established by statute and varied according to the seasons of the year, and the vessels were examined before starting on a voyage by special officers to see that these and other regulations, such as those concerning the necessary coatings of pitch and the proper amount of arms to be carried, were complied with. Piracy being very prevalent in the Adriatic, it was decreed in 1336 that each vessel employed for other than coastwise traffic should carry five cuirasses, four spears, four bows, a suitable number of arrows, and a sword, shield, and helmet for every person on board. The personnel of these merchant ships consisted of the nauclerius (captain or master), the scribanus (accountant), the mercator (the owner of the goods carried, or his representative), the custodia (supercargo), the marinarius (mate), the conductus (ship’s boy), and a crew varying from eight to fourteen men for vessels up to a tonnage of eighty miara; for larger ships the necessary number was fixed in each particular case by the authorities. Members of noble families engaged in trade were constantly making voyages on their own ships, and later we find them even employed as scribani, and in fact a decree of 1462 in the Liber Croceus established that no one could be a scribanus unless he belonged to the Ragusan nobility.[208] At this time the ships were still small as compared with the great argosies[209] of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, but they were swift and suitable for the purposes for which they were required. The war fleet and the mercantile marine, as at Venice, were interchangeable, and ships which in peace time served for commercial purposes were converted into warships simply by increasing the number of armed men, strengthening the bulwarks, and providing them with engines of war.

Shipbuilding from the earliest days of the Republic formed an important industry. The timber was obtained from the forests of Monte Sergio, now, alas, disappeared, and from those of Lagosta and Meleda, of which traces still remain, as well as from Bosnia. The iron came from the interior, and was manufactured at Venice or locally, the canvas from Ancona and the Marche, pitch from Dalmatia, cordage from Ragusa itself. So jealous was the Republic of the shipbuilding industry, that no native builder (calafato or marangone) might lend his services to foreigners, under which heading the Slaves were included. In later times an exception was made in favour of the Turks. The harbour of Ragusa, which is too small for large modern steamers—these always land passengers and goods at Gravosa—in the Middle Ages was ever busy with arriving and departing ships, and the arsenal hands were always engaged in building or repairing craft of all kinds. Other shipping yards existed at the Isola di Mezzo, at Malfi, on Giuppana, and later at Stagno, Slano, and Ragusavecchia. The Ragusan vessels were famed throughout Illyria, and the Republic was frequently requested to lend some to this or that Slave potentate, to the Hungarians, and sometimes to the Venetians themselves.

[Illustration: COURTYARD OF THE SPONZA (CUSTOM-HOUSE)]

The dangers of navigation, even in the Adriatic, were by no means trifling. The storms of that narrow sea, the sudden gusts of bora or scirocco which sweep down among the countless islands, channels, and promontories of the east coast with terrific violence, are considered dangerous for small ships even to-day. In the Middle Ages the light sailing-craft ran much greater risks. But piracy was then the chief source of anxiety. We have already spoken of the Narentan corsairs in a previous chapter, but even after Venice had broken their power, piratical communities still survived. Almissa, between Stagno and the Narenta, was their chief centre, and its inhabitants were almost exclusively devoted to piracy. The Ragusan statutes contain numerous provisions forbidding all intercourse with them. A Ragusan who sold a ship to the Almissans was fined 100 ipperperi besides the price of the vessel itself; nor could he buy one from them, as it was presumed to be stolen property.[210] Occasionally some arrangement was made with this community of freebooters, and in 1235 a treaty of perpetual peace was signed with Koloman, Count of Almissa.[211] But it proved to be of little avail, and the Ragusan annals are full of entries concerning the depredations of the pirates. The Almissans were not finally subdued by the Venetians until after they regained Dalmatia in 1409. Other piratical communities were found in Northern Dalmatia and Croatia—the district formerly known as the Kraina[212]—and from the ports of Apulia,[213] Sicily, and even from Cattaro pirate vessels often issued forth to ravage the Dalmatian coast or prey upon the Adriatic trade. With Cattaro in particular Ragusa was very often at war on account of the rivalry for the salt trade, and all intercourse with the Serbs on the shores of the Bocche was forbidden. On various occasions the Government issued decrees forbidding Ragusan merchantmen from setting sail without an armed convoy, and whenever news was brought to the city that corsairs had been sighted the armed galleys of the Republic were instantly got ready and sent in pursuit of the freebooters. The Venetians had undertaken the policing of the Adriatic, and the Ragusans were bound by treaty to contribute one or more ships for the purpose. Thus in 1326 they were thanked by the Venetian Senate for their past services in this direction, and requested to send two of their best galleys to the head of the Gulf.[214]

Another risk which Ragusan traders ran was that their ships and goods might be seized and confiscated in foreign ports by the local authorities. Antivari, Dulcigno, Durazzo, and Trani were the worst offenders in this respect, but even at Venice and Alexandria the citizens of St. Blaize were not always safe.

The sailor’s calling was consequently fraught with considerable danger and responsibility, and the return of a merchant ship from a long voyage was hailed as a great event, especially if it occurred at Christmastide or Easter. Then, as Prof. Gelcich says, “more than an occasion for domestic rejoicing, it was a national festival.... We can see with our mind’s eye the large crowd lining the quays watching the ships entering the harbour, each vessel trying to be the first to drop anchor, so as to receive the small gift of one ipperpero awarded by the State for the achievement.”[215] On Christmas Eve all the sailors of the ships which happened to be in port that night carried a block of wood (ceppum)[216] to the castle, singing songs (kolende), and placed it on the Count’s hearth. The Count in return gave them each a cup of wine and two ipperperi pro kolendis. They also received two ipperperi from the Salt Commission, and two more from the Cathedral treasury.[217] All ships, whether Ragusan or from cities with whom the Republic had a commercial treaty, “qui navigant more Raguseorum,” coming into port were exempt from the stata or harbour dues, and only paid a small tax to the Count, the Archbishop, and the Cathedral treasury. With the proceeds of the latter the new Cathedral was built, declared by De Diversis and other writers to have been the finest church in all Illyria. Ships from countries with whom there were no treaties paid the arboraticum and the stata.

The weakening of Venice in consequence of the Hungarian wars, although acceptable to the Ragusans for political reasons, produced a very deleterious effect on their commerce, as piracy revived; Ragusan unfriendliness was also punished on occasion by exclusion from the Venetian ports. Shipbuilding had declined to such an extent that in 1329 the Venetian Senate ordered the Ragusans to construct an arsenal where ships could be built or repaired.[218] A resolution added to the Statute-book in 1358 declares that “marineriza Racusii erat amissa.” Ragusan ships were now very few, and seaborne commerce was carried chiefly on foreign bottoms and in partnership with foreigners. With the separation from Venice, Ragusan trade came to be almost wholly in foreign hands. A series of statutes were enacted forbidding Ragusans from associating with foreigners, and various other measures were taken to revive national shipping; the results were very successful, and by the end of the fifteenth century the city had more than regained its old position.

The overland trade of the Balkans attained a remarkable development in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, and regular trade routes were established from the Adriatic coast through the interior to Constantinople and the Black Sea. Of these routes which, together with that from Hungary, formed the connecting link between Western and Eastern Europe, there were several. One was from Spalato, one from the Narenta mouth, one from Ragusa, one from Cattaro, and one from the mouth of the Bojana. They all joined the Belgrad-Constantinople route at different points, and all had branch routes to the various mining and commercial centres of Servia, Bosnia, Hlum, Albania, and Bulgaria. Ragusa, owing to her geographical position, was always the chief market on the Adriatic for the hinterland, and Ragusan caravans were constantly travelling along the various routes. The chief exports from the Slavonic lands were cattle, cheese, dried fish from the lake of Scutari, skins, wool, honey, wax, timber, silver, and iron. Ragusa imported salt, manufactured cloths, clothes, brocades, arms, axes, horse-trappings, glass-ware, perfumes, sweetmeats, southern fruits, fish, oil, wine, and gold- and silversmiths’ wares.[219] The salt trade formed one of the Republic’s chief sources of income, as the interior, although rich in other minerals, was absolutely wanting in this necessary commodity. Salt-pans were established at four points along the Illyrian coast—the Narenta, Ragusa, the Bocche di Cattaro, and San Sergio on the Bojana. The Ragusans, by means of old treaties with the Slaves, had almost acquired a monopoly of the traffic, and they were often able to punish the depredations to which their territory was subjected by cutting off the supply. The largest salt-pans were in the neighbourhood of Ragusa itself, but after 1333 they were removed to Stagno, where the industry is carried on to this day, and continues to supply the saltless interior.[220] The Narenta salt-pans were monopolised by the Ragusans, who established a customs station at the river’s mouth, and those of the Bojana, although outside their territory, were also in their hands; their only rival was Cattaro, whence the innumerable quarrels with that city. Cloth was imported from Venice, Florence, Mantua, and later from the looms of Ragusa herself. The presents which the Ragusans gave to the Slave princes and nobles out of friendship or as blackmail and bribery often took the form of rich gold brocades, silks, and satins, which greatly delighted the splendour-loving barbarians. We can well imagine the semi-civilised and proud vojvods and župans gloating over a consignment of the choicest products of Florentine industry, and being thereby induced to concede almost any commercial or political privilege to the patient and cunning envoys from the Republic of St. Blaize. To this day the Slaves of Servia, Dalmatia, and Bosnia, even the very poorest, love to deck themselves out in the most gorgeous costumes and the brightest ornaments, which adds not a little to the picturesqueness of that country.

A large part of Ragusan territory, both on the mainland and on the islands, was covered with vineyards; wine was, in fact, the chief agricultural product of the country. No wine could be imported from abroad save by a special licence, occasionally granted to the Count, foreign ambassadors, or eminent ecclesiastics.

The land trade was carried on entirely by means of caravans. There were no carriage roads since the decay of those built by the Romans, and all goods travelled by caravan and were carried on the backs of pack-animals, chiefly horses. Each caravan, which was formerly called a turma, a word still used in Montenegro, consisted of 200 to 300 pack-animals under the charge of Vlach drovers. These Vlachs or Rumans of Dalmatia were nearly all shepherds or horse- and cattle-drovers, and had markedly nomadic habits. At an early date they became identified with the Slaves, but, as I have said, they were probably of Latin origin.[221] In the Middle Ages they were usually the subjects of the feudal chiefs and monasteries. The leader of the caravan, also a Vlach, provided an adequate armed escort, and undertook to protect his charge against the brigands. Most of the traders were Ragusans or natives of the other coast towns, but Slavonic merchants also took part in this trade, especially those who were settled at Ragusa, where some of them became naturalised so as to enjoy the same exemptions and privileges as the citizens. Even noble feudatories and kings did not disdain this kind of traffic, and employed their own Vlachs for the purpose. The journey was by slow stages, as the paths were steep and rocky, and many precautions were necessary. In Bosnia and the Herzegovina, in spite of the roads and railways, much of the traffic is still carried on on pony-back, the more valuable goods in gaily painted green boxes, the rest packed up in canvas, secured to clumsy wooden saddles. Save for the proportions of the caravans, which are now much smaller than in the heyday of the Ragusan Republic, and for the fact that armed escorts, so far as Bosnia and Dalmatia are concerned, are no longer necessary, but little has changed. The importance of this traffic was very considerable, as it was then, as I have said, the chief link between the Western world and the Slavonic lands; Ragusa probably did far more to civilise the latter than was attempted by the Greeks, with whom the Slaves have always been in eternal conflict.

[Illustration: FAÇADE OF THE SPONZA (CUSTOM HOUSE), AND CLOCK TOWER]

The principal route from the coast was that from Ragusa to Niš, in Servia, where it joined the great road from Hungary to Constantinople via Belgrad. The caravan left Ragusa by the Porta Ploce to the east, and ascended the slopes of the Monte Sergio to Bergato, the Ragusan frontier, situated on a ridge between the valleys of Breno and Gionchetto. A few minutes farther on the Slave customs station of Ledenici[222] was reached. Thence the path descends into the broad and fertile valley of Trebinjčica to the town of Trebinje in the land of Hlum, which was usually the first halting-place (five or six hours from Ragusa). The caravan encamped outside the town, and the merchants and part of the escort lodged in the inns. From Trebinje the march was resumed up the course of the Trebinjčica past Ljubomir to Bilek or Bileće; then along what is now the Montenegrin frontier through dense forests to Crnica, where in 1380 a Ragusan commercial colony was established; thence past the castle of Kljuć (= key), which was afterwards the stronghold of the Vojvod Sandalj Hranić into the basin of Gacko,[223] close to the watershed between the Adriatic and the Black Sea. The country about here is fertile, and offers good pasturage. The Sutieska or Sutiska gorge was next entered, one of the finest tracts of scenery in the Balkans, guarded by the two castles of Vratar; there was an important customs station here in the fifteenth century, at the time of Duke Stephen Kosača, who levied a toll on all caravans. The route is so narrow at this point that a small body of men could hold a whole army at bay. The French traveller Des Hayes de Courmenin, who wrote in 1621, mentions an iron chain by which the path could be closed in war time. On emerging from the gorge the swirling waters of the Drina are reached, on the banks of which were a number of castles and several trading stations; the most important of these was Chotča (now Foča), on the right bank, with a wooden bridge; under the Turks it was for a long time the residence of the Sandžakbeg of the Herzegovina, and is still a town of some consequence. Another station was Ustikolina, where there was a Ragusan colony, first mentioned in 1399. A day’s march farther on is the town of Goražda, guarded by the castle of Samobor, after which the route proceeds in a south-easterly direction over the finely wooded Metalka saddle, whence an extensive view of the mountains of Montenegro, Servia, Bosnia, and Albania is obtained, to Breznica.[224] This was an important centre in Roman times, and the remains of a large Roman settlement (name unknown) have been unearthed close by. In the Middle Ages it was the meeting point of three trade routes—one to Ragusa, one to Niš and Constantinople, and a third to Cattaro via the Tara gorge, the source of the Piva, the castle of Onogošt, Nikšić, and Grahovo. From Plevlje the route travelled through what is now the Sandžak of Novibazar to Priepolje on the Lim, a favourite halting-place of the Ragusan merchants in the fourteenth century. On the opposite side of the river are the ruins of a fine large castle guarding the road, a stronghold of King Stephen Vladislav, who also built the adjoining monastery of Mileševa.[225] A few miles farther on was the point which was afterwards the eastern frontier of Stephen Kosača’s duchy. Another day’s march brings us to Senica or Senice, which was often the residence of the Nemanjid rulers of Servia. Here the route from Ragusa joined the one from Northern and Eastern Bosnia;[226] at Raška the two routes again separate, one going southwards to Salonica, the other eastwards to Niš. Just beyond Raška, in the latter direction, was Trgovište (market-place), often mentioned between 1345 and 1459 where a Ragusan colony was established. Two-thirds of the way from Ragusa to Niš were now accomplished. Trgovište was the centre of the great Servian Empire, and the surroundings abound in ruins and memories of the Nemanjid Tsars. At the end of the fifteenth century the town is alluded to as Novibazar (New Bazar, Yeni Bazar in Turkish). Not far off, in the valley of the Raška, are the remains of some Roman baths, and here was probably the site of the ancient Ras (mentioned in the tenth and eleventh centuries), which gave its name to the whole country (Rascia). From Trgovište the route proceeded by the Ibar valley through the mining district of the Monte Argentaro to Toplica, Prokoplje, and Niš. The whole journey took fifteen days in favourable weather. From Niš onwards the Ragusan caravans followed the great road to Constantinople or went to Bulgaria, where they had considerable trade and at least one colony at Vidin, in consequence of the privileges obtained from the Bulgarian Tsars.[227]

Another much frequented caravan route was that which started at the mouth of the Narenta and passed through Bosnia and Servia. Ragusan goods were transported either wholly by sea round Sabbioncello or via Stagno to the little island of Osinj in the river delta, where a trading depôt was opened. Close by were several other depôts, the most important of which was the Forum Narenti (called Driva by the Slaves), with a large customs station, salt stores, and a Ragusan colony. Later it was supplanted by the Venetian castle of Gabela or Gabella.[228] The caravans travelled from the mouth of the Narenta through the land of Hlum, following the course of the river to Blagaj, the residence of the lords of Hlum (afterwards Dukes of St. Saba or the Herzegovina), above the spot where the river Buna springs full-grown from the rocks.[229] The route continued up the Narenta valley, as the railway does to-day, past Konjica, which was to play an important part in later times, over the Ivan Pass to Visoko in the centre of Bosnia, the castle of the Bani. Below was the town of Podvisoko (Sotto-Visochi in Ragusan documents), on the banks of the river Bosna. Between 1348 and 1430 this was the commercial capital of the country and the seat of important trading communities. From Visoko the route proceeded to Olovo and Borač, near Vlasenica,[230] where it branched off into three. One led eastward to Srebrnica, the centre of the silver-mining district,[231] and Rudnik; another went northwards to Soli; the main route went to Kučlat, well known as a trading station in the fourteenth century, with a large Ragusan colony, to Zvornik and across the Drina to Sirmia and Belgrad. At Sirmia,[232] which was on the ruins of the Roman Syrmium, the Ragusans had a flourishing settlement protected by the Kings of Hungary, until the town was burnt by the Turks in 1396. Its importance was due to its position as a starting point for the Ragusan traders going to all parts of Hungary.[233]

These various routes were called collectively the Via de Bossina in the Ragusan documents. The routes which started from the coast at points south of Ragusa were denominated the Via de Zenta.[234] Ragusan vessels sailed down the coast, and either discharged their goods at the towns of Antivari and Dulcigno, or sailed for some distance up the various rivers—the Bojana, the Drim, the Mat, the Išmi, the Vrego, the Devol, and the Vojussa. This stretch of coast, which had formed part of the Byzantine theme of Dyrrhachium, was under Servian rule from 1180 to 1440.

“In Servian times,” writes Prof. Jireček,[235] “this region, now so desolate, was in the most flourishing condition, and had a large population and numerous beautifully situated towns. Even in the sixteenth century Italian travellers who ascended the course of the Bojana compared this green land with its many villages to their own fair country. Large Latin and Oriental monasteries stood peacefully side by side. Servian, Albanian, and Italian were the principal languages spoken. The cities enjoyed important privileges, granted by the Servian Kings, Tsars, and Despots (later by the Balšići), and their citizens occupied important positions in the Government service; the ruling princes themselves often visited these districts. The ports plied a busy trade, for from hence goods were transported to the Byzantine districts of Macedonia and Thrace, as far as Bulgaria and the Mare Majus (Mar Maggiore) as the Italians in the Middle Ages called the Black Sea.”

The chief city off the coast of Zedda was Antivari, situated about four miles from the sea, where the open bay of Volovica served as a harbour. Its government, like that of Ragusa and Cattaro, was an oligarchical constitution, in the hands of a numerous and active aristocracy, under privileges granted by the Servian Tsars. The citizens were of Latin origin, and Latin and Italian were the official languages, but the inhabitants of the surrounding country were Serbs. It was the centre of the archiepiscopal see of Northern Albania. After the Turkish conquest its importance was reduced to nil, and nearly all the noble families either died out or emigrated to Ragusa. It is not easy to realise that the actual Montenegrin village was once a busy commercial city. Nothing but a few escutcheons on some of the houses bear witness to its past magnificence.

A few miles farther south is Dulcigno,[236] which was also an autonomous oligarchical Republic, albeit less important than Antivari. Here the Roman element was always mixed with the Albanian. After the Turkish conquest it became a nest of pirates. Close by was the Golfo dello Drino, into which the two rivers Bojana and Drim (Drino) flowed. Eighteen miles up the course of the former was the great Benedictine monastery of San Serge and St. Bacchus, round which stood warehouses, customs offices, salt stores, shops, and booths, forming a centre called San Sergio by the Italians, Sveti Srgj by the Serbs; it retained its importance until the sixteenth century.[237] At the time of Queen Helena, the widow of Stephen Uroš I., the settlement was under a “Bajulus Regine at Portum Sancti Sergii.”[238] Here the ships unloaded their cargoes, which were forwarded to all parts of the interior by caravan; goods designed for Scutari, however, were sometimes transhipped into smaller boats and thus carried up to the lake and town. The caravan route went past Scutari to the castle of Danj (now Daino) on the Drim, where the Servian kings sometimes resided, and where the route joined that from Alessio (Lissos, Alexium, Slav- and Alb-Lješ[239]) at the mouth of the Drim. Thence the caravans proceeded to Prizren, which they reached in thirty-three hours by a road reputed to be one of the most difficult in the Albanian mountains.[240] The chief halting-places were Pilot and Spas, where there was a custom house. Prizren, which is on the Bistrica, some distance east of the junction of that river with the White Drim, is still a large town, on the site of the Roman Therenda.[241] Nemanja conquered it from the Eastern Empire; in 1204 it was in Bulgarian hands; in the course of the century it came once more into Servian possession, and was one of the chief cities of the kingdom. King Milutin and the Tsars Dušan and Uroš frequently made it their residence, and many ruined castles are found in the vicinity. Here was the chief commercial factory of the Ragusans for Albania, and they erected two Latin churches. From Prizren the routes crossed a fertile and well-populated plain, over the watershed between the Adriatic and the Black Sea, and into the plain of Kossovo. At Lipljan (Ulpiana and Justiniana Secunda in Roman times) it crossed the route from Bosnia to Salonica, reached Novobrdo, and finally Sofia, one of the Bulgarian capitals. The first mention of a Ragusan merchant in this city is in 1376; the Ragusan colony became very important at the end of the century in Turkish times, when Sofia was the residence of the Beglerbeg of Rumelia.[242]

The second Via de Zenta started from the three harbours of Antivari via the Sutorman Pass, Budua by the bridle path to Cetinje (still in use), and Cattaro by the road to Cetinje. A little further east the three branches met, and the route proceeded over well-wooded mountains, now, alas, bare and desolate, past the ruins of Doclea to Podgorica (a day and a half from Cattaro); then to the Plava lake, one of the fairest spots in Albania, but now also one of the most dangerous, on the shores of which, according to Professor Stojan Novaković, stood the well-known Servian trading centre of Brskovo. Professor Jireček, however, who has had access to further materials, places it in the upper Lim valley. Brskovo (Brescoa or Brescoua in Venetian and Ragusan documents) was the chief commercial city of Servia, and is mentioned as early as the days of King Stephen the First-Crowned (1196-1228). It was principally frequented by the people of Ragusa and Cattaro, and to a lesser extent by the Venetians. The various products of the districts were collected here for export to the coast, while the caravans from the coast brought foreign goods for distribution throughout Servia. The customs, which were usually farmed out to Ragusans, were a source of considerable revenue to the Servian kings. Here, as in some other mining towns, was also a mint, where the grossi di Brescova were coined.[243] The Ragusan colony was numerous and influential, containing members of some of the noblest families.[244] Beyond Brskovo came Peč (Ipek in Turkish), an archiepiscopal, and later patriarchal, see (until 1766). Peč, too, enjoyed considerable traffic, and had a Ragusan colony in the fourteenth century.

The post from Venice to Constantinople went by this route in the sixteenth century. As soon as the ship arrived the despatches were handed to the messengers (they were always natives from two Montenegrin villages), who rode off with them via Plava, Peč, Novoselo, Priština, Samokov, and Philippopolis, reaching the Bosporus in eighteen days.[245]

Throughout Servia, Bosnia, Hlum, the Zeta, and Bulgaria there were thus numerous Ragusan colonies. As a rule mining was the chief industry, and it was in the mining districts that the commercial settlements were to be found. In Roman times the mines of Illyria were well known; they were abandoned at the time of the barbarian inroads, and it was not until the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, at the time of the rise of the Serb States, that the industry revived. Wonderful tales were told by mediæval travellers of the richness of the Balkan mines. As late as 1453 the Greek Critobulus asserted that gold and silver sprang from the earth like water, and that wherever you dug you found large deposits of the precious metals, in greater quantities than in the Indies.[246] King Stephen Uroš II. Milutin (1282-1320) was the first to summon in German miners, called Sasi (i.e. Saxons), so as to benefit by their superior skill, but the Ragusans were also numerous. Many of the technical terms relating to mining still used in Bosnia are of German origin: orat = Ort; hutman = Hüttenmann; karan = Karren. The ore was extracted from galleries and shafts, many of which are still in existence. The refining of the metal was executed at Ragusa or Venice.

Gold, silver, lead, and iron were the chief products of the Bosnian and Servian mines. Gold, of which the earliest mention is in 1253, was found chiefly in the neighbourhood of Novobrdo (Novus Mons, Nouomonte, Νοβοπύργον), which was for a long time the largest city in the interior of the Balkan peninsula between the plain of Kossovo and the Bulgarian Morava, three miles east of Priština. Silver, however, was found in much larger quantities. Of this metal two kinds are mentioned in the Ragusan annals, i.e. argento bianco (white silver) and argento de glama (glamsko srebro in Slavonic), which had a slight gold alloy. Srebrnica was the chief centre for the silver-mining industry. Lead was another important product, and was in much request for the roofing of houses and churches. Sometimes a whole caravan of 300 horses journeyed from the mining districts to Ragusa laden with nothing but lead. The iron output gave rise to various active industries, both locally and at Ragusa, where Bosnian iron-workers were often employed by the Republic. A certain amount of copper was also found, and there were tin and quicksilver mines in the Kreševo district. The principal mining centres thus were: Kreševo and Fojnica;[247] Srebrenica, near the Drina, chiefly for silver;[248] Zvornik on the Drina, for lead;[249] Rudnik, where there are traces of Roman mines mentioned by Ragusan documents of the thirteenth century; Kopaonik, for silver and iron;[250] Novobrdo, for gold and other metals;[251] Kučevo and Brskovo, which flourished at the end of the thirteenth century.[252]

Each mining centre usually consisted of a castle on a hill, wherein dwelt the Vojvod, or feudal lord, representing the King or Tsar, and a town below with a market, where the miners and merchants dwelt. In times of danger the whole community could take shelter in the castle.[253] The Saxons, as we have seen, were the most numerous of the foreign settlers, and the Ragusans came immediately after them. At Novobrdo early in the fifteenth century we find members of nearly all the noblest Ragusan families—Bobali, Benessa, Menze, Ragnina, Resti, Gozze, Caboga, &c. The Ragusans were the principal merchants and carriers, and the provision trade was almost wholly in their hands. They sold supplies in exchange for raw metal. There were also merchants from the other Dalmatian towns, from Italy, especially from Venice, and a few natives. The mining towns on the whole had a marked Latin character, and they were all provided with at least one Latin church,[254] under the authority of the Bishop of Cattaro. There were also several Franciscan monasteries, which afterwards ministered to the religious needs of the native Catholics in Turkish times; some of them still exist. The chief authority in the town was, as I have said, the Servian Vojvod, but the head of the mining and mercantile community was the Conte dei Purgari Vaoturchi.[255] The taxes and customs were farmed to Ragusan or Cattarine speculators, and in fact most of the higher financial officials in the South-Slavonic States, including the Protovestiars (Finance Ministers), were usually natives of those cities. The Ragusans who owned houses were bound to bear arms in defence of the castle and market-town, but the others were exempt. If a dispute arose between them and the Saxons or the Serbs the question was decided by an arbitration commission composed of six Ragusans and six Saxons or Serbs. Ragusan creditors enjoyed the privilege of being able to imprison their debtors, provided they too were Ragusans, in their own houses. The heads of the Ragusan community were the consul and two judges, usually noblemen appointed by the Republic. In 1332 a consul was appointed to reside at the Royal Court, which was at Prizren or Skopje (Üsküb).[256] This consul was to travel about the country, visiting all the market-towns, mining centres, and fairs, with a view to learning what openings there were for Ragusan trade, as well as all the towns where Ragusan colonies were already established. The different mints were under the superintendence of the Vojvods and of the gabellotti (tax-farmers) or aurifices (goldsmiths), usually Ragusans or Dalmatians. In the tenth century Constantine Porphyrogenitus alludes to the use of coinage by the Ragusans, but for a long time afterwards trade continued to be carried on by means of barter. Thus in 1280 we find a Ragusan selling a horse to a fellow-citizen for sixteen ells of cloth, and even as late as 1322, although mints were established in various places, a commercial treaty between Stephen, Banus of Bosnia, and Ragusa alludes to the fact that cattle were used for payments of indemnities.[257]

Communications between Ragusa and the settlements in the interior were carried on by means of couriers (cursores, corrieri, Slav. knižnici), who were instituted early in the fourteenth century, and lasted until the fall of the Republic. They carried official correspondence from the Republic to the ambassadors and consuls, and legal notices, writs, reports of judicial proceedings, &c., to the Ragusan traders. They were not allowed to convey private correspondence, which was usually sent by caravan, or in the case of the chief merchants by their own special messengers, save on the return journey. The time employed by these official messengers was usually two days from Ragusa to Blagaj (Mostar), four or five to Visoko or Sutieska, five or six to Prača, seven or eight to Srebrnica, ten to Zvornik, twelve to Syrmium, seven to Rudnik or Novobrdo, fifteen to Constantinople. In bad weather, when the passes were blocked with snow, double the time was often necessary to traverse the same distance, which was the time required by the caravans in favourable weather. The envoys sent to Constantinople with the tribute to the Sultan took as much as two months.[258] The official correspondence to the various Ragusan representatives in the East is preserved in the archives of Ragusa in 138 volumes, under the heading of Lettere e Commissioni di Levante.

This traffic proved to be a source of great wealth for the citizens, who in time came almost to enjoy a monopoly of the inland trade in this part of the Balkan peninsula. But great as were the privileges which they enjoyed, merchants and miners were subject to depredations and arbitrary confiscations at the hands of the Servian kings, the Bosnian Bani, or the various minor feudatories. Most of the quarrels between Ragusa and the Slavonic States were caused by these depredations, which after all were natural enough. The Ragusan merchants succeeded in accumulating large fortunes by intelligent management and indefatigable industry, which the less hard-working Slaves, devoted to the arts of war, were incapable of acquiring. Whenever the King or vassal lord was in need of money, what could be simpler than to pounce down upon a richly-laden caravan on its way to or from the coast and plunder it or take heavy toll of it, or to impose fresh taxes on the wealthy colonies of “Uitlanders” at Rudnik, Srebrnica, or Brskovo? Ragusa was often forced to pay tribute to this or that sovereign to ensure safety from depredation, and in those days the line of division between feudalism and brigandage was very vague. But the mercantile communities were quite willing to undergo the risks for the sake of the large profits which they made. There can be no doubt that in this way a certain amount of civilisation was introduced into these lands which would otherwise have remained quite without the pale. The currents of western thought and culture found their way into Bosnia and Servia by way of Ragusa and the other Dalmatian towns rather than by Constantinople.[259] These civilising influences increased and spread until the curse of the Turkish conquest fell on the land like a blight, from which it is only now beginning slowly and painfully to recover.

This mercantile development naturally led to the formation of numerous guilds or confraternities. Like other Ragusan institutions, they were based on Venetian models, and were really the beginnings of the modern mutual aid societies on a religious groundwork. Among the earliest of these are that of the joiners, founded in 1266; that of St. Michael, founded in 1290; that of the goldsmiths (1306), that of Rosgiato (1321), and that of St. Anthony the Abbot (1348). During the Venetian period they were under strict Government supervision, but after 1358 they were invested with political privileges and exemptions.[260]

CHAPTER VI

ART IN THE THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH CENTURIES

During the Venetian period, with the increasing wealth and consequence of Ragusa, the city itself was beautified by the erection of numerous handsome buildings, both lay and ecclesiastical, and by 1358 it was almost entirely reconstructed. In its early days the walls, the castle, and one or two churches were the only stone edifices; all the rest of the town was of timber. Throughout the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries the defences were increased, new bastions erected, and the older walls strengthened. The city now occupied both the seaward ridge and the slopes of Monte Sergio. The walls by which it was surrounded climbed painfully over the rocky eminences on each side, and dropped down almost to the sea-level in between. The fortifications did not acquire their present aspect until the sixteenth century, but parts of them were begun much earlier. Four towers were erected at the entrance of the harbour on the south-east side of the town, of which two—San Luca and San Giovanni—still survive. The latter, which is now called the Forte Molo, a huge round bastion, has been considerably altered in later times; San Luca has preserved more of its original character. Of the tower called the Campana Morta (the dead bell),[261] few traces beyond the name survives. The sea-tower which occupies its site is evidently of a much later date. These towers were garrisoned by the town guard of 127 men, who were chosen by lot from the citizens every month, and increased in times of danger.[262] Other towers were built at intervals along the walls, and their defence was entrusted to the private families whose houses they adjoined. Of these the most important was the Torre Menze or Minćeta, one of the most beautiful features of the city. Its erection was decreed on July 3, 1319, but it was entirely rebuilt in the fifteenth century, and considerably altered in the sixteenth. It stands on one of the highest points of the town on the Monte Sergio.

Of the other buildings of this time there are some important remains, from which we may resume a fair idea of Ragusan architecture under the Venetians. Its characteristic note at all times is the fact that early forms were preserved here, as in other parts of Dalmatia, down to a much later date than in the rest of Europe. The style is a mixture of Italian with an Oriental touch, and occasionally, according to Mr. Jackson, even a German element. During the Venetian age traces of Byzantine art still survive, and in buildings of the fourteenth century, a time when Italian Gothic was most flourishing, we find the round arch of Romanesque art. But Ragusan builders did not follow any very distinct system. The various styles were no more than tapped by them. None were fully developed; and in every building, from whichever point of view we regard it, we find many deviations from strict orthodoxy. Some of the Ragusan architects and master-masons had been educated in Italy, others perhaps at Constantinople, but no part of their work shows an absolute grasp over any definite style. Nevertheless it is extremely interesting, and proves them by no means deficient in artistic sense. Many of the buildings of this little Republic are of great beauty, and the whole ensemble of edifices compares favourably with many a more famous Italian town.

The principal buildings erected or completed between 1200 and 1350 are the following: The cathedral church of Santa Maria (1206-1250), San Biagio (1348), the church and monastery of the Franciscans (begun 1319), the Dominican church and monastery (1254-1306), the Castello (1350, on the site of an earlier building), and the Sponza or custom house, begun early in the fourteenth century. The cathedral was destroyed by the earthquake of 1667, San Biagio by fire in 1706, the Castello supplanted by another building in 1388. The Franciscan and Dominican churches were almost entirely rebuilt in later times, but of their monasteries much remains, and the cloisters are in their original state. The Sponza, too, survives, although the top story, the façade, and the portico were added subsequently.

[Illustration: CAPITAL IN THE FRANCISCAN CLOISTER]

What the Duomo was like we can only discover from the somewhat confused account of De Diversis, and from the model of the town in the hands of the silver statuette of San Biagio. According to local tradition, it was erected through the munificence of Richard Cœur-de-Lion, King of England, who on returning from the Holy Land encountered a terrible storm off Corfu, and made a vow that he would build a church to the Virgin on the spot where he should first touch land in safety. After being tossed about for several days he was able to land on the island of Lacroma, near Ragusa. In fulfilment of his vow he built the church, at the request of the citizens, in Ragusa itself, as well as a small chapel on the island. There is, however, no evidence of the truth of this story, and none of the contemporary accounts of Richard’s peregrinations even mention Ragusa, while the entries in the Ragusan archives state that the church was built with the contributions of the nobles. According to De Diversis, it was the most beautiful church in Dalmatia. It consisted of a nave and side aisles separated by great columns; and from the above-mentioned model of the city we see that it had a cupola mounted on a drum pierced with windows and a clerestory. De Diversis also speaks of a curious ambulatory formed by small columns outside the church, the walls of which were ornamented with figures of animals. In the choir was the high altar, with a pala of silver under a beautiful ciborium supported on four pillars. The floors were of mosaic, and the windows all filled with stained glass. On the walls were depicted scenes from the Old Testament and the New. All this bespeaks a Romanesque building with traces of Byzantine art. But alas! nothing remains of this exquisite piece of architecture; the present church (1671-1713) is a large classical edifice with barocco ornamentation.

The original church of San Biagio was begun in 1348 as a votive offering after the plague of that year. From De Diversis’s description it was very similar to the Duomo, but on a smaller scale. It suffered little damage from the earthquake, but was burnt down in 1706. Both this church and the Duomo are fairly good examples of an unattractive style, and the stone of which they are built is of a rich mellow tone.

The two stately piles at each end of the town—the Franciscan and Dominican monasteries—have fortunately preserved much of their original character. The latter was begun after the destruction of the first Franciscan house outside the Porta Pile by the Slaves in 1319, and the new building was erected just within the gate, which its inmates were to guard in times of danger. The church and a large part of the monastery have been rebuilt since the earthquake, although here and there a few interesting details remain. Thus on the south side, opening on to the Stradone, there is a handsome doorway in the Venetian Gothic style, surmounted by a Pietà, a very fair piece of sculpture; the date is probably the end of the fifteenth century. In the sacristy we find a Renaissance lavabo of carved stone. The campanile marks the transition from the Romanesque to the Gothic. The east window of the lower story and those on the second story are Venetian Gothic, while the south window of the lower story is round-arched. The top story with the cupola was rebuilt after the earthquake. But it is in the cloister that the chief interest of the building lies, a cloister which Mr. T. G. Jackson calls “one of the most singular pieces of architecture I have ever seen.”[263] Here we observe the most notable feature of Dalmatian architecture in all its force, for although its date is later than 1319 it is thoroughly Romanesque in character, and all the arches are round. It consists of a courtyard with three bays opening out into it on each side; the openings are divided into six round-headed lights, each head being pierced by a large circular light. A series of coupled octagonal shafts standing one behind the other, with a common base and common abacus, but separate capitals, serve as mullions to the arches. The capitals are extremely quaint and curious. Each one is different from its fellows, and the architect seems to have let his fancy run riot in designing them, “recalling the wildest and most grotesque fancies of early Romanesque work.”[264] Some are adorned with simple foliage, spiral volutes, and block leaves, but on others we find hideous grinning faces, dragons, strange uncouth monsters, masks, dogs, and all manner of fanciful ornaments. Judged by ordinary standards, we should take them to be work of the twelfth or thirteenth century, but as a matter of fact they are of a much later date. According to Eitelberger, these early forms were preserved in most of the monasteries of the East when they had given place to Gothic in Western Europe.[265] The workmanship of these capitals, like much Ragusan carving, is somewhat rough and unfinished, but for this the material, which is not sufficiently hard, may be partly responsible. Of the open circles in the heads of the opening, the centre one on each side of the cloister is larger, and ornamented with a rich border of acanthus leaves; the others are cusped. Possibly it was intended that they should all contain some ornamentation, and indeed the large round openings look somewhat bare. Above the cloister is an elegant balustrade, of which only one side survived the earthquake, but a few years ago it was restored according to the original design. The name of the architect has been preserved in an inscription in the cloister itself:

☩ S · DE · MAGIST ER MYCHA PETRAR DANTIVAR QVIPPE CITCLAVSTRVM CVM OMNIBVS SVIS.

He was one Mycha of Antivari, a town where Byzantine influence was stronger than at Ragusa. The inscription has no date, but it is close to two others of 1363 and 1428, and the style of the lettering, according to Jackson, is even earlier than 1363. The building was not begun until after 1319, when the former Franciscan monastery was destroyed, so that the date is somewhere between 1319 and 1363. Within the enclosure are orange trees and evergreen shrubs, and a graceful little fountain is placed in the centre; the whole scene forms a most charming picture of mediæval monastic life. A second cloister higher up the hillside served as a garden where the simples for the monks’ pharmacy were grown. This, too, is a delightful old-world nook.

At the opposite end of the town, just inside the Porta Ploce, stands the massive group of the Dominican church and monastery. These buildings originally formed the southern bulwark of the town, the monks themselves, like the Franciscans, being entrusted with the defence of the gate; but later a second wall was built outside it. The church, which was begun in 1245 and completed in 1360, consists of a vast nave separated from a polygonal choir by a high arch. The building is extremely bare; the traces of Gothic arches and clustered pillars form a sort of skeleton, around which the existing church was constructed in the seventeenth century. In the sacristy there are a few more fragments of early work, and the south doorway, with a round arch of many receding orders under an ogee crocketed hood mould, also belongs to the original church. Jackson notices a strong flavour of German Gothic in it. There are several pointed windows of extreme simplicity, and a large round one decorated with an outside frill of small Venetian arches. The campanile was begun in 1424[266] by Fra Stefano, a Dominican, but it was not completed in 1440, for De Diversis says of it, “nondum perfectum, in dies crescit.” It has round arches and shafts set back to the centre of the wall.

But as in the Franciscan monastery, the cloister is almost untouched. It is an irregular square, with five bays on each side, each bay being divided by three lights, the head pierced by two irregular lights above. The style is a curious medley “of Gothic and Renaissance, of forms understood and otherwise, as indeed could only occur in a land which, being on the borders of Eastern and Western culture, did not possess the power to create and execute the various styles correctly.”[267] The arches of the bays are round, but the inside work has more the character of Venetian Gothic, especially in the foliage. The shield of the semicircular head is pierced by quatrefoil lights encircled alternately with an ornament of interlacing circles almost Byzantine in character. The Dalmatian architect had doubtless seen Gothic work in Italy, but “had failed to grasp the idea of receding orders in the arch, or consistent mouldings in his tracery.”[268] The columns with their caps and bases are of a severely antique character. But in spite of all deviations from architectural orthodoxy this cloister, set off by cherry and orange trees and evergreen shrubs, is, after the Franciscan cloister, one of the loveliest monastic buildings in Dalmatia.

The secular buildings, with one notable exception, belong to a later period. The exception is the Sponza[269] or custom house, a large part of which was built in the early fourteenth century. It stands at the end of the Stradone, opposite the Piazza and the church of San Biagio, and consists of three stories built round a courtyard. The ground floor and first floor were probably built in the first years of the thirteenth century.[270] The top story, the façade, and the portico belong to the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The oblong courtyard is surrounded on the lower story by vaulted arcades of round arches with square soffits supported on short plain solid octagonal columns, without bases (like those of the Ducal Palace at Venice), and short capitals opening out into square abaci. The second story is also arcaded, and has twice as many window openings as the lower story has arches, round at the two ends and pointed on the sides, with square piers over the columns below and round columns over the centres of the arches; their capitals are adorned with foliage, some à crochet, and some with deflected leaves at the angles. According to Jackson, all this part is of the same period, in spite of the fact that some of the openings are round and some pointed. The general effect is one of extreme simplicity and sobriety; it is, as Jackson says truly, “an admirable piece of plain, useful, and not ungraceful architecture, not too showy for the commonplace purposes of the building, and yet well proportioned and carefully built.”[271] Round the courtyard are the various warehouses, over the doors of which are the names of different saints. Above the end arch is the inscription:— FALLERE NRA VETANT ET FALLI PONDERA MEQ. PONDERO CVM MERCES PONDERAT IPSE DEVS.

The early work ends with the moulded stringcourse above the second story; the third story, which has plain square windows, bears the date 1520 and the monogram IHS, found on so many houses in Ragusa, to commemorate the earthquake of that year. The façade has a portico of five handsome round arches in the Renaissance style, the columns of which are adorned with elaborate capitals; many of these have been renewed. Above is a row of windows in the purest Venetian style of the fifteenth century. The central window is a three-light aperture, the two side ones are of a single light. The windows of the third story are square like those looking on the courtyard. In the centre is a niche with a statue of St. Blaize, while the row of pinnacles on the roof call to mind many a Venetian palazzo. In spite of all incongruities the Sponza is a very attractive building, full of quaint grace and good work.

It has many interesting associations with Ragusan history. It was here that the caravans about to start on their perilous journeys through the wild Balkan lands formed up, and those which arrived at Ragusa first stopped. Every bale of goods arriving at or departing from the city, by sea or land, had to be first examined at the Sponza, where the proper amount of duty was assessed and paid. All business was transacted at or around this building. To this day it serves as a custom-house, and still forms a picturesque background for the crowds of peasants and traders from all parts of Dalmatia, the Herzegovina, Montenegro, and Albania who congregate here on market days, although the traffic has declined both in bulk and in value since the palmy days of the Republic. The first floor was used in later years for literary and learned societies and entertainments. The second floor was the mint.

Of the Castello no traces now remain, its place having been taken by the Rector’s Palace, with which we shall deal later on. The buildings we have described were almost the only stone edifices in the town. All the rest, including the convent of the Clarisse, founded in 1290, were of timber.[272] Ragusa was in great part destroyed by fire in 1292, and rebuilt shortly afterwards, mostly of wood, as before. In a Reformatio of 1320 the Government published a decree against the excessive use of timber in construction. But the city was improving in various ways. The streets were wider and more regular, and stone steps were built on either side of the Stradone to make the higher quarters more accessible. Elaborate rules were issued to ensure the solidity of the roofs and chimneys, and by 1355 the town was paved with brick.[273] The steep streets on the seaward ridge and on the eight slopes of Monte Sergio began to assume their present aspect, although but few details of fourteenth-century domestic architecture have remained. There are several houses in the Venetian Gothic style, but these were built during the Hungarian occupation, the artistic influence of Venice outlasting her political suzerainty.

Of the plastic arts we find as yet only slight beginnings, but we may mention a few early paintings in the Dominican church. A large crucifix in the Byzantine style, which hangs over the choir arch, was vowed during the black death of 1348. In the sacristy there is a polyptych in ten sections, with the Baptism of Christ in the centre of the lower row, and St. Michael, St. Nicholas, St. Blaize, and St. Stephen; the Virgin, with St. Peter, St. Dominic, St. Peter Martyr, and St. Francis above. The work is very primitive; but if it be by a local master, it is probably of a later date than the style suggests. The robes are very rich and profusely gilt, but the effect is garish rather than brilliant, although restoration may perhaps be responsible for this. A Byzantine Madonna and Child in red is in the same church between the nave and the transept.

In the city records there are occasional entries alluding to the engagement of painters, and in 1344 a certain Magister Bernardus was commissioned to paint the new hall of the communal palace, which he was to decorate “pomis et stellis auratis.” No trace of this work has survived.

An interesting piece of sculpture is the bas-relief of St. Blaize on a wall near the Porta Ploce. The figure is seen in profile, and carries a crozier with a Lamb in the crook. It is somewhat stiff and Oriental in pose, but full of character. Curiously enough, it is the only really good statue of the city’s patron saint at Ragusa. Other images may be seen over the gates, on the fortifications, and on various buildings, but they are all colourless and of very rough workmanship. A plaque of marble, with figures in high relief, in the sacristy of the Franciscan church, deserves notice. It is said to be thirteenth-century work of the Isola di Mezzo.

During the next two hundred years architecture attains to its full development, and at least one painter arises whose work is of considerable value, while the goldsmith’s and silversmith’s art come to occupy an important place.

CHAPTER VII

RAGUSA UNDER HUNGARIAN SUPREMACY—THE TURKISH INVASION, 1358-1420

By the treaty of 1358 the whole eastern shore of the Adriatic as far as Durazzo was ceded to Hungary, but as a matter of fact that Power only extended its occupation as far as Ragusa. Not having a strong fleet, King Louis feared that the more southern cities would be difficult to hold, and he therefore never exercised his treaty rights over them. Venice, having lost with Dalmatia her chief naval base, turned her attention towards Albania and the adjoining Slavonic countries. She had at one time occupied Durazzo (1205-1208), and through her colonies in Dalmatia had come into contact with the Albanians. Now that her influence in the former country was destroyed, and that she had lost a large part of her mainland possessions, the population devoted itself to “the bee-like task of accumulating wealth and extending its commerce.”[274] Relations were once more established with Albania, trade with that country was encouraged, and the foundations were laid for the revival of Venetian influence in the Adriatic.[275]

The conditions of the Slavonic states behind Dalmatia were at this time extremely disturbed. During the brilliant reign of Stephen Dušan, the Servian people were at the height of their greatness and power. Macedonia, Albania, and other parts of the Greek Empire, and a part of Bosnia, as well as Servia proper, acknowledged the rule of the Servian Tsar, and even Bulgaria paid him tribute. The great position of Servia under this ruler is not usually appreciated by historians of the Eastern Empire. Dušan, as Professor Bury observes,[276] was not only a great warrior, but a great legislator, and drew up the Zakonik or code of laws, comparable with that of Jaroslav for Russia. Had he lived a few years longer, and been able to crush the turbulence of his feudal vassals and consolidate his possessions, Kossovo might never have taken place, and the Balkans never have been subjected to the horrors of the Turkish conquest. But on his death in 1355 the whole fabric of his Empire split up into a number of separate principalities. He was succeeded by his son, Uroš IV. (1355-1367), who was not strong enough to carry on his father’s work, and the Magnates and governors soon began to show signs of insubordination. Not only had he to deal with internal discontent, but he was also attacked by foreign neighbours. In 1358 Louis of Hungary made war upon him with such success that he conquered the erstwhile Hungarian district of Mačva,[277] south of the Save, and placed Nicholas of Gara to rule over it.[278]

The most powerful Servian Magnates were the brothers Vukašin and Ulješa Mrnjavčić, Knez[279] Lazar Grebljanović, who was afterwards to achieve immortal fame on the field of Kossovo, Vuk Branković, the brothers Balša, and Knez Vojslav Voinović. This last and the Balšas obtained their independence during the lifetime of Uroš. In 1367 the last of the Nemanjas died, murdered, it is said, by Vukašin’s followers while out hunting. Vukašin himself, who had been greatly favoured by Dušan and appointed, by the terms of the Tsar’s will, chief State Councillor to Uroš, succeeded to the throne. But this only hastened the disruption of the Empire, for Knez Lazar, Vuk Branković, and Nicholas Altomanovic (the Governor of the Danubian provinces) rose against him, and not only proclaimed their own independence, but occupied part of his immediate possessions.[280]

Of the various states into which the Servian Empire split up the first to be formed was the Zedda, ruled by the Balša family. These were, according to some authorities, of French origin, and according to others were descended from the Nemanjas.[281] A Balša had served in Dušan’s armies, and was afterwards made governor of the Zedda. In a privilege of 1360, in which Stephen Uroš IV. grants trading rights in his states to the Ragusans, the “Zedda of Balša” is mentioned, showing that the province was still under Servian suzerainty. It consisted of the region round the lake of Scutari, i.e. of part of Montenegro and Northern Albania; it is, in fact, another name for the ancient Doclea.[282] It was always regarded with especial affection by the Nemanjas as their original home, and in 1195 they made it into a Grand County. The first Balša died in 1361, leaving three sons, Stračimir, George, and Balša II., and a daughter. The sons reigned jointly, the eldest being merely “primus inter pares.”[283] They at once began to aspire to become independent of Servian authority and to expand their own territories. Their first move was an alliance with Ragusa, who made them honorary citizens of the Republic. Between 1362 and 1370 they conquered Scutari and threw off all allegiance to Dušan’s successor.

South of the Zedda lies Albania proper. Formerly a province of the Eastern Empire, it had first been conquered by Charles of Anjou (1266), then by Stephen Uroš II. Milutin, and then again by Philip of Taranto for the Angevins. Finally, after many vicissitudes, it came under the rule of the native prince Charles Topia, who, after he had captured Durazzo from the Neapolitans in 1364, made himself master of the whole of Middle Albania and independent of Servia. In Southern Albania and Macedonia other vassal nobles, such as the Gropa of Ochrida, Radoslav Hlapa in the Verria district, and Alexander at Avlona, rose to power.

In the immediate hinterland of Ragusa was the land of Hlum, ruled by Knez Vojslav Voinović, who owed allegiance both to the Servian Tsar and to the Banus of Bosnia. He too after Dušan’s death made himself independent of his successor, and with Hungarian help also of the Banus. His territory extended from the Servian Morava by Senice and Gacko to Cattaro and Ragusa, and included the coast between those two towns. He was the bitterest enemy of the Ragusans, and never ceased from molesting them. He is described in their chronicles and documents as a “homo perfidus,” who “tamquam infidelis male servat fidem.”[284] On his death in 1363 he was succeeded by his nephew Nicholas Altomanović, who fixed his headquarters at the important commercial town of Rudnik.

Stephen Tvrtko, Banus of Bosnia, profited by the break-up of Servia to consolidate his own possessions. He had come to the throne in 1353, and sided with Hungary in the war against Venice and the Serbs. Apparently some of his Magnates were inclined to rebellion and encouraged in their disloyalty by the Tsar Dušan, who thus hoped to annex the whole Banate; in this he might have succeeded had he not been cut off by death while on the march to Constantinople (Dec. 20, 1355). But as soon as the power of Servia was broken, Louis of Hungary changed his policy towards Bosnia, and obliged Tvrtko to agree to very onerous conditions. His possession of the Banate was recognised, but he had to give up his rights over Hlum to Elizabeth, Louis’s wife.[285] At the same time he was reduced to the position of a vassal of Hungary, and various feudal lords on the frontier were encouraged to shake off their allegiance to him. A general rising of the Bosnian barons ensued, and the sect of the Bogomils, taking advantage of this state of anarchy, became so influential that Pope Innocent VI. proclaimed a crusade against them early in 1360. This was more than Louis had bargained for, and he sent an army into Bosnia (June 1360) which put down the revolt and restored Tvrtko’s authority. Another rebellion broke out in 1365, and Tvrtko was driven from the country and forced to apply once more for Hungarian help; a small contingent was granted to him, and after severe fighting he managed to regain the throne in 1366; his brother Vuk, a Bogomil, who had been among the rebels, fled to Ragusa. Shortly after Tvrtko visited that city in full state, accompanied by a train of nobles, confirmed all the privileges granted to it by his uncle Stephen, and contracted a treaty of perpetual alliance with the Republic, “save for what shall do injury to the honour of the King of Hungary.”[286] But he failed to achieve the main object of his visit, viz. the surrender of Vuk. The Ragusans refused to give him up, and on becoming a Catholic he enlisted the sympathy of the Pope (Urban V.) for his claims to the Bosnian throne. But Louis of Hungary would not support him, having turned his attention to Poland, of which country he hoped to become king. Tvrtko was thus able to enjoy a period of peace, and to consolidate his somewhat disturbed Banate.

[Illustration: FAÇADE OF THE RECTOR’S PALACE

(From a photograph by Messrs. Stengel & Co., Dresden)]

The Republic of Cattaro continued to remain in a state of semi-independence. It was usually on good terms with Venice, and the town contained a flourishing commercial colony of Venetians. Ensconced in the deep and well-sheltered inlet known as the Bocche di Cattaro, its trade was active and its mercantile fleet large. Its relations with Ragusa were characterised by mutual jealousy, owing partly to commercial rivalry (especially on account of the disputed salt monopoly), and partly to the intrigues of Venice, who wished to prevent all possible coalitions of the Dalmatian townships against her own supremacy.[287]

A new Power now makes its appearance as a factor in the history of Europe, the Ottoman Turks, who were destined in the space of two centuries to conquer the whole of the Balkan peninsula, a large part of Dalmatia, and nearly the whole of Hungary, humbling that kingdom to the dust. The Serbs and other South Slavonic peoples by their civil wars and mutual jealousies prepared the way for their greatest enemy and that of all Christendom. In these events the part played by Ragusa was a curious one. At one moment the Republic actually tried to arbitrate in the quarrels of the Servian princes and to induce them to unite against the invader. But from the point of view of general European history its chief interest lies in the action of its Government in obtaining information as to the movements of the Turkish armies. The Ragusans were subsequently on good terms with the Turks, and permitted to visit all parts of the Empire, even when other Europeans were excluded. Ragusan merchants and agents sent home despatches which are preserved in the city records, and in them we can follow the Turkish conquest step by step, as city after city, province after province, was first raided, then rendered tributary, and finally absorbed into the Sultan’s dominions. This is not the place to tell the story of the conquest, but it will be well to remind the reader of a few of its more important events and dates.

The first Turkish invasion of Europe occurred in 1341, when Orhan crossed the Bosporos to intervene in the civil wars of the Eastern Empire. Several minor raids followed, while the Emir Orchan (1326-1360), who may be regarded as the founder of the Ottoman power, established his capital at Brusa. In 1358 his son Suleiman again invaded Europe, and the Chersonnese was soon filled with colonies of Ottomans.[288] In 1359 Gallipoli, “the key of Europe,” was occupied and rebuilt as a Turkish town. In 1360 both Orchan and his son Suleiman died, and his second son Murad succeeded to the throne. The latter in the following year captured Adrianople, which henceforward was to be the seat of the Turkish Government, and the headquarters for the attacks on the Greek Empire, the Serbs, and the Bulgarians. In 1370 a Turkish army of 70,000 men under Murad spread into Macedonia, but was driven back by the Serbs under King Vukašin and his brother Ulješa. He advanced again the following year, and encountered the Serbs at Černomen,[289] on the right bank of the Marica, a day’s march from Adrianople. The Serbs won in the first instance, but during the night the Turks rallied, and inflicted a terrible defeat on them. Vukašin and his brother fell with the flower of the Servian chivalry.[290] The Turks now overran Macedonia and Servia, and forced Marko Kraljević, Vukašin’s eldest son, and other Slave princes to pay tribute to them. The vassals who had hitherto obeyed Vukašin now rebelled against his son, and the Servian Empire was definitely broken up, while the Turks became ever more powerful.

The exchange of Hungarian supremacy in the place of that of Venice brought about less change in the internal situation of Ragusa than might have been expected, but the dignity of the Republic was enhanced by the further extension of its autonomy, for it now becomes to all intents and purposes an independent State. When the last Venetian Count departed a commission of three Rectors, elected by the citizens, was appointed to carry on the affairs of the Government, and they were to be changed every two months. But a few months later the number was reduced to one,[291] and his tenure of office limited to one month. Formerly, in the periods during which Ragusa had been independent, the ruler of the State had held office for six months, and had enjoyed considerable authority. But the example of Damiano Juda had made the citizens chary of entrusting their destinies to a too powerful magistrate, and they now curtailed his initiative till he became a mere figure-head. His chief duties were the safe-keeping of the keys of the castles and of the State seals, the summoning of the Grand Council, the Senate, and the Minor Council, and the proposal of the affairs to be discussed in these assemblies, in which, however, he himself had only one vote. During his brief tenure of office he might never leave his official residence save in full state, i.e. accompanied by twenty-four retainers attired in scarlet, two musicians, and all the chief secretaries and palace functionaries. His own robe was like that of a Venetian senator. Under these circumstances we can hardly imagine him taking much pleasure in a quiet walk for a breath of fresh air. If he was ill or excluded from the Council “in his own interest or in that of his relations,”[292] his place was taken by the senior member of the Minor Council. If he died while in office he was borne to the grave on the shoulders of the nobles, the bell of the Palace tolled, and the city gates were closed. In 1441 Ladislas, King of Hungary, conferred upon the chief magistrate of Ragusa the title of Arch-Rector, which was confirmed by King Matthew Corvinus in 1463, but the Senate refused to allow him to use it, lest it should inspire him with dangerous ambitions! He was, however, permitted to accept the knighthood of the Golden Spur with which he had been invested by the same monarch. No other important changes were made in the constitution from this date until the fall of the Republic.

Ragusa’s international position, however, was now considerably altered. The King of Hungary allowed the citizens the most absolute liberty to manage their own affairs, and not only had he no Hungarian representative in the town, but he did not even attempt to interfere indirectly with the Government. Ragusa was merely bound to pay him a tribute and to provide a naval contingent in time of war on the terms set forth in the treaty of Višegrad. She always remained the faithful friend and ally of Hungary, and was quite content to render this not very onerous allegiance; in her relations with that Power there was no trace of the constant recriminations and bickerings that there were with Venice. The reason of this difference of feeling towards the two Powers lies in the character of Venetian as compared with Hungarian policy. Venice was ever extending her influence down the Adriatic coast, consolidating her dominion, and destroying local autonomies. Above all, Venice was a great maritime Power and could swoop down on Ragusa or any other Adriatic town with her swift galleys at any moment; commercial rivalry, too, had its effect, for Venice aspired to the monopoly of the same trades as those in which Ragusa dealt. Hungary, on the other hand, was purely a military State. Its aims were internal consolidation and the security of its own immediate frontiers. It did not aspire to distant dominions, as it had no powerful navy, and it merely desired to possess Dalmatia so as to secure a wider outlet to the sea than the Croatian coast; and it had no sea-borne trade to interfere with that of Ragusa. On the land side it wished to secure the allegiance of the Bosnian Banus, but there was little danger of its establishing an absolute sway over the Slave lands immediately behind Ragusa.

The Ragusans now set to work to consolidate their independence and develop their trade, but they were not destined to enjoy a long period of absolute peace. Their first quarrel was with Vojslav Voinović, Count of Hlum (“Comes Chelmi Magnus Procer Imperatoris Sclavoniæ”).[293] Early in 1359 the Republic sent an envoy to him, offering to pay a sum of 4000 ipperperi as tribute due to the Emperor of Slavonia; but shortly after he raided the Ragusan districts of Astarea and Gionchetto, burned the houses and churches, cut down the vineyards, took a number of prisoners, and arrested the Ragusan traders in his territories. Vojslav was known to be meditating an expedition against Stagno and even Ragusa, so that defensive measures were taken. All the city gates except two were walled up, a special guard of night watchmen was formed, troops and sailors levied throughout the Republic’s dominions, and a band of mercenaries was raised at Curzola with the permission of the Venetian Count for the defence of Stagno. A master-mechanic was sent for from Messina to superintend the war engines, and a master-crossbowman from Italy. In the meanwhile the Senate sent envoys to the King of Hungary and to his lieutenant the Banus of Croatia and Dalmatia, complaining of Vojslav’s conduct, and asking for assistance against him.[294] He was described as being “like a wolf who wishes to devour us lambs,”[295] and a price of 10,000 ipperperi was put on his head the following year.[296] Ragusa also tried to resort to another measure against Vojslav. The latter’s territory reached as far as the neighbourhood of Cattaro, which town served him as a port. Ragusa now proposed an alliance with the Cattarini, and suggested that they should break off all relations with the lord of Hlum and cease to provide him with provisions and salt. But Cattaro was unable to accede to this plan from fear of Vojslav’s power. Ragusa then determined to punish that town, and made an alliance to this end with the Balšas, lords of Zedda. Negotiations were opened with the Servian Tsar Uroš and with his most powerful vassals, and envoys were sent to the King of Bosnia and to Sanko to arrange a plan of campaign against Hlum. Operations began by sea, and on July 6, 1361, Ragusa itself appears to have been attacked by Vojslav’s ships.[297] The Republic confiscated the money which that prince had deposited in the town,[298] and a naval expedition was fitted out to operate against Cattaro and raid the Bocche. Raids were also made into Vojslav’s territories on the land side, and doubtless the Ragusans were able to pay their enemy back in his own coin. The quarrel with Cattaro and Vojslav lasted nearly two years, and only ended through Venetian and Servian mediation.

According to some authorities[299] Vojslav died in 1363, and was succeeded by his cousin Nicholas Altomanović; according to others[300] in 1371. The latter date is probably the correct one, the confusion having arisen from the fact that Nicholas came to reign jointly with his brother in 1363 or 1364, and after that date we find them both mentioned in the Ragusan documents. This system of dual or plural sovereignty, prevalent in Servian lands, caused much trouble, and also weakened the resistance against the Turkish invaders, as the rival princes were always quarrelling among themselves and intriguing with outside foes against each other. At this time a coalition of a number of Servian princelings and nobles against others was formed, and produced the most fatal consequences by breaking up the organisation of the country. During this war the Balšas, in order to consolidate their power, began to make political and commercial alliances with their neighbours. For this purpose they applied to Ragusa, requesting the honour of Ragusan citizenship for themselves. The Senate was well pleased to accede to this desire, as the Republic was feeling by no means safe from Vojslav, and Hungarian help delayed in coming. A treaty of offensive and defensive alliance was concluded, by which it was agreed that the Balšas should attack Cattaro, Vojslav’s ally, by land and the Ragusans by sea. The Ragusan envoy, Clemente Dersa, informed the Balšas that Vojslav was meditating a coup de main on Budua, and that this would be a serious menace to their territory. Budua is a small town on the Adriatic, just south of the entrance to the Bocche di Cattaro. It is of ancient origin, and has one of the earliest municipal statutes in existence.[301] It was under the direct protection of the Servian Tsars, who were represented by a castellano, and independent of the vassal feudatories. Ragusa had had a quarrel with the town in 1359 owing to the alleged acts of piracy committed by its inhabitants, but afterwards peace was made when Budua became in a manner subject to the Balšas and helped them in their revolt against Servia. During the hostilities the Cattarini besieged Budua and nearly captured it, taking a number of prisoners in the sorties, until a Ragusan flotilla came to the rescue and drove them back.[302] In April 1362 Ragusan ships blockaded Cattaro by sea, while the Balšas attacked it by land.[303] During these hostilities the Ragusans captured the property of some Venetian merchants as contraband of war, and this caused further unpleasantness with Venice. Cattaro then requested Venetian mediation, and in January 1362 Paolo Quirini and a Hungarian representative were sent to Dalmatia to arbitrate, but without success. At last, in August, the Servian Tsar intervened, and on August 22 peace was signed at Onogost.[304] All parties regained their former privileges, prisoners were liberated, and compensation paid for injuries. The chief result for Ragusa was the introduction of the plague from the lands beyond the mountains.[305] The Balšas, however, were able to extend their territory along the coast as far as Dulcigno, and in 1367 the dignity of warden of Budua passed to George Balša, and he and his brothers thenceforward styled themselves “magnificent barons of Maritime Slavonia.” They were now able to negotiate with Venice, and became an important Power in the Adriatic. This ultimately proved advantageous for the Ragusans, to whom they granted many privileges and opened the trade routes up the rivers of Northern Albania. They also obtained for the Republic from the Servian Tsar the full possession of the island of Meleda.[306]

But the peace failed to prevent the molestations of the lawless Count of Hlum, Nicholas Altomanović. In April 1371[307] the Ragusans wrote to the King of Hungary complaining of his raids, and describing him as “the worst of all the Rascian barons, although they are all false and infamous.” Not content with the gifts they had made to him, he had demanded the tribute due to the Servian Tsar, and on their refusal he invaded their territory and tortured the prisoners he made by pouring boiling lard over them. The Ragusans added that the Banus of Mačva, who was the King of Hungary’s vassal, had done nothing to restrain Altomanović, but was secretly his friend. The whole of the interior being in a state of anarchy, inland trade was almost at a standstill, and the Republic requested the King to intercede with the Pope for the renewal of the licence to send two ships every year to the lands of the Infidel.

The Ragusan forces, however, managed on several occasions to defeat the bands of Altomanović, and later in the year the Republic joined the alliance of Knez Lazar and Tvrtko, Banus of Bosnia, against that prince. The latter now had won the Balšas to his side by the gift of Canali, Trebinje, and Dračevica, but the coalition succeeded in conquering a large part of his possessions. Knez Lazar occupied Rudnik, and Tvrtko the upper valley of the Drina, and drove George Balša from Trebinje. The King of Bosnia’s possessions were thus extended by 1376 over the greater part of the Servian lands as far as Trebinje, Cattaro, and Nikšić in the south, to Senice in the east, and included the important monastery of Mileševo, where St. Sava, the Apostle of the Serbs, was buried.[308] He was now the most powerful ruler in this part of the Balkans, and had himself crowned at Mileševo with two crowns, styling himself “Stephen Tvrtko in the name of Our Lord Christ King of Servia and Bosnia and the Primorije (coast land).”[309] Ragusa was the first State to recognise him, and proved quite willing to pay the 2000 ipperperi a year due to him as lord of Servia.

The Ragusan Senate had the foresight to understand the growing importance of the Ottoman Turks, and having obtained from Urban V. an exemption to trade with the Infidel, it contracted commercial agreements with the Sultans of Egypt, Syria, and Konia in 1359, and in 1365 obtained from the Sultan Murad a firman granting the citizens of Ragusa freedom to trade in all parts of the Ottoman dominions and protection for their commercial factories, in exchange for a yearly tribute of 500 ducats. Ragusa was thus the first Christian State to make a treaty with the Ottoman Turks, and its citizens were enabled to penetrate into the remotest parts of the Turkish Empire and form permanent settlements there at a time when other Christians were either excluded altogether or limited to a few coast towns. The tribute which they paid for these advantages, although often raised subsequently, proved a most profitable investment.

In 1378, in consequence of the intrigues of Venice and Genoa to obtain a predominant position at Constantinople, war broke out between the two Republics—the famous Chioggia war—in which Ragusa too was involved. The Genoese induced Francesco Carrara, lord of Padua, who had been humbled but not subdued by Venice, to join them, and further help was obtained from Louis of Hungary. Ragusa, as vassal of that potentate, joined the coalition. But Venice, undismayed, made all preparations for war, and invested Vettor Pisani with the supreme command at sea. A Venetian victory off Cape Antium was won on May 30, and Pisani took Sebenico and Cattaro by storm; these and other towns on the Adriatic coast which his garrisons occupied were harried and blockaded by Ragusan vessels, who also seized this opportunity to destroy the salt-pans of Cattaro, thus ridding the Republic of a dangerous competitor.[310] The Ragusans were in great fear of an attack by the Venetian fleet, and made desperate efforts to strengthen the defences of the town and of Stagno. They also asked for assistance from Tvrtko, King of Bosnia, who offered them a contingent; but on hearing that he was treating with the Venetians, possibly with a view to a move against Ragusa, they refused it. On October 14, 1378, the Genoese fleet under Fieschi put in at Ragusa,[311] where a Ragusan galley joined it, and the admiral received two bombards and a present of money from the Republic. Armed barques issued forth from the town to scour the Adriatic and obtain news of the movements of the Venetian fleet, which were at once transmitted to the Banus of Dalmatia and Croatia at Zara, while privateers cruised about to plunder the enemy’s merchantmen. Ragusan ships were, in fact, the eyes of the allied fleet.

The Senate sent a squadron out under Stefano Sorgo to capture all Venetian or Cattarine ships found in South Dalmatian waters,[312] while envoys went to Cattaro to stir up the people to rebel against Venice and return to Hungarian allegiance. But the Cattarini, still fearing the Venetians, at first refused. Then a joint Genoese and Ragusan fleet made a demonstration against the town, and the authorities promised to raise the Hungarian standard on a certain date. But they failed to do so, and intrigued instead with the King of Bosnia against Ragusa, plundered Ragusan grain ships, and captured the sentinels guarding the approaches to the city on the Monte Sergio. After the total defeat of the Venetian fleet off Pola in May the Ragusans pursued their operations against Cattaro by land and sea with renewed vigour, and by June 26 the town had once more returned to Hungarian allegiance.[313]

Meanwhile the Genoese had carried the war almost to the very gates of Venice, and were besieging Chioggia. A Ragusan contingent under Matteo Giorgi was of great assistance to them in the siege, owing to Giorgi’s knowledge of the use of artillery,[314] and, according to Razzi, he would have prevented the blockade of the Genoese fleet, which was executed, by closing the harbour with sunken boats, if only his advice had been followed.[315] On the defeat of the Genoese the Ragusan galleys managed to escape, and saved a number of the fugitives whose vessels had been sunk (June 24, 1380). Desultory fighting continued for a few months longer, in which the Ragusan galleys took part, and in 1381 peace was signed at Turin. Although in the end the Genoese had been defeated, Venice was by no means victorious, and had to confirm her renunciation of Dalmatia, much to the satisfaction of Ragusa.

But it seemed as though the little Republic of St. Blaize were destined never to be at peace with her neighbours for long. Hardly was the Chioggia war over when a storm-cloud appeared on the side of Bosnia. Now that the Bosnian king had humbled his neighbours and become the most powerful sovereign of the Southern Slaves he began to assume an unfriendly attitude towards Ragusa. His kingdom possessed a stretch of coast from the Bocche di Cattaro to the mouth of the Četina, but the two best ports of that region—Ragusa and Cattaro—were independent Republics owing allegiance to the King of Hungary, who was by no means likely to be always friendly to a powerful and independent Bosnia. If Tvrtko wished to establish a really strong Servian state he would have to occupy those towns. While still Banus he had granted the freedom of his territories to the Ragusans in a charter dated from Bobovac, February 5, 1375.[316] On April 10, 1379, he came to Žrnovica, very near Ragusa, accompanied by his magnates. The Republic sent out a commission of nobles to greet him, and a new and advantageous commercial treaty was concluded, Ragusa agreeing to pay Tvrtko and his successors 500 ipperperi a year for freedom to trade in Bosnia, and 2000 a year as lord of the Servian lands.[317] But this friendship did not last long, for on July 26, 1379, we find the Republic complaining to Louis of Hungary that the people of Cattaro having offered their city to the King of Bosnia, the latter refused to allow foodstuffs to be imported into Ragusa. Louis defended his faithful vassals, and Tvrtko was forced to desist from his annoyances. When, in 1382, Louis died, he left a widow, Elizabeth, who was Tvrtko’s cousin, and two daughters, Mary and Hedwig. He had declared Mary his successor, and betrothed her to Prince Sigismund, son of the Emperor Charles IV., King of Bohemia; but on his death the Poles, who were united to the Hungarians under the same dynasty, refused to be ruled by Mary, and elected her younger sister Hedwig as their queen instead, and even in Hungary and Croatia a considerable party was opposed to Elizabeth and Mary. Civil war broke out and devastated Hungary, Croatia, Dalmatia, and Slavonia for the next twenty-five years. Of these disturbances Tvrtko determined to take advantage, now favouring Elizabeth and Mary, now Charles of Durazzo, who as an Angevin claimed the throne of Hungary also, and his son Ladislas, always with an eye to his own profit.[318] His first thought was for Ragusa. He knew that he could not capture the town without a large fleet, for Ragusan shipping had revived since 1358, and was now very formidable. But he also knew that its inhabitants lived entirely by trade, and he determined to injure them by establishing a rival trading centre at the entrance of the Bocche, making it the chief port and the commercial capital of Bosnia. He called it Sveti Stjepan (San Stefano), but the name was soon changed to Novi, and then to Erzegnovi (Castelnuovo). In violation of his treaties with Ragusa he opened salt-pans at Castelnuovo, which soon became an important trading station not only for the neighbourhood, but for the whole of Dalmatia and Croatia. The Ragusans complained bitterly, and as they obtained Hungarian support, Tvrtko deemed it prudent to give way for the moment, and he promised to close the salt market.[319] But again in 1383 he re-opened it, and the Republic sent Pietro Gondola and Stefano Luccari to Budapest to complain of this breach of the treaty to Queen Mary. The latter at once issued a decree forbidding the inhabitants of Dalmatia and Croatia to trade at Novi.[320]

Tvrtko, not feeling yet strong enough to attack Ragusa openly, allied himself with the Venetians. The latter sold him a large galley fully armed and equipped, and allowed him to have two others built in Venice, sent Niccolò Baseio to him as admiral, and made him honorary citizen of the Republic.[321] These movements disturbed not only Ragusa, but also the two Hungarian queens, who feared that Tvrtko might avail himself of the discontent in Croatia and Dalmatia to raise further trouble. They therefore sent Nicholas of Gara to his court at Sutieska to try to come to some arrangement. Finally Tvrtko was induced to agree not to disturb Ragusa nor the Hungarian dominions, for which promise he was rewarded with the town of Cattaro.[322] This occupation brought him into conflict with the Balšas of Zedda, but after some fighting peace was restored through Venetian mediation. On April 9, 1387, Tvrtko concluded a treaty with Ragusa, in which he promised to protect the city from all enemies, and the Ragusans granted him the right of asylum should he ever be in need of it. It was added that if he should come to the town for any reason, and Queen Mary, who was then a prisoner in the hands of the rebels, should escape, he should be warned in good time and allowed to leave.

By the following year the King of Bosnia’s power in Croatia and Dalmatia had greatly increased, and he became possessed of such important castles as Clissa, Vrana, Ostrovica, and probably Knin, the key of Croatia.[323] He now tried to get hold of the Dalmatian coast towns, as the whole country was in a turmoil of war and revolution, Ragusa alone remaining quiet and loyal to Queen Mary and her husband Sigismund. Various Dalmatian towns promised to pay allegiance to Tvrtko, including Spalato, which was to raise the Bosnian standard on June 15, 1389. But on that very date the death-knell of the Southern Slaves sounded on the fatal “Field of Crows.”[324]

While Tvrtko was thus consolidating his kingdom at the expense of his neighbours, while Hungary was a prey to civil war, while the various princelings of Servia were eternally fighting among themselves, the Turks were ever marching onward. As early as 1375 Marko Kraljević, the hero of Servian popular poetry, had initiated the disastrous policy of calling in Turkish assistance in a quarrel against another Christian prince. Wishing to reconquer Kastoria and other towns in Southern Macedonia and Albania held by the Musacchi family and their ally George I. Balša, he obtained a Turkish contingent for the enterprise, but was defeated by Balša. In 1376 Tvrtko had allied himself with Knez Lazar, who ruled over the Danubian provinces of Servia (the last remnant of the Servian Empire) against Nicholas Altomanović, and continued to remain on good terms with him after Nicholas’s death. He regarded Knez Lazar’s principality as a buffer State between his own dominions and those of the Turks. After the fall of Niš in 1375, and of Sofia in 1382, he gave Lazar assistance, and in 1387 he sent him a contingent which enabled him to cut to pieces a Turkish army of 20,000 men at Pločnik on the Toplica (Old Servia). But the Sultan Murad I. determined to avenge the defeat, and prepared an expedition against Lazar. The latter, seeing himself in great danger, appealed for help from all his neighbours, but the King of Bosnia alone sent him a force, commanded by Vlatko Hranić. The Servian-Bosnian army, under the leadership of Knez Lazar, with Marko Kraljević as chief lieutenant, had its headquarters at Priština, in the plain of Kossovo—a long plateau surrounded by mountains extending from Verisović to Mitrovica. The Turkish army was commanded by the Sultan Murad in person; the right wing was led by his son Bayazet, and the left by his son Yakub. The fight began early on Wednesday, June 15, 1389, and raged all day. For a long time the fortunes of the battle seemed doubtful, and both sides fought with heroic courage. But at last Bayazet succeeded by a sudden attack in throwing the Servian left wing into confusion. At the same time Vuk Branković, whose name has been handed down to the execration of the whole Servian race as a traitor, abandoned the field of battle with all his division. Then Vlatko Hranić and the Bosnian contingent began to give way, and the main body of the Serbs was driven slowly back. Knez Lazar, after fighting like a lion, was killed in the mêlée; Murad was mortally wounded in his own tent by the Servian chief Miloš Obilić, who pretended to be a traitor and to have information to give him. He was himself cut down instantly, and then Lazar’s head was brought in by attendants to cheer the dying Sultan, who expired soon after.

The Turks did not follow up their victory, and from the first news of the fight which he received Tvrtko thought that the Christians had triumphed, and sent messages to that effect to the foreign Powers. In the churches of Florence Te Deums of victory were sung, and the Republic congratulated the Bosnian king. Even when the true result was known no one realised at the time what a crushing blow had fallen on the Slavonic peoples of the Balkans. The native princes continued to fight among themselves regardless of their impending doom, and Tvrtko, who was the most powerful of them, thought more of occupying Dalmatia and Croatia than of strengthening his southern frontier. His enterprises were fairly prosperous; he succeeded in conquering the whole country from the Velebit mountains to Cattaro, Zara and Ragusa alone remaining true to Sigismund, while the three islands of Brazza, Curzola, and Lesina recognised the suzerainty of the Bosnian king (1390). He died in 1391, leaving Bosnia in such a position as she had never enjoyed before. But her power was not based on a solid foundation, and therefore short-lived. His brother, Stephen Dabiša, who succeeded him, soon lost the greater part of Dalmatia and Croatia.

George II. Stračimirov Balša, who now styled himself “absolute lord of all the Zedda and of the coast,” and had established a brilliant court at Scutari,[325] was equally unconscious of the danger, and thought only of capturing Cattaro. He began by occupying the Krivošije,[326] and blocked all the roads leading into the town. Ragusa at the request of Cattaro acted as mediator, and peace was made, probably on an understanding on the part of the Cattarini that they would pay a tribute to George.[327] Ragusa was beginning to be really alarmed at the progress of the Turks in Albania, and saw the necessity of allying herself with the other Dalmatian townships, “propter oppressionem Turcorum.” In 1390 the Senate had tried in vain to mediate between the King of Bosnia and Hungary, so as to end the war which was desolating the country,[328] and now it made a proposal of this kind to Hungary and Venice. At the same time it granted a subsidy of arms and ammunition to George Balša. But mutual jealousies prevented the idea from being realised,[329] and in 1392 George himself was a prisoner in the hands of the Turks.[330] He was soon ransomed, but he lost Scutari, and his power was seriously shaken.

[Illustration: APOTHECARY’S GARDEN, FRANCISCAN MONASTERY]

The year 1395 proved an unfortunate one for Ragusa. In the first place, one Constantine Balša, a relative of George II., who had obtained a trade monopoly in the Zedda and inland as far as Prizren and Novobrdo, laid heavy impositions on Ragusan trade so as to exclude it from the country.[331] At the same time heavy rains flooded the city and its immediate neighbourhood, destroying all the crops, and on May 19 a severe earthquake—the first great shock felt in Dalmatia for many centuries—wrought great havoc.[332] During this period the Adriatic was infested by the pirate barques of Gabriele da Parma. There was another quarrel with George Balša on account of a certain monk named Marino of Dulcigno, who intrigued with the Slaves near Ragusa. However, this was soon settled to the satisfaction of all parties, the Albanian markets were re-opened, Constantine Balša recovered Scutari from the Turks for his kinsman, and declared himself despot of the town. In 1395 George visited Ragusa, where he was splendidly received as Prince of Albania.

Although the Ragusans were usually on bad terms with their immediate neighbours, they had been for some time good friends with the Bosnian magnate Vlatko Vuković. On his death in 1392 his estates descended to his nephew Sandalj Hranić, to whom Ragusa sent an embassy of homage in 1395. He was a true type of South Slavonic lordling of that time. His one object was to consolidate and enlarge his territories, so as to carve out a principality for himself and be independent of the King of Bosnia or the Despot of Servia. Like all his colleagues, he completely failed to appreciate the terrible significance of the Turkish danger, and while he began by “proclaiming his misfortunes from the mountain tops, he ended by descending into the plain to declare himself the vassal of the powerful invader.”[333] He was certainly less cruel than most of his neighbours, and, unlike them, was guilty of no particularly heinous murders. The result of his ambitious schemes was the formation of the Duchy afterwards called of St. Sava or the Herzegovina.[334] In 1396 he meditated a descent on Cattaro in order to round off his dominions. This town was also coveted by Radić Crnoević, lord of what is now Montenegro. Radić got into trouble with Balša, by whom he was defeated and killed, while Sandalj, although he could not take Cattaro, took Budua, probably at the secret instigation of Venice, who did not wish Balša to advance further north. Sandalj was granted the honorary citizenship of Venice.

In the meanwhile, in spite of several set-backs, Turkish raids into Bosnia continued. Small bands were sent forward as feelers to ravage and plunder and prepare the way for their grand advance. We find the Ragusan Senate asking the King of Hungary to recommend them to Venice for protection against the Turks,[335] while they gave asylum in Stagno and Sabbioncello to many Slaves and Vlachs who were flying from the terrible enemy. On September 28, 1396, Sigismund, King of Hungary, at the head of a confederate force of 100,000 Christians, was totally defeated by the Sultan Bayazet at Nikopolis on the Danube. The King himself managed to escape down the river on a Venetian galley to the Black Sea to Constantinople, across the Ægean, and up the Adriatic to Ragusa, which he reached on December 21. He was honourably and hospitably received by the Rector and Councillors, who offered him the keys of the town. He spent nine days there, being entertained, together with his suite at the expense of the Republic, and he received in addition a present of 2000 ducats and two years’ tribute in advance. As a reward he granted the Republic the right to strike silver coinage.[336] On December 30 he departed on board a Ragusan galley for Spalato. He took the four sons of the ship’s chief officer into his service, and subsequently through his favour many Ragusans rose to high positions in Hungary.

Every day fresh batches of refugees fled into Ragusan territory before the advancing Ottoman hordes, who even threatened the Bocche di Cattaro. George Balša himself began to fear for his own safety, and requested that Ragusa should give shelter to his wife and family. The Republic placed a palace at his disposal, and also allowed him to purchase arms and ammunition in the town and have his old weapons repaired there. But even this had to be done secretly, lest Sandalj, who was an enemy of the Balšas and a friend of the Turks, should retaliate on the Ragusans. We find an interesting entry in this connection by Andrea da Bologna, the Chancellor of the Republic, in the Reformationes for 1398: “Die ... (blank space) Januarii (1398) Filius Pasayt (Bayazet) cum magna quantitate Turchorum et Sclavorum intravit Bossinam, et fuit depredatus ipsam. In reversione major pars ipsorum propter immensum frigus decesserunt.”[337] This shows that even at that early date the Turks found allies in the renegade Slaves. The Ragusan Senate tried to mediate between Sandalj and George so as to strengthen Hungary, and arranged a meeting between the former and his rival’s wife, but the attempted conciliation failed. Apparently, too, some of the Slavonic lordlings tried to draw Ragusa into their intrigues with the Turks, and in 1399 Feris (?Ferid), Governor of Svečanj, visited the town as Turkish envoy, but nothing came of the negotiations.[338]

The kingdom of Bosnia was, as we have seen, subject to constant incursions on the part of the Turks, whom it was incapable of resisting, for under the reign of King Dabiša and Queen Helena Gruba the Vojvods had risen to power once more, and had become almost independent. Of these the most important were Sandalj Hranić, lord of Hlum, of whom we have already spoken; Hrvoje, Duke of Spalato; and Paul Radinović. Sandalj ruled over a great part of Hlum as far as the Drina. Hrvoje, who has been described as the “Bosnian Warwick,” owing to the number of princes he deposed and set up, ruled over middle Dalmatia, a large part of Bosnia, including the town of Jajce, and some districts of Hlum, including Livno. Paul Radinović was lord of Trebinje, part of Canali, and other lands as far as Prača. His sons, Peter and Radosav, took the name of Paulović. Queen Helena lost her throne owing to a rebellion in 1398 or 1399, and was succeeded by Stephen Ostoja, probably a natural son of Stephen Tvrtko.[339] Ostoja had to depend for his authority on the goodwill of his magnates, but his reign was at first successful. He defeated Sigismund of Hungary, who tried to enforce his claims on Bosnia, and had invaded it at two points. Also on the Turkish frontier things were more peaceful, and, according to Klaić, after the raid of 1398 Ostoja concluded a treaty with Bayazet to support the claims of Ladislas of Naples to the Hungarian throne against Sigismund.[340] Later, Bayazet became still less formidable, as he had to hurry off to Asia to defend his Empire against Timur.

For a few years after his accession Ostoja had been friendly to Ragusa, and in 1399 he granted them a further stretch of coast from Stagno to Klek, near the mouth of the Narenta. For this the citizens had given him a palace in the town and made him an honorary citizen; they granted the same favours to Hrvoje for his intercession.[341] But Ostoja, finding himself with no coastline save the bit between the rivers Četina and the Narenta, repented of his generosity, and tried to induce Ragusa to recognise Bosnian supremacy. When in 1400 the envoys brought him the tribute he suggested that the city should throw off the Hungarian yoke and come under his protection. But the Republic would not hear of the proposal, preferring to obey the distant and complaisant King of Hungary rather than the near and untrustworthy King of Bosnia. The latter did not yet feel strong enough to attack the city openly with any chance of success where Tvrtko had failed, so he resorted, if we are to believe the local historians, to intrigue, and secretly fomented a conspiracy of ambitious nobles. The circumstances of the plot are not very clear, and Ragnina’s account, detailed though it is, leaves much unexplained. In the early part of 1400 four nobles, Niccolò and Giacomo Zamagna, and Lorenzo and Simeone Bodazza, determined to become masters of the city with the help of the Count of Popovo (in the Herzegovina), the Vojvod of Trebinje, and other Bosnian barons. According to Ragnina the conspiracy was engineered by Ostoja, or by Stephen the Despot of Servia. It is more likely that the former was privy to it, as the Despot of Servia was now a person of no importance, and his territory did not even border with that of the Republic. The Bosnian king probably saw in this plot a means of possessing himself of the town and its valuable port; but he did not appear in the actual intrigue, which was carried on by the neighbouring vojvods. Ragusa at this time was almost deserted, a large part of its inhabitants having taken refuge in the neighbouring country on account of the plague. On the Feast of the Forty Martyrs (March 9) a number of the conspirators were to dine in the house of a certain artisan at Ragusa to mature their plans. The man not having enough table utensils for the company sent his wife to the house of a noble named Niccolò Gozze, in whose service she had been, to ask for a loan of the required articles. Gozze promised to lend them, but wanted to know for whom they were required. The woman told him the names of the nobles in question, and as they were men of somewhat shady antecedents Gozze became suspicious. He bribed the woman to take note of all that she should hear at supper, and to report it to him the following morning. This she did, and informed Gozze that a Morlach named Miloš and four companions had come with the nobles, and that it was agreed that Miloš should wait at the town gate for a Slave messenger who was expected with letters from the Bosnian magnates. They also discussed how to raise a band of followers from among the dregs of the people, and secretly to admit some Slaves from outside, with the object of overpowering the town guard, seizing the gates, and opening them to a large force of Bosnians. Gozze, although suffering from the gout, rose from his bed, had himself carried to the Government Palace, and summoned the Minor Council. The woman was secured and summoned to give evidence, and the chief conspirators were arrested. They confessed everything under torture. At the same time a trusty man was sent to await the arrival of the letters in the place of the Morlach; he gave all the requisite signs when the messenger arrived, and received the papers. The contents were as follows: “In the first place remember your promise and take care of yourself and yours, and we shall do what we have decided.” The conspirators were beheaded on March 10, and their property confiscated. A few who managed to escape were condemned in contumacy. This episode is interesting as being one of the only instances of an internal revolution in law-abiding Ragusa. There is not enough evidence to enable us to understand its character nor the actual complicity of Ostoja. It may also have been an early symptom of the disagreement between the Latin and Slavonic elements of the population.

[Illustration: ENTRANCE TO THE FRANCISCAN MONASTERY]

Ostoja, after having received the homage of Sebenico and Traù, renewed his request that Ragusa should recognise his supremacy; but again the citizens refused, and renewed their oath of fealty to Sigismund, merely promising to take no part in the hostilities between Bosnia and Hungary, and to refuse to admit Bosnian rebels into the town. The following year a number of Sigismund’s opponents in Hungary, Croatia, and Dalmatia collected at Zara, and Ladislas crossed over from Italy and was crowned by the Hungarian Primate King of Hungary, Croatia, and Dalmatia. Ostoja himself, however, was not altogether satisfied, for although he had favoured Ladislas’s cause as long as the pretender was in Italy, the moment he landed in Dalmatia, the Bosnian king felt that his own interests along the seaboard were menaced. Hrvoje, Duke of Spalato, maintained an ambiguous attitude, and Ostoja determined to make use of this confusion to declare war on Ragusa. He found a pretext in the fact that two Bosnian rebels had been given hospitality in the town; he began by demanding back the Primorije which he himself had ceded, as well as other territory given by his predecessors, and he also insisted that the Ragusans should recognise his full suzerainty. His demands being rejected he sent a force of 8000 men under the Vojvods Radić Sanković, Sandalj Hranić, and Paul Radinović into Ragusan territory. Hostilities lasted from August 1403 to the spring of 1404.[342] We have but meagre details of this campaign besides those given in the untrustworthy chronicle of Resti, and some information in the Diplomatarium. According to Resti, the Ragusans at first drove back the Bosnians, but the latter were soon reinforced and again invaded the Republic’s territory. Encounters took place at Bergato and Gionchetto, and 4000 well-armed Ragusans commanded by Giacomo Gondola tried to induce the enemy to give battle, but without success, as the latter retired to Trebinje. Probably the Ragusans were defeated, as we find the Senate asking for the mediation of the Hungarian king shortly after. But the difficulty was, which king, as Ladislas was now in Dalmatia. The tortuous nature of Ragusan diplomacy is well illustrated by the contemporaneous embassies to Ladislas, Sigismund, and Hrvoje. They did not wish to commit themselves by sending regular ambassadors to Ladislas, as Sigismund might still gain the upper hand, so they merely sent a monk, Marino Bodazza, ostensibly to obtain compensation for the property taken by the pretender’s followers. But a request for mediation in the Bosnian quarrel was also hinted at. Ladislas replied that he would consider the matter if a proper embassy were sent to him. This the Senate refused to do, upon which Ladislas declared Ragusa to be his enemy. But, fortunately for the Republic, Sigismund regained his freedom, and collected a large army in northern Hungary, while Ladislas returned to Italy. An embassy was then sent to Sigismund, the envoys being instructed to go first to Hrvoje, the Duke of Spalato, to complain of Ostoja’s conduct, and suggest that he himself might become King of Bosnia; but if he did not care to go so far, he might help some other member of the Kotromanić family, or Paul Radissić, who had been living at Ragusa for the past two years, to acquire the crown. Ragusa had always been friendly to the old Bosnian dynasty, and had given refuge to many of its exiled princes. At the same time they were to inform him that Ostoja, on seeing the retreat of Ladislas, had sent envoys to Sigismund to intrigue against him (Hrvoje). If the latter broached the subject of Ragusa’s relations with Ladislas they were to say: “We are the subjects of the Crown of Hungary, and whoever is actually King of Hungary is our suzerain.” They were to proceed to Sigismund’s court only if Hrvoje advised them to do so. If they did go on to Hungary they were instructed to try to obtain for Ragusa the suzerainty over the three large islands of Lesina, Curzola, and Brazza, to discover what were the provisions of the treaty which was being negotiated between Ostoja and Sigismund, and to warn the latter against the Bosnian king’s fickleness, and induce him to insist that that potentate should give up the territory he had filched from the Republic in the last war, and pay compensation for the damages, calculated at 200,000 ducats, for which he was responsible. They were also to suggest that he should come to terms with Hrvoje, who might help him to reduce Bosnia to obedience, and to advise him to sow dissension among the Bosnian magnates, who were always ready to rebel.[343]

The embassy departed for Spalato, and thence, at Hrvoje’s advice, proceeded to Hungary, but there they found that, Ostoja having shown himself willing to make peace, Sigismund had concluded a treaty with him already. By its terms Ostoja recognised Hungarian supremacy over Bosnia, and agreed to renew all the privileges of the Ragusans, and restore all the territory taken save the Primorije or coast-land. This did not satisfy the Republic, and Hrvoje was still more annoyed as it upset all his ambitious schemes. So he concluded an alliance with Ragusa against Ostoja, with the object of deposing him and placing Paul Radissić on the Bosnian throne. Hrvoje was to lead an army of Dalmatians and Bosnian malcontents up the Narenta valley, while Ragusa was to cut off Ostoja’s supplies and intrigue against him at the Hungarian court. Sigismund, however, supported Ostoja, and when the latter was besieged in his castle of Bobovac by Hrvoje he sent a force to his assistance under the Banus of Mačva[344] (Sigismund’s lieutenant in northern Bosnia), and gained back all his territory for him. But he did not forget his faithful Ragusans, and not only induced Ostoja to renew their privileges, but requested him to restore them the coast between the Ombla and Stagno.[345] After long negotiations the Diet or “Congregation” of Bosnian magnates met at Visoki in April,[346] and Ostoja brought Ragusa’s claim before it, but no decision was arrived at. After further useless negotiations the Ragusans again allied themselves with Hrvoje and the Bosnian rebels, including this time Sandalj Hranić and Paul Radinović. A second conference of nobles was summoned, and Ostoja was deposed. Stephen Tvrtko II., son of Stephen Tvrtko I., was elected king, and Ostoja retired to Bobovac, now occupied by a Hungarian garrison. The new king owed his position to Hrvoje and Sandalj, who were the real masters of the country, and Ragusa applied to them to obtain a lasting peace with Bosnia. “For what you desire,” wrote the Rector to Sandalj, “that also the lord King Tvrtko and the Duke (Hrvoje) and all Bosnia desire too, for God has granted you the favour that this should be so.”[347] Eventually Tvrtko gave them back all the territory that had been theirs and some more lands besides. The Republic made him and his brothers, as well as Sandalj, citizens of Ragusa, and gave them palaces in the town.

The loyalty of the Ragusans to Hungary was sorely tried this same year, for Sigismund prepared to make war on Tvrtko as a usurper and reinstate Ostoja as the rightful king. They would not side openly with Tvrtko against this suzerain, but they did not wish to lose the valuable and hardly won favours of Bosnia; they therefore placed their arsenals at the disposal of Tvrtko’s agents, who bought large supplies of arms for the war.[348] Sigismund sent three armies into Bosnia—one under the Banus of Mačva by way of Usora, a second under Paul, Banus of Croatia, up the Una valley towards Bihać, and a third to guard the Bosnian-Slavonian frontier under Peter of Perén. Ladislas lent his fleet to Hrvoje to keep watch at Arbe and attack Sigismund’s forces if they should invade the littoral. But after a few ephemeral successes the Hungarians were defeated at all points, and Tvrtko’s position was thereby considerably strengthened. Ostoja, fearing for his life, asked for a safe conduct to Ragusa in April 1407, and the Senate, much to his surprise, granted it, forgiving him all his former hostility, “for any man who from Bosnia or from the land of any other lord takes refuge in our city, according to the law, may enter freely and live here undisturbed.” But after all he did not avail himself of the permit, either because he mistrusted the Ragusans, or because he still hoped to regain his throne. While Tvrtko was trying to win Cattaro and Budua from the Balšas, Sigismund was preparing his revenge, and in 1408 invaded Bosnia with a large army, defeated the usurper and captured him, together with a large number of magnates, of whom 126 were beheaded at Dobor. Ostoja was replaced on the throne, and Sigismund retired to Buda with Tvrtko in his train.

We must now return to Ragusa’s relations with the Balšas. When George II. died in 1403 he was succeeded by his son, who styled himself Balša III. The Zedda was now surrounded by jealous rivals; the Turks claimed tribute, Venice wished to establish posts in the country against them, and various native princelings aspired to enlarge their estates. Ragusa being at war with Bosnia, allied herself with the lords of Njegoš (the nucleus of modern Montenegro) and with Cattaro, and tried to conciliate Venice. Balša determined to oust the Venetians from Albania, and invited the Turks to help him to capture Drivasto and Scutari. Thus Ragusa and he were in opposite camps. Drivasto fell, and so did the town of Scutari, but the castle held out (1404). With the help of Sandalj Hranič and the Albanian magnates Venice soon recovered all that she had lost, and by June, 1407, Balša and his ambitious mother Helena had to sue for peace and give way on all points. Balša, however, did not carry out his engagements, and Venice resorted to the threat of calling in the help of Bayazet to force him to do so (January, 1409); in June of the same year the Venetian fleet sailed down the Adriatic and put in at Ragusa, where the Capitano in Golfo met the envoy of Sandalj.[349] Balša, being now thoroughly frightened, went to Venice with his mother and signed a further agreement. But in 1410 he again raided the Venetian possessions and attacked Scutari with a large force. Benedetto Contarini defended the town with great skill, and received much assistance from a Ragusan flotilla operating on the lake.[350] Balša having also threatened Cattaro, that town offered itself to the Venetians, who were ready to occupy it; but now Sandalj came forward with his claims on it, which caused further complications. Ragusa, although allied to Venice, tried to better her relations with Balša on account of her Albanian trade. But this ambiguous attitude was not quite successful, and Ragusan merchants ended by suffering molestations both from the Venetians and from Balša’s subjects. In 1412 peace was concluded, and Balša restored everything.

Once the danger from Balša was passed Ragusan hostility against Venice revived again, and the Senate wrote to protest against Venetian depredations in Albanian and Sicilian waters. The Republic still desired the supremacy of Hungary in the Adriatic, and although that cause was lost, it tried to bolster it up by inducing Cattaro to return to Hungarian allegiance. This attempt was made, however, more with the object of injuring Venice than with any hope of benefiting Hungary. Ragusa also contracted an alliance with Balša and with Sandalj, who had married Balša’s mother, and was meditating a coup on Cattaro. But the Cattarini succeeded in inducing Ragusa to mediate between them and Sandalj, and even to provide them with a large loan with which to arm the whole population of the Bocche. The maze of intrigue and counter-intrigue between Venice, Hungary, Ragusa, Bosnia, and the various Slave and Albanian princes now becomes hopelessly involved, and no man trusted any other. Ragusa’s policy is well explained in a despatch,[351] in which it is stated that the Republic “had to be on good terms with these lords of Slavonia, for every day our merchants and our goods pass through their hands and their territory, and we fear lest they (the merchants) should suffer injury.” But when Balša demanded a number of Ragusan shipbuilders to repair his vessels for operations against Venice the Senate refused, fearing to incur the latter’s displeasure.

The protection and promotion of trade was the keynote of Ragusan policy, and everything was done with that end in view. In the meanwhile the Senate acquired much knowledge concerning the affairs of Italy and of the East from the Ragusan traders, and communicated the information to Sigismund. Thus the latter learned about the advance of the Turks in Bosnia at the instigation of Vuk, the son of Knez Lazar, who wished to get possession of his brother’s principality. Ladislas continued to send piratical fleets to Dalmatia, which did much damage to Ragusan commerce. But the Ragusans revenged themselves by relieving Curzola, which was attacked by the Apulian fleet. “With the favour of St. Blaize we shot so many arrows and javelins against the enemy, and did their ships so much damage with our bombards, that many of their men were killed or wounded. They abandoned much property and arms, and not only desisted from the siege, but abandoned these parts altogether.”[352] This same year (1409) the Venetians began to re-establish their rule over Dalmatia, and obtained Zara from Ladislas. This caused an outbreak of hostilities between them and Sigismund, who regarded Dalmatia as an integral part of his dominions. While the two Powers were fighting the common enemy was advancing, and in 1411 a Ragusan despatch announces that the Turks had taken and burnt Srebrnica. In 1413 negotiations were opened between Hungary and Venice, in which Ragusa took part, and while Sigismund agreed to give up the greater part of Dalmatia, Ragusa asked for and obtained the lease of the three coveted islands of Lesina, Curzola, and Brazza, which had been withdrawn from Hrvoje’s rule.[353] The Ragusans had hoped to obtain full ownership, but even the lease was a great point gained, and the Republic thought that it would eventually become vested into absolute possession. The islanders, however, were not well disposed towards their new masters, and were only cowed into submission by a naval demonstration. A count was appointed for each island, to remain in office for six months, with a salary of which Ragusa was to pay one-third and the islanders the remainder.[354] This acquisition might have been the beginning of great things for the Republic had its policy been a little less narrowly provincial and nervous. Its territory was now fairly large, its commerce and finances flourishing, and with its intimate connection with the dying kingdom of Bosnia it might have extended its influence far into the hinterland, establishing a strong Latin-Slavonic State as a bulwark against the advancing Turks. Ragusa was also trying to get possession of another part of Canali and Dračevica from Sandlaj Hranić, but the latter would not give it up, because “if he were hard pressed by the Turks he would have no other means of escaping to the sea,” and also because Dračevica was the best position for dominating Cattaro,[355] which he had now forced to pay him tribute. The Venetians, Sandalj, and Balša were now all suffering from the Turkish obsession. The enemy’s headquarters were at Üsküb, whence many raids into Bosnia and Albania were made. In 1415 the Turks invaded Bosnia for the third time, and raiding parties came as far as Sebenico and Almissa, so that the Ragusan Senate ordered the islanders to arm light galleys to co-operate with those of Ragusa and Stagno. The ridges dividing the hinterland from the sea were anxiously watched, and every moment it was feared that the dreaded turbans might appear over the crest. In 1416 Sigismund announced to Ragusa his intention of making war on a grand scale against the Turks, and declared that the property of all those who helped them should be confiscated. As the Despot of Servia, Sandalj Hranić, and almost every other Slavonic prince were more or less tributaries to the Sultan, this seems rather a sweeping order. In the same letter he declared that the three islands were withdrawn from Ragusan suzerainty and were to be given over to one Ladislas Jakez, a favourite of the Empress Barbara (September 21-23, 1416). No reason is assigned for the withdrawal of the concession, but it was probably due to the somewhat high-handed manner with which the Republic had governed its new possessions. Curiously enough, the Senate did not seem very unwilling to lose them.

[Illustration: TERRACE OF THE FRANCISCAN MONASTERY WITH THE TORRE MENZE IN THE BACKGROUND]

There were now fresh disturbances in Bosnia, and Tvrtko, who had been deposed in favour of Ostoja, was causing trouble. He raised a band of rebels, with which he defeated his adversaries and obliged some of them to take refuge in Ragusan territory. Of this hospitality Tvrtko, as an old friend of the Republic, complained, but the citizens replied that it was better for malcontents to fly to Ragusa, where they usually ended by making peace with their king, than to other lands. For a few months Tvrtko was quite powerful, but soon after he was again defeated. Hrvoje, who had been deprived of his duchy, now called in the Turks to aid him against Hungary and Bosnia, and the Sultan Mohammed I. thereupon sent a force into the latter country, which defeated the Hungarians near Usora, and obtained much booty. As soon as it had retired civil strife broke out again, in consequence of the murder by Ostoja of Paul Radinović, a powerful Bosnian noble. Hrvoje died in March 1416, and in October a Ragusan despatch declared that “the whole of Bosnia is laid waste, and the barons are preparing to exterminate each other.” The rebel magnates met in a Diet, and forced Ostoja to fly to Hlum, where he succeeded in establishing a precarious rule, but after the year 1418 nothing more is heard of him. The magnates elected his son, Stephen Ostojić, as King, and Ragusa at once sent an embassy to try to obtain from him the rest of Canali, of which a part had been given by Sandalj and a part by Paul Paulović. This request Ostojić granted, and in exchange for a yearly tribute of 500 ipperperi promised to protect the city. Sandalj and Paulović still retained a part of that territory, but on Paulović’s death in 1419 Sandalj sold all his remaining share to the Republic for 18,000 ducats, and included that of Paulović. The latter’s son, Radosav, protested, and induced the Canalesi to revolt. He too asked for Turkish help, for, as Resti says, “he had begun after the example of the other Slave princes to nourish in his breast the viper that was to devour them all.” He continued to disturb Ragusa for years to come.

Between 1417 and 1421 Balša had been at war with most of his neighbours, including Venice and Ragusa, but in this last year his stormy life came to an end, and with him the house of Balša died out, for he left no sons. Stephen, the Despot of Servia, Sandalj Hranić, and a native prince named Stephen Maramonte, laid claim to his estates, but Venice obtained the lion’s share, as Drivasto, Dulcigno, and Antivari surrendered spontaneously to the Republic. Thus disappeared the principality of the Zedda.

With the year 1420 opens a new epoch in the history of Dalmatia, for it marks the final reconquest of the country by Venice and the withdrawal of Hungary from the Adriatic. In 1409 the great Republic had, as we have seen, reoccupied Zara, and in 1412 Sebenico. She seized the opportunity of Sigismund’s being engaged in the Hussite war in 1420 to seize Lesina, Brazza, Curzola, and Almissa. Traù, defended by a strong Hungarian garrison, held out for a little while, but ended by surrendering too. Spalato fell next, and Cattaro, after having for some time owed allegiance to Sandalj Hranić, now spontaneously surrendered to the Venetians, who took possession on March 8. Thus they regained the whole of Dalmatia, including the Croatian towns of Novigrad, Nona, and Vrana. Ragusa alone remained outside their sphere, but according to Resti they meditated a coup de main even on the town, and had actually prepared an expedition for the purpose; the plot, however, was disclosed by a Venetian Senator to a Ragusan who had lived twenty-seven years in Venice and was regarded as almost a Venetian. But he had not forgotten his duty towards his native city, and hastened to inform the Ragusan Government. The town was immediately put in a state of defence, so that when the Venetian squadron arrived it saw that a surprise was out of the question, and gave up the idea. This story, like every other statement of Resti’s, is doubtful; but according to Lucio there actually were hostilities between the two Republics at the time, nor is it unlikely that Venice may have meditated uniting her Dalmatian possessions by occupying Ragusa.

The situation of Ragusa towards Hungary was thus considerably altered, as the Hungarians were no longer on her borders. The Republic from this date assumes a still greater degree of independence than before, but from the despatches to the King of Hungary it appears that it still recognised his suzerainty to a certain extent. Hungary was, however, no longer able to afford it valid protection, and the Venetians it did not trust; this explains its subsequent attitude towards the Turks, whom it was now obliged to conciliate, lest it should suffer the fate that was soon to befall its neighbours. But its dependence on the Sultan amounted to little more than the payment of a tribute.

As we have seen, the one important alteration brought about by the exchange of Hungarian in the place of Venetian overlordship was the establishment of the Rector, elected by the city council. This form of government lasted unchanged until the fall of the Republic. Its character tended to become more and more oligarchic, and although the “Specchio,” or Golden Book, was not compiled until 1440, all save the nobles were practically excluded from any share in the government. A new high court of justice was formed, consisting of five judges, who remained in office for one year. Beyond this there is no important constitutional or administrative change to record.

Various measures were taken to improve the general conditions of the city. Lepers were confined to a spot outside Ragusa called San Michele alla Cresta, which they were not allowed to leave. As elsewhere, they were regarded with feelings of horror mixed with superstitious awe. The earliest mention of them is in a small legacy in their favour dated 1295.[356] They probably made their first appearance at Ragusa at the time of the Crusades. We have already alluded to the great plague of 1348, and after that there were several outbreaks of the dread malady in Ragusa; they are recorded in Gradi’s history of the plagues at Ragusa, written “ad memoriam et terrorem cunctorum gentium.” In 1363 a second outbreak took place, a third in 1371, and a fourth in 1374. According to Gradi, the total number of victims in these four visitations amounted to 250 nobles and 25,000 commoners. Quarantine stations for persons coming from infected spots were established at Ragusavecchia and on the island rock of Mercana, but in spite of these precautions there was a fifth outbreak in 1391, which lasted six months, nearly all the nobles taking refuge at Gravosa. In 1397 a still more rigorous quarantine was established, but in 1400 the plague broke out afresh and carried off 2500 victims, and in 1401 it returned. The city then remained free from the scourge until 1416, when two months of plague caused the death of 3800 persons. It was imported from the East, it is said, by Paolo Gondola. In 1410 one Giacomo Godoaldo of Ferrara had been appointed official physician to the Republic, and seeing that his remedies were of little avail, he suggested in 1416 that plague patients should be isolated. The Senate agreed, and two houses in the suburb of Danče were set apart for them. When another outbreak occurred in 1422, the number of victims was very small, owing to these precautions.

Ragusan trade continued to increase considerably, and followed much the same lines as in the preceding period; but, owing to the Turkish invasion and the constant wars in the Slave lands, it tended more and more towards the sea. Italy, the Greek Empire, Asia Minor, and Egypt were always the chief markets for Ragusan merchants, and special exemptions were granted to them to trade with the Infidel,[357] although they were forbidden to sell timber, iron, or arms in those countries. Their relations with the Turks were satisfactory, and they often sent envoys to the Emirs and Sultans. At the same time, this did not interfere with their good understanding with the Christian Powers, and they did much business with Constantinople and the rest of the Greek Empire, both by sea and by land. The land trade with the Slavonic hinterland, although subject to frequent interruptions, was still very active, and new and flourishing commercial colonies arose in Bosnia, Hlum, Servia, Albania, and Bulgaria. With Hungary there was a very active trade, both by way of Bosnia, Servia, and the Danube, and by sea via Croatia. Embassies were frequently sent to the Hungarian court and to the Banus of Croatia and Dalmatia, who resided at Zara as the King of Hungary’s viceroy. The envoys in question frequently acted as commercial travellers for Ragusan goods, of which they brought samples to sell. An enactment, which is greatly to the credit of the little Republic is the prohibition of the slave trade, “perchè turpe scellerato ed abominevole” (1417).[358] In this the Ragusans were ahead of most of the other Christian States at the time, and later, as we shall see, the city became an important ransoming agency for liberating slaves captured by the Turks.

The citizens were now extremely wealthy, and addicted to luxury and splendour. They took much pleasure in picturesque popular festivals, of which that of San Biagio (February 3), and the anniversary of bringing of the Saint’s arm to Ragusa (July 5) were the most important. On both days races were run for a banner (palio), which attracted large crowds of peasants from the neighbourhood.[359] A third feast was that of the Forty Martyrs (March 9), established in 1400 to commemorate the city’s escape from tyranny.[360] The procession is thus described in the Ceremonial of the Rector:—

“On the 8th day of March his Excellency the Rector issues forth under the arcades (of the Palace), whence he is invited by the parish priest of St. Blaize to enter the church. The following morning he again comes forth and seats himself on the upper seat, opposite the magistrates, as is customary in such festivals, with the rest of the Senators; the bells of the Senate and of the Council are then rung. After the third tucket of the pipers the Secretary begins, with his Excellency’s permission, to read out in order the names of all the magistrates and of the remaining members of the Senate and of the Council; all must be present, save in case of illness or other legitimate impediment—absentees are fined 25 ipperperi. This done, his Excellency proceeds along the street of the Palace, with all the aforesaid nobles, marching two and two, carrying lighted torches given them by the people. They enter the church of San Biagio, our Standard-bearer, and then come out again in procession, carrying the three relics which are wont to be thus carried, viz. the Head, the Arm, and the Foot of the Saint, and they march across the Piazza, round the Loggia, and return by the Palace street. They again repair to the said church, and High Mass begins. When it is finished the Archbishop leads the way, followed by his Excellency, to the Loggia, where the guard is. Then the Preaching Father of the Cathedral delivers a political discourse. This ended, the procession returns to the church in the same order. There the Archbishop and the Rector make obeisance to each other before the choir; the former enters the choir, the latter returns to the Palace; the torches remain in the church.”[361]

Another more secular festival was that of the Tree on May 3. There existed a society of patrician youths, from ten to eighteen years of age, and therefore too young to take part in the affairs of the State. The society elected some of its members managers of the festival, and “on the last day of April they plant a maypole, artificially covered with fir branches, to be burnt on May 3. They choose a page, and three or four attendants for him, from among the patrician boys under ten, to read out the prayers suitable for the occasion On May 1 and on each of the following days the members of the society repair daily to do homage to the Rector and the chief authorities, who encourage them, and give them sweetmeats as a reward for the trouble they are taking. The ceremonies round the maypole are accompanied by fireworks and discharges of small cannon, and on the evening of the third day the maypole is set on fire. While it is burning splendid fireworks are set going. The whole company then repair to the house of the page, whose father receives formal thanks.”[362]

A symbol of Hungarian suzerainty, possibly connected with the May festival, is the so-called statue of Orlando. In many mediæval towns a pillar was erected in the chief square, from the summit of which the public crier proclaimed the enactments of the Government. Here, too, the people were wont to gather when their consent was required, and near this spot capital sentences were sometimes executed. The pillar also served as a support for the city standard. It was usually adorned with a statue of a warrior, whence it was called in German towns the Rolandssäule or Rolandsbild, Roland being the symbol of Imperial authority. Such a monument did not exist at Ragusa until the fifteenth century, when Sigismund, King of Hungary, the city’s protector, was elected Emperor of Germany. The Roland column at Ragusa is a square pier in the piazza opposite the church of the Patron Saint, with a statue of a knight in full armour on one side and a flagstaff on top, from which the banner of the Republic floated on grand occasions. The right arm of the figure, from the elbow downwards, served as a standard of measurement for the cloth merchants.[363] From the platform on the summit political orations and funeral discourses were held and public announcements proclaimed. In 1825 the monument was upset by a terrific hurricane, and among its foundations a brass plate was discovered with the following inscription:—

MCCC....III . DE . MAGGIO . FATTO . NEL . TEMPO . DI . PAPA . MAR TINO . V . E . NEL . TEMPO . DEL . SIGNOR . NOSTRO . SIGISMONDO . IMPERA TOR . ROMANORVM . ET. SEM(per Augustus) . ET . RE . D’ONGARIA . E . DALMATIA . E . CROATIA . ET . CETERA . FO . MESSA . QVESTA . PIE TRA . ET . STENDARDO . QVI . IN . HONOR . DI . DIO . ET . DI . SANTO . BLA SIO . NOSTRO . GONFALON . LI . OFFICIALI....

Part of the figures of the date are erased, but as Martin V. was Pope from 1417 to 1431, and Sigismund Emperor from 1411 to 1437, the full date should be MCCCCXVIII, or MCCCCXXIII, or MCCCCXX with the III as the day of the month. There is no mention of Sigismund’s title of King of Bohemia, which he assumed in 1419, so that the earlier date seems more probable, according to Professor Gelcich. On the other hand, in this case the day of the month would not be mentioned, and as the year 1420 was that of the end of Hungarian rule in Dalmatia (the Convention of Cattaro was signed on March 8, 1420), it is likely that this column was erected to reconfirm Ragusa’s allegiance to the Hungarian crown, as well as to proclaim its independence from Venice. The date, May 3, may have some connection with the aforementioned festival.

CHAPTER VIII

THE TURKISH CONQUEST (1420-1526)

For the next hundred years Ragusa remains under Hungarian protection, but bound by ties so shadowy that for all practical purposes she may be regarded as an independent State. During this period, however, she feels the weight of Turkish power more and more, and her tribute to the Porte goes on increasing, until it reaches the maximum limit of 12,500 ducats. But in spite of this ever-present danger she continues to grow in wealth, splendour, and importance, and to carry out her mission as a haven of refuge and a bulwark of Christianity and civilisation. She flourishes as a centre of learning and the arts no less than as an emporium of trade, and all the while she remains singularly free from internal troubles and constitutional changes—a unique distinction in that part of the world. She pursues the even tenour of her way undisturbed, conservative, aristocratic, narrow-minded, but on the whole successful and prosperous, and her population contented.

Very different was the condition of the neighbouring Balkan lands. Bosnia was for the present fairly quiet; the Turks had been driven out of the country, and their leader, Isak Beg, defeated in a raid into Hungary, so that King Tvrtko was able to reoccupy Vrhbosna, and Sandalj Hranić recognised his supremacy for the time being. The long civil war in Croatia and Dalmatia between the partisans of Sigismund and those of Ladislas had resulted in the acquisition of the littoral by Venice, and the only prince who remained independent of the Republic was Ivan Nelipić, Count of Četin, Klissa, and Rama. His estates comprised Western Bosnia and some districts of Hlum and Dalmatia. He could not, of course, face the Venetians on the sea, but he managed to hold his own on the mountain ridges.[364] The Venetians and Tvrtko were ready to come to an understanding on this matter, and a war against Nelipić was under discussion when the Turks again invaded Bosnia. There were 4000 Ottomans in the country all through the summer of 1426, and they seized a number of towns and raided Croatia, Usora, and Srebrnica, while King Tvrtko did not dare to do anything against them.[365] The Ragusan colonies in Novobrdo and Priesrinac were besieged by the Turks and in great danger. The Venetians conducted further operations against them in Albania, the Morea, Achaia, and round Salonica. The routes through Albania, Bosnia, and Slavonia were interrupted,[366] and the inland trade at a standstill.

Sandalj Hranić for a moment seemed to appreciate the danger, and after a visit to Ragusa in 1424, made peace with Radosav Paulović, who now seemed ready to sell his share of Canali to Ragusa for 13,000 ducats down and 600 a year. The Republic created him and his son Ragusan nobles, and gave them a palace in the town.[367] But he soon repented of his bargain, and demanded back the territory, with the excuse that the Ragusans were fortifying it contrary to the treaty. The Ragusans refused to evacuate it, and Radosav collected a large force to make war on them. The Republic raised local levies and mercenaries in Italy, Albania, the Narenta Valley, the Kraina, and Hlum. A band of Italian mercenaries was attacked by Radosav at the Pass of Ljuta and forced to retire, and the enemy raided Breno. An Albanian force went to lay waste Radosav’s lands, while a mixed detachment of Ragusans and Albanians, 1800 strong, under Marino Gozze, made for Trebinje; but the Albanians mutinied, Radosav fell on the divided force, and Gozze had great difficulty in retiring to Breno in good order.[368] More troops were levied in Ragusa and 2000 more mercenaries obtained from Albania and Italy, while envoys were sent at the same time to the Hungarian court to protest against Radosav’s conduct, and to request that troops should be sent against him from Usora. The argument was strengthened by the assertion that Radosav was a Bogomil.[369] A little later another request was made to Sigismund that he should instruct the ambassador he was sending to Sultan Murad II. to ask the latter to punish Radosav, who, although an Ottoman vassal, had violated the truce with Hungary by attacking a town under Hungarian protection.[370] This proves that Radosav was already a tributary to the Turks, and also explains why Sandalj and the King of Bosnia feared to help Ragusa against him, although they were on good terms with the Republic. The Hungarian ambassador, however, was not given the instructions suggested, and a Ragusan envoy had to be sent as well. Finally, Sigismund did intervene directly, and formed an alliance with Bosnia, Ragusa, and Sandalj against Radosav, and 70,000 ducats, of which Bosnia was to pay 40,000, Sandalj 20,000, and Ragusa 10,000, were offered to the Sultan for permission to divide up all his territories between them. The Sultan sent a Pasha to make inquiries on the spot, and he confirmed the Republic’s possession of the land it had bought and Radosav raided, and demanded compensation for the damage inflicted.[371] Finally, after endless negotiations at the Sultan’s court at Adrianople[372] an agreement was concluded by which the Republic retained the territory it had purchased, and was to keep the interest of the money invested by Radosav at Ragusa for twelve years as compensation; prisoners were to be released on both sides without ransom; certain special enemies of the Republic were to be exiled from Radosav’s court, and all damage done to Ragusan territory in future by his vojvods was to be paid for by him (1432).

In 1431 the Council of Basel had met, and one of its most active members was Johannes Stoicus of Ragusa, who made every effort to promote the union of the Eastern and the Western Churches, and end the religious strife in the Balkans with a view to common action against the Turks. He requested the Ragusan Senate to try to induce the chief princes of Servia and Bosnia, whether schismatics or Bogomils, to send envoys to Basel. The attempt was actually made, but the whole country was in such a state of anarchy and rebellion that none of them were able to pay any attention to the matter.[373]

A war had broken out between the King of Bosnia and Stephen Lazarević, Despot of Servia, which was destined to last for thirty years. All the Slave princes were fighting amongst themselves, and Ragusa had another opportunity of extending her dominions far into the interior had she been so minded. But according to Resti, the reason why she abstained was that she realised that the Turks had earmarked all that country, and that for her to occupy it would be to court annihilation, and Trebinje, which was now offered to her, was refused. It seemed more prudent to content herself with a small compact territory and with acting the part of intermediary between East and West, civilisation and barbarism, Christianity and Islam, than to aspire to dangerous conquests. The Ragusan despatches for the next few years are full of the Turkish advance. In 1432 Isak Beg invaded Croatia, passing through Bosnia with 3000 men, and raided the territory of Zara, while another army entered Wallachia and Transsilvania, forcing the lord of Wallachia to recognise the Sultan’s supremacy. Two years later, however, the Turks met with a serious check in Albania, where a native force under Arneth Spata defeated the invaders several times; in 1435 Isak Beg himself sustained a reverse, and most of Albania was cleared of the Turks.[374] But the wars amongst the Slaves made organised resistance impossible, and Sandalj Hranić, whose power now extended throughout Hlum to the borders of Croatia in the north, far into the Zedda in the south, and as far as Podrinje in the east, took the opportunity of the war between the King of Bosnia and the Despot of Servia to join the latter in buying of the Sultan the right to despoil the former of his kingdom. The Despot received Usora and Zvornik, while Sandalj was to take the rest.[375] Tvrtko, whose power had been slipping from him, was now forced to fly, and took refuge with Sigismund of Hungary;[376] but the civil war continued. On March 15, 1435, Sandalj died, leaving his broad lands to his nephew, Stephen Vukčić, generally known as Stephen Kosača,[377] who afterwards assumed the title of Duke[378] of St. Sava, because the shrine of that saint was in his dominions. The same year Ivan Nelipić, the last of the independent Croatian counts, died, and his estates were annexed by the Hungarian king and divided among the Ragusan citizens Matthew, Francis, Peter, and John of Talovac (or Thallovez) as a reward for their services to Hungary. Kosača, regardless of the Turkish danger, continued his petty intrigues; he at once began to quarrel with Radosav Paulović, who was in a sense his vassal, and each made a bid for Turkish help. Ragusa attempted to mediate between them and to dissuade them from calling in the enemy, but Kosača asked for and obtained 1500 Turks to reduce Radosav to obedience.[379] In 1438 he invaded the plain of Trebinje, which was under the latter’s jurisdiction, and forced the inhabitants to fly into Ragusan territory. Later he proposed to Peter and Matthew of Talovac to attack Ragusa itself, but they refused, and the Republic on being informed intrigued against the Duke, and told the King of Hungary that he was merely an instrument of the Turks.

In 1436 the Sultan Murad again invaded Bosnia, and captured Vrhbosna, which henceforth became the Turkish headquarters in the country.[380] King Tvrtko now returned with Hungarian help, but he found his whole kingdom devastated, Usora, Srebrnica, and Zvornick held by the Despot of Servia, and the rest by the Turks, or by vojvods who were Turkish vassals. He was therefore forced to agree to pay the Sultan a yearly tribute of 25,000 ducats. The real ruler of Bosnia was now Murad, who alludes to it as part of his own dominions in a privilege granted to the Ragusans in 1442, allowing them to trade “in Romania, Bulgaria, Wallachia, Servia, Albania, Bosnia, and all other lands, places, and cities under my rule.”[381] In 1440 he conquered the whole of Servia with the exception of Belgrad, which was gallantly defended by the Hungarian garrison commanded by the Ragusan Giovanni Luccari. The Sultan retired baffled, but the Despot George was forced to fly, and took refuge at Ragusa with his treasure. The following year the Sultan, Isak Beg, and the Pasha of Romania all sent to demand the surrender of the Despot, offering the Republic his treasure and an increase of territory between Cattaro and the Drina as a bribe. The citizens refused to violate the laws of hospitality,[382] but at the same time, as George was an inconvenient guest, it was hinted to him that he had better leave the city. He agreed, and suggested going to Constantinople; but the Senate dissuaded him from doing so owing to the parlous condition of the Eastern Empire. So he went to Hungary instead on a Ragusan galley.[383] Murad determined to punish the Republic for this refusal, and arrested all the Ragusans in his dominions, the ambassadors themselves escaping with difficulty to Constantinople. He then prepared to attack the city by land and sea, and the citizens strengthened their defences, increased their military forces, enlisted foreign mercenaries, and secured the services of an Italian engineer. The Turkish menace was notified to the Pope and to the King of Bosnia, while at the same time the Senate tried to bribe the Sultan by offering to raise the tribute to 1400 ducats. According to local historians, Murad desisted from his proposals out of admiration for the magnanimity of the citizens in respecting the laws of hospitality; but the real reason is probably to be found in his alarm at the attitude of Hungary, and in the fact that the city’s defences promised a long and difficult siege. In any case Murad was pacified, and in 1443 Ali Beg arrived at Ragusa, and a treaty of peace was signed which returned to the status quo.[384] King Sigismund had been operating against the Turks in various directions, and obtained the loan of some Ragusan ships to transport the Sultan’s rebellious son (or brother) from Segna to Albania.[385] But he was not very successful in any direction, and it seemed as though the end of the Bosnian kingdom were at hand. On his death he was succeeded by Albert, who died soon after, and then the Polish King Ladislas came to the throne, and to the rescue. It is interesting to note that in the embassy sent to him by Tvrtko to ask for help allusion was made to the common origin of the Bosnians and the Poles—an early expression of pan-Slavism.[386] Ladislas was assisted by the famous leader John Hunyadi, who in 1442 defeated the Turks again and again in the Carpathians. In June 1443 Ladislas and Hunyadi, with an army of Hungarians, Serbs, Bosnians, and Bulgarians, invaded the enemy’s country and defeated Murad at the Kunovica Pass near Philippopolis. Peace was signed between Hungary and the Turks soon after, by the terms of which Servia was given back to the Despot George Branković, and Bosnia freed from the invaders, but Stephen Tvrtko died before this was accomplished. He was succeeded by Stephen Thomas, who in September 1444 held a Diet of the Magnates at Kreševo, where the Ragusan envoys came to greet him on his accession. He confirmed the Republic in possession of the Primorije and of Canali, for which he was to receive the Servian tribute of 2000 ipperperi on St. Demetrius’s day, and the Bosnian tribute of 500 on that of San Biagio. This shows that Bosnia was once more the chief South-Slavonic State and had annexed all the western part of the former dominions of the Servian Tsars. Servia itself was little more than a vassal State of the Turks. During the war Ragusa had made gifts and paid tribute to the Sultan to secure immunity for the Ragusan merchants in Turkish territory and obtain the renewal of the privileges. To this the King of Hungary does not seem to have taken much exception.[387]

In the meanwhile Pope Eugene was preparing an international crusade against the Turks, and he also sent a brief to Ragusa, requesting that a contingent of two galleys should be provided by the Republic, as well as the loan of three more, to be paid for by himself, to escort his legate, the Bishop of Corona, which request was granted.[388] Shortly afterwards the Senate informed the King of Hungary that nineteen galleys had touched at Ragusa, viz. eight Papal ships, two Ragusans, five Venetians, and four Burgundians, and that they were now collected at Corfu, while some more Burgundian vessels, and seven from Aragon, were expected at Modone. The land war in the Balkans began badly for the Christians. On November 11 the Hungarians were utterly routed at Varna, in Bulgaria, and King Ladislas was killed. The young Ladislas Posthumus was then elected King of Hungary. One of the Sultan’s first acts after this fight was to raise the Ragusan tribute as a punishment for sending galleys to join the Christian fleet.[389] George, Despot of Servia, with characteristic treachery, had arrested and imprisoned Hunyadi after the Hungarian defeat. The Ragusan envoy, Damiano Giorgi, who had come to Belgrad to return the Despot’s treasure, made every effort to obtain Hunyadi’s release, but as George would not hear reason, he induced the Serbs to liberate him without the Despot’s consent. Giorgi and his family were afterwards taken into the Hungarian service by the new king, Matthew Corvinus, as a reward, and given high emoluments. But they never ceased to work in the interests of their native city by means of their influence at Court. The efforts of Ragusan citizens in foreign countries were among the chief causes by which the Republic attained to and maintained its international position.

In 1447 war between Hungary and the Turks broke out anew, and Hunyadi led an expedition across the Danube, but the following year he was defeated on the ill-omened field of Kossovo. On this, as on other occasions, Ragusa sent a number of boats to Albania to pick up the fugitives who had escaped across country from the fury of the invaders, and sent them back to Hungary or gave them asylum in the town. Peace was concluded, but fighting continued in Albania, and we now find the name of Skanderbeg, the great Albanian hero, mentioned for the first time in the Ragusan annals.

The Senate informed the Hungarian king that the Turks were besieging Kroia, Skanderbeg’s stronghold, with two large guns, one of which could throw balls weighing 400 lbs.; the town, however, was well defended by 1500 men, and Skanderbeg was not far off, ever ready to fall upon the Turks and cut off small detachments and convoys.[390] Ragusa had furnished him both with money and provisions, and he frequently came to the city to refit. He was now successful, raised the siege of Kroia, and expelled the Turks from a large part of the country.

[Illustration: CLOISTER OF THE DOMINICAN MONASTERY]

We must now return to Stephen Kosača, Duke of St. Sava, and his relations with Ragusa. Like so many other Servian princes he was a Bogomil by religion, and when Stephen Thomas, King of Bosnia, abjured that heresy and became a Catholic, many of his Bogomil subjects fled into the Duchy to escape persecution, and others into Turkish territory, while his Orthodox subjects took refuge in Servia. This caused further discords between Bosnia and Servia, and John Hunyadi cannot be exempted from the blame of having induced Stephen Thomas to ill-treat the heretics;[391] in fact he actually quarrelled with the King because the latter relented from his persecutions. The King’s daughter had married Stephen Kosača, who nominally was a vassal of Bosnia, but he hardly recognised his allegiance at all, and styled himself “by the Grace of God Duke of St. Sava, Lord of Hlum and the Littoral, Grand Vojvod of the Bosnian kingdom, Count of the Drina,” &c.[392] Like his predecessor Sandalj Hranić, he was one of the fatal men of the Balkans; although he tried to resist them later, his attitude contributed not a little to the Turkish conquest of the South Slavonic lands. His aim was simply to consolidate and extend his own dominions at the expense of his neighbours, and he availed himself for this purpose of the assistance which the Turks were always only too ready to give. He also proved Ragusa’s most inveterate enemy. In July 1450 he was still on good terms with the Republic,[393] but in 1451 the first dispute arose. The cause, according to Chalcocondylas, and repeated by Razzi, Gondola, and others, was that he had taken to himself a Florentine mistress brought into the country by some Italian merchants, and drove his wife Helen from the Court. She repaired with her son to Ragusa, and the Duke demanded that they should be given up. The Republic refused, and Kosača, out of revenge, raised duties on Ragusan trade, opened salt-markets in the Narenta, reoccupied part of Canali, and laid waste the Republic’s territory. A more likely reason is probably to be found in Kosača’s overmastering ambition. The Republic at once demanded help of the Christian Powers, especially of Hungary, against the heretical Duke, and an envoy was sent to the Pope to complain that many Italians were in his service. His Holiness replied by forbidding all good Catholics from having anything to do with him. Fortunately for Ragusa the King of Bosnia was hostile to Kosača on account of the indignities to which the latter had subjected his wife (the King’s daughter). For the same reason his son Vladislav left Ragusa and raised a rebellion against his father, allying himself with the Republic, to whom he promised to give back Canali as soon as he was master of the Duchy.[394] In December 1451 Ragusa contracted an alliance with Stephen Thomas, who undertook “to declare war without delay and carry it on without interruption against the Duke Stephen Vukčić (Kosača), his government, his cities, and his servants, with all the glorious strength of Our kingdom, with Our servants, and Our friends in open warfare, as is suitable to Our lordship and Our kingdom, provided that no obstacle impede us and no Turkish army attack us.”[395] The Despot of Servia and other minor potentates joined the league against “this perfidious heretic and Patarene.”[396] Ragusa also sent an envoy to Hungary to urge the King to intervene, stating that Kosača was intriguing with the Venetians, the Turks, and the King of Aragon. It was suggested that this was a good moment for Hungarian action, as the Turks were in a state of anarchy in consequence of the death of the Sultan, and that a Hungarian army might now occupy Kodiviet and thus prevent them from ever entering Bosnia again.[397] Hostilities commenced in 1452, and at first Kosača was unlucky, for a number of his barons rose against him and joined Ragusa, and the commander of the league’s forces was his own son. But soon after a civil war broke out in Bosnia. The Herzegovinian nobles fought against the Duke while Kosača was devastating Ragusan territory. At Ragusa’s instance a legate was sent by Pope Nicholas V. to Kosača, who received him amiably, promising to make peace with the Republic and become a Catholic. But this was only to gain time, and as soon as the Turks once more appeared on the frontier and assisted him he again made war on Ragusa, and a Turkish force approached the city, which was now in grave danger. In July 1453 Vladislav expressed a wish to make peace with his father, and the Duke, thus strengthened, again invaded Canali, took Ragusavecchia, and captured a body of Ragusans under Marino Cerva near Bergato. Further details of these operations are wanting, but peace was made at last through the intervention of the Papal legate and of a Turkish Vizir, and signed at Novi, April 10, 1454, confirming the status quo. Kosača promised the Ragusans that he would never attack them again “save by order of the Grand Signior, the Sultan of Turkey, Mehmet Beg” (Mohammed II.).[398] It is thus clear that already the Sultan’s influence in this part of the world was predominant. In 1453 the whole of Europe was shaken to its foundations by the capture of Constantinople by the Turks. This event, however, did not have much direct effect on Bosnia and Hlum, as the Turkish conquest there had already begun. Every month some fresh raid was made, dealing death and destruction, and yet everywhere the invaders found Slavonic princes ready to help them against others who still held out.[399] The first consequence which the fall of Constantinople had on Ragusa was the raising of her tribute to the Sultan to 5000 ducats. The city again became a haven of refuge for fugitives from the territories invaded by the Turks, and many Greeks from Constantinople, including members of the most distinguished families, fled to Ragusa, and remained there for a while. Thus we find some of the Palæologi, Comneni, Lascaris, and Cantaconzeni, and learned men like John Lascaris, Chalcocondylas, Emmanuel Marulus, Theodore Spandukinos, author of a history of the Turks, Paul Tarchaniotes, father of the historian John, and many others. No doubt these men contributed to the revival of learning in Dalmatia, as they did in the Italian towns. The refugees were provided with food, shelter, and money, and were afterwards sent on board Ragusan galleys free of charge to Ancona.[400] The citizens would have been willing that they should settle permanently at Ragusa, but the Senate feared that as many of them were such distinguished men the Sultan might use this as a pretext for aggression. A certain number, however, did remain.

After the capture of Constantinople it was hoped that Mohammed would content himself with being overlord of the remaining Balkan lands not under his direct sway. But he soon evinced more dangerous intentions, and proceeded to establish his complete ascendency, destroying all the independent or semi-independent States. Of these the first to be attacked was Servia, which the Sultan claimed through his stepmother, a Servian princess. The miserable remnant of the great Tsar Dušan’s Empire was reduced to a small part of the present kingdom of Servia. Mohammed’s object was to prepare for the struggle with Hungary, the only Power which he seriously feared, for Genoa was now weak, and Venice’s first thought was “not to recover the bulwark of Christendom from the hands of the Muslim, but to preserve her own commercial privileges under the Infidel ruler.”[401] In 1454 the Turks invaded Servia, captured Ostrovica, and besieged Smederevo (Semendria); but John Hunyadi led an army against them, relieved that stronghold, defeated them at Kruševac, and burnt the fortress of Vidin on the Danube. But the following year Mohammed advanced in person and captured Novobrdo,[402] with its valuable mines, “Totam religionem Christianam libidinoso ambiciosoque animo dicioni suæ ascripsit, flagratque cupidine mundi,” as the Ragusan reports informed the Hungarian king. The Republic suffered ill-effects from this capture, because the Ragusan merchants who had a flourishing trade there were driven out. In July 1456 Mohammed besieged Belgrad, but was defeated by the courage of the defenders aided by the brilliant strategy of Hunyadi. Unfortunately this great leader died soon afterwards, and Hungary was crippled by internal troubles. In 1457 Fra Marino da Siena travelled through Dalmatia to preach a crusade against the Turks and collect money for that purpose. He raised 4000 ducats at Ragusa alone,[403] and the King of Hungary requested the Senate to use its influence to induce him to devote the money to a land crusade, as the danger on that side was more pressing, rather than to a naval expedition. By the end of the year the whole of Servia was subjugated except Belgrad and the Danubian provinces. On the death of Ladislas, Matthew Corvinus, Hunyadi’s son, was elected by the Diet to succeed him (January 1458).

Ragusa, which had been described by King Ladislas as the “scutum confiniorum regni nostri Dalmatiæ,” had been threatened by the Turks in 1455, but not seriously, as they were occupied elsewhere. In 1458 Mohammed again menaced the Republic, and sent Isak Beg into Bosnia to order the vassal princes to capture the city if she did not immediately make submission to him and increase her tribute.[404] Hungarian aid was solicited, and the citizens prepared to defend themselves; but once more the danger was averted, as the Turks had other more pressing matters to attend to.

In 1459 the final conquest of Bosnia was begun. King Stephen Thomas had paid tribute to the Sultan since 1449, and after the fall of Constantinople he had sent envoys to do homage to the victor,[405] but at the same time he was imploring the help of the Pope; this caused much discontent among his Bogomil subjects, who had already shown themselves not unfriendly to the Turks. But after Hunyadi’s victory at Belgrad Stephen was encouraged to further resistance; he refused to pay the tribute, and actually intended to lead a crusade in person.[406] The Pope ordered his legate in Dalmatia to raise funds for him, and enjoined Kosača to help him.[407] Stephen began to attack the Turkish garrisons in Servia, but after taking a few towns he came to terms with the Sultan early in 1458, and paid him a tribute of 9000 ducats. On the death of Lazar, the Despot of Servia, the King of Hungary conferred the despotate on Stephen the Younger, or Tomašević, the Bosnian king’s son, who had married Lazar’s daughter, Helena. Thus Bosnia acquired the Danubian region of Servia, including Semendria. But Mohammed determined to conquer even these districts once for all, and to punish Stephen Thomas for his audacity. The Servians themselves were dissatisfied with their new ruler, because he was a devout Catholic, and they regarded him simply as a Hungarian viceroy. When in June 1459 Mohammed approached Semendria the inhabitants opened their gates to him. Owing to its position at the confluence of the Morava and the Danube it was the key to the whole country, and its fall, which spelt the end of Bosnian rule in Servia, caused consternation throughout Europe. It was attributed by Matthew Corvinus to Stephen Thomas and his son. While this quarrel was going on and the Hungarian king was at war with Germany, the Turkish general, Hassan Pasha, had obliged the King of Bosnia to let him pass through the country with a large army. The next year hostilities broke out between Paul Sperančić, Banus of Croatia, and Stephen Thomas, in the course of which the latter was killed. His son, Stephen Tomašević, succeeded to him, and was the last King of Bosnia (1461).

The country was indeed in a most terrible condition—the Turks threatened it from the south, the Banus of Croatia from the west, and internally the Bogomils were in open revolt and protected by the Duke of St. Sava. The Papal legate managed, however, to bring about a reconciliation between the latter and Stephen Tomašević, who now retired to Jajce. There he collected his magnates around him, and was solemnly crowned, being the first and last Bosnian king who was crowned with the favour of the Catholic Church,[408] styling himself “King of Servia, Hlum, the Littoral, Dalmatia, Croatia, Dolnji-Kralj, the Western Land, Usora, Soli, Prodrinje,” &c. He granted many privileges to the Ragusans, confirmed the Republic in possession of all its territories, and promised to pay his father’s debts towards it.[409] By the end of 1461 he managed to make peace with the Banus of Croatia and his own rebels, and obtained help against the Turks from Venice, Ragusa, and elsewhere. Kosača himself was in danger from the Turks, who only supported him as long as he was of any use to them; he too applied to Ragusa for money and ammunition. Pius II. succeeded after long negotiations in reconciling the King of Hungary and Stephen Tomašević, the latter paying the former a sum of money and giving up a fortress. But in spite of this slightly improved outlook the final ruin was fast approaching. The Bosnian king’s Catholicism had alienated his Bogomil subjects, many of whom had taken refuge among the Turks, while several of the magnates were holding treasonable intercourse with the enemy.

[Illustration: MAP OF THE RAGUSAN REPUBLIC AND NEIGHBOURING STATES.

After the Peace of Carlovitz (1699.)]

The Sultan on hearing of Stephen’s alliance with Hungary sent to demand the tribute, and this being refused he vowed vengeance, but stayed his hand for a short while to attend to other affairs. The despairing King implored help of all his neighbours, and prepared for a last stand. More troops were levied in Bosnia, and envoys were sent to Italy and Croatia to enlist mercenaries.[410] But the support of his people was lacking, and resistance hopeless. Ragusa could not give men, being herself hard pressed, but gave arms and ammunition.[411] Finding himself in desperate straits he sent envoys to Constantinople to offer to pay the tribute once more and ask for a fifteen years’ truce. Mohammed granted this request, fully intending to attack Bosnia at once. The Servian Michael of Ostrovica, who heard the Sultan discussing this treachery, warned the Bosnian ambassadors, but they laughed at him and returned home with the good news. Mohammed then began his northward march with 15,000 horse and countless foot, and let out that he intended to attack Hungary itself, so that Matthew Corvinus should not send help to Bosnia. The army marched through Üsküb to Senice, and an advanced guard under Mohammed Pasha captured Podrinje in Bosnia. The great fortress of Bobovac, which had hitherto resisted all Turkish sieges, was next attacked. It might easily have held out for many months, but the Governor, Knez Radak, a Bogomil who had been converted to Catholicism by force, surrendered it without a struggle. The traitor, however, was beheaded by the Turks, and a large part of the inhabitants made prisoners, including the very envoys who had brought the charter of the truce from Constantinople. The news of the fall of Bobovac caused the most widespread dismay throughout the land, and the Turkish advance was almost unopposed, many of the Bogomil nobles going over to the enemy. In eight days about eighty towns had surrendered. The King fled from Jajce to Kljuć, where he was pursued by Mohammed Pasha and besieged. On a promise that his life would be spared if he surrendered, he gave himself up, and was brought as a prisoner before the Sultan at Jajce, which had also opened its gates to him on the understanding that its inhabitants should be unmolested. The craven King helped to make the conquest all the easier by authorising his governors and officers to surrender (June 1463). The Sultan now wished to complete his conquests by annexing the Herzegovina. Stephen Kosača at first meditated flight to Ragusa, but then determined to hold out for a time, and sent his son, Vladislav, to levy troops on the coast. The Turkish advance through the bare and rocky Karst mountains of the Duchy proved more difficult than was anticipated. Mohammed besieged Blagaj, the Duke’s residence, in vain, captured Kljuć (not the Bosnian town of that name) and Ljubuski, but soon lost them again.[412] A few weeks later he abandoned the scheme and returned to Constantinople. The Bosnian kingdom had collapsed entirely; 100,000 prisoners had been taken, and 30,000 youths enrolled in the corps of Janissaries. The Sultan was in doubt as to what to do with Stephen Tomašević. It was his invariable practice to put the rulers of the lands which he conquered to death, but in this case his lieutenant had pledged the Imperial word that the King should be spared. A learned Persian mufti helped him out of the difficulty by declaring that a safe-conduct given without the Sultan’s direct assent to be invalid, and he himself cut off Stephen’s head. The King’s widow, Mary Helena, fled to Croatia and afterwards to Spalato, accompanied by many magnates, including the Vojvod Ivaniš Vlatković, and eventually died in Hungary. The Queen-mother, Catherine, lingered for a while in the convent of Sutjeska (Herzegovina), until the advance of the Turks forced her to escape by way of Stagno to Ragusa, where she received hospitality and was given a pension of 500 ducats a year. She remained there until 1475, when she retired to a convent in Rome; she died in the Eternal City three years later, and was buried in the church of Ara Cœli.

Countless fugitives from Bosnia now fled to the Dalmatian towns, especially to the ever-hospitable Ragusa, until at last Mohammed’s attention was called by a Franciscan monk to the depopulation of the country, and he was induced to modify his policy of persecution and grant privileges to that Order, which thenceforth ministered to the spiritual needs of the Bosnian Catholics.[413] Religious differences had thus brought about the final ruin of the land, and subjected it to the awful blight of Turkish misrule for over four centuries; but they survived the conquest. The Bogomils gradually dropped into Muhamedanism, which from its purely monotheistic character was less repugnant to them than Catholicism; but a few adhered to their old tenets for a long time, and there were Bogomils in Bosnia and the Herzegovina until sixty or seventy years ago; indeed it is asserted that Bogomil rites are still practised by the Muhamedans of certain villages near Konjica and elsewhere. The Orthodox Church, however, gained large numbers of adherents, and is to-day the most numerous of the three communities in Bosnia and the Herzegovina.

Meanwhile the Ragusans were cowering behind their walls, expecting every moment to hear the tramp of the Turkish legions advancing to overwhelm them. The outworks on the Monte Sergio were strengthened, the churches outside the city and the houses in the suburbs of Pille and Ploće were pulled down, the wells at Ombla, Gravosa, and the neighbourhood poisoned, and the Government was authorised to destroy the aqueduct if necessary. The fortifications of Stagno were improved, and the Count entrusted with the defence of the frontier. All the Ragusan galleys in Dalmatia and elsewhere were recalled to defend the home waters, crossbowmen and rowers were levied in all the islands, a corps of infantry and lances raised in Apulia and placed under the command of Spirito d’Altamura, and a Herzegovinian contingent under Ivaniš Vlatković was formed. A loan of 15,000 ducats was raised to provide for war expenses.[414] During his raid through the Duchy the Sultan came very near to Ragusa, which he had determined to attack in person and occupy, as it would be a most useful port on the Adriatic and a basis for operations against Venice and Italy. While processions and prayers of intercession were being held in the town, a messenger arrived from the Beglerbeg of Rumelia ordering the Republic to do homage to Mohammed. This was done; but the Sultan demanded that the citizens should give up all their territory to him, and that the ambassadors should follow him to Thrace as hostages. The Senate was filled with consternation, as the surrender of the territory would be but a preliminary to the capture of the city itself. But one of the Senators, Serafino Bona, proposed that a reply should be drafted to the effect that while the Republic was ready to give up its territory to the Turks, it would place the city itself under the direct protection of Hungary and admit a Hungarian garrison. This diplomatic answer saved the situation, for the Sultan, who had heard of the great preparations which were being made in Hungary, had no mind to be attacked by the enemy from the south-west as well as from the north. Moreover, his troops were being severely handled in the rocky gorges of the Herzegovina by Kosača and his mountaineers; so he abandoned the enterprise for the time being.[415]

In the south a vigorous resistance was maintained by Skanderbeg,[416] the only Christian leader worthy of the name since the death of Hunyadi. Captured by the Turks when a child and brought up as a Muhamedan in the corps of Janissaries, he distinguished himself by his prowess in the Turkish service. But during the Servian campaign of 1442 he was suddenly inspired with a feeling of duty towards his native country and the faith of his ancestors. He abandoned the Turkish host with 300 followers, obtained possession of the fortress of Kroia by stratagem, and from that day forth maintained in the wild fastnesses of Albania a desperate and successful struggle against the Turks. Only once was he defeated (in 1456); but on countless other occasions he inflicted overwhelming defeats on the enemy, and he came to be regarded as the chief bulwark of Christianity in the Balkans, assuming the title of “Athleta Christianitatis.” In 1444 he summoned a council of Albanian leaders at the Venetian town of Alessio to concert defensive measures. Army after army was hurled against him, only to be repulsed and cut to pieces. After the capture of Constantinople Mohammed sent Hamsa Pasha with 50,000 men into Albania, but he was defeated by Skanderbeg with only 11,000. A few months later the Albanian hero passed through Ragusa on his way to Apulia to obtain help from Alfonso V., King of Naples, and having received promises of a contingent of Neapolitan troops, he returned in disguise to Ragusa, when he was given a ship to go to Redoni in Albania. According to Razzi,[417] the Sultan heard of this visit and raised the Ragusan tribute in consequence. The Neapolitan historian Summonte, on the other hand, states that Skanderbeg himself did not come to Naples on this occasion, but sent three ambassadors. He adds that Albania was then placed under Neapolitan protection. What is certain, however, is that 1000 men and 18 guns were sent from Naples to the Athlete of Christendom. In 1458 Alfonso died, and his son Ferdinand found his succession disputed by John of Anjou, who had the support of most of the barons. He then appealed to Skanderbeg for help, and the chivalrous Albanian, who was not forgetful of past services, being at the time undisturbed by the Turks, crossed over to Apulia in 1459, defeated Ferdinand’s enemies, established the King securely on the throne, and returned to Albania the following year. Ragusa again furnished him with money and arms, recommended his cause to the Pope, and gave him ships for service along the coast and between Albania and Italy. It is probable that all his sea journeys as well as those of his ambassadors were performed on Ragusan ships. He also deposited sums of money in the treasury of the Republic. Between 1460 and 1461 he defeated four Turkish armies of 300,000 or 400,000 men each, and obliged Mohammed to make peace with him. Early in 1462 he again visited Ragusa, where he was greatly honoured by the citizens, and furnished with further supplies of grain, wine, sheep, &c. When, in 1463, Pope Pius II. proclaimed a crusade, Skanderbeg was induced to violate the truce—as indeed Mohammed would have done had it suited him—and joined the expedition. On August 4, 1464, he gained a splendid victory at Ochrida, but twelve days later Pius II. died, and the crusade collapsed, and Skanderbeg found himself alone, exposed to the full fury of the Turks. But he again routed them, and sent envoys to Italy to ask for assistance. Mohammed in person led a large army into Albania and laid siege to Kroia. Skanderbeg remained outside the town, as he had done in the previous siege, with a few thousand warriors, and repeatedly fell upon the enemy, inflicting heavy losses on them. Mohammed, hearing that his northern frontiers were threatened by the King of Hungary, and his Asiatic provinces by the Prince of Caramania, departed from Albania, leaving Balaban Pasha to continue the siege with 19,000 men (he had lost 30,000 already). Skanderbeg himself went to Rome to obtain further help from the Powers. But although he was received with great splendour, he obtained no material assistance save a little money. Venice, however, sent him some troops, and on the death of Balaban Pasha the siege of Kroia was raised. In 1466 the Sultan returned in person with 130,000 men to attack Durazzo and Kroia, but failed in both attempts, and returned discomfited to Constantinople. Further contingents arrived from Venice and Naples, and Skanderbeg summoned another conference of chiefs at Alessio to discuss defensive measures. But on January 17, 1467, the Athlete of Christendom died of fever. The Persian war continued to give the Albanians a short respite, but the end of their independence was not far off. Skanderbeg had not had time to consolidate his country so that it would remain united after his death, and his disappearance was followed by complete anarchy.

[Illustration: THE ORLANDO COLUMN]

In the north the King of Hungary was making desperate efforts to recover Bosnia, and in his operations he received help from Ragusa. A few months after the murder of Stephen Tomašević, Matthew Corvinus invaded Bosnia, and with the help of several of the magnates, including Kosača’s son, Vladislav Vukčić, reconquered Dolnji-Kralj and Usora, with about thirty towns and fortresses, including Jajce, Zvečaj, Banjaluka, Tešanji, and Srebrenik, only Upper Bosnia and Podrinje remaining under the Turks. The King rewarded Vladislav for his services by giving him the counties of Uskoplje and Rama. In the spring of 1464 Mohammed again invaded Bosnia with 30,000 men and besieged Jajce, but was forced to retire. The part of Bosnia now under Hungary was formed into two Banats—Jajce and Srebrenik—and the Governor, Nicholas of Ilok, Vojvod of Transsilvania, was entitled “King of Bosnia,” so as to uphold the Hungarian claims over the whole country. In the south another Hungarian expedition was made in 1465 from the Narenta. The Ragusan Senate ordered a bridge to be built across that river, at the Republic’s expense, near the castle of Počitelj, so as to facilitate the passage of the Hungarian army, and all the necessary materials and workmen were sent there for the purpose. Two Hungarian envoys came to Ragusa to arrange the plan of campaign. The Herzegovina was still ruled by Kosača, but Turkish raids from southern Bosnia were frequent, and it was important to keep the enemy from the Narenta’s mouth.[418] Počitelj, a quaint and picturesque hill town, came to be the centre of a series of operations against the Turks, which lasted until 1470. In 1466 we find the Ragusans giving “4 schopetos parvos, 4 tarassios de minoribus,” 200 lbs. of powder, 1000 beams, and 1000 “clavos” for the defence of Počitelj, and two carpenters, two marangoni, and some boats. Three bombards, building materials, ropes, bullets, provisions, and more firelocks and boats were added later, together with a staff of boat-builders and engineers.[419]

In 1466 Kosača died, having deposited his will at Ragusa. By its terms his estates were divided between his three sons, Stephen, Vladislav, and Vlatko. To the first he also left his crown, some plate and jewels, and 30,000 ducats, to the third 30,000 ducats, to his widow Cecilia 1000 ducats, some plate, brocades, and robes; the rest of his personalty was to be divided equally among his three sons, save 10,000 ducats for his soul.[420] But their possessions were constantly menaced by the Turks, and the youngest brother became a renegade and took the name of Achmed Beg. The other two soon quarrelled among themselves, and each asked for Turkish assistance. In 1469 Hamsa Beg raided Ragusan territory, and an attack on the town was momentarily expected. A second raid was made in 1470, and Postranja and Canali were laid waste, the castle of Soko alone holding out. The Ragusan merchants in Trebinje were also plundered. As Hamsa refused to hear reason, the garrison was increased, the galleys armed, and the moat before the Porta Pile dug.[421] At this time Počitelj was being besieged.

The Ragusans had been trying to induce the Sultan to reduce the tribute from 5000 to 3000 ducats, stating that the constant troubles in Slavonia and Servia had made them very poor. As Mohammed was engaged in the Persian war, his vizirs agreed to the reduction, but when he returned he not only insisted on the remaining 2000 being paid, but raised the sum to 8000.[422] There was nothing for it but to pay, as Turkish karaulas (block-houses) were only two miles from the gates, and an attack was feared at any moment. But it was not paid for nothing, for the Ragusans obtained many new privileges; moreover, the increase was in part due to the fact that the Turks were the successors to various native princes whom they had dispossessed, and to whom the Republic had formerly paid tribute. The Pope renewed the exemption to trade with the Infidel. The one danger was that the Turks should suddenly desire to capture the city, as on more than one occasion they had been on the point of doing. It required all the skilful diplomacy of the Senate to avoid this contingency.

In January 1474 the Turks renewed their incursions into Albania. Skanderbeg on his deathbed had entrusted the task of defending his country to the Venetians, which they, with the help of the Montenegrins and some Albanian tribes, attempted to do. They themselves held various towns on or near the coast, including Scutari, which was now besieged by an immense Turkish army. Among the defenders were several Ragusans, and the Republic was throughout the siege well supplied with news of all the operations. The Turkish leader was Suleiman Beg, a Bosnian renegade, while the Venetians were led by Andrea Loredano, and their allies by Ivan Crnojevnić, a Montenegrin. Hostilities began with the defeat of the Turkish fleet at the mouth of the Boiana by Gritti, but by May the enemy had invested the town. The garrison consisted of only 1300 men, while it contained 700 non-combatants, but it was well provided with arms, ammunition, and food. The besiegers brought up much heavy artillery drawn by camels. The Ragusan Senate was convinced that if Scutari fell it was all up with Albania and Dalmatia, and that even Italy would be in danger. The Turks delivered an attack and effected a breach in the walls; the garrison not wishing to exhaust themselves, waited until the enemy had entered, and then fell upon them with such fury that they drove them back, killing 2000 and wounding an immense number. Suleiman Beg announced this disaster to the Sultan, and then abandoned the siege, having lost 7000 men killed and 14,000 wounded in all. As some Ragusans had taken part in the defence, the Sultan again raised the Republic’s tribute to 10,000 ducats.[423] In 1477 the Turks attacked Kroia, Skanderbeg’s old stronghold, and as the Venetians could not relieve it, it fell, while numerous bodies of Turkish cavalry made inroads into Friuli from Bosnia. The Venetians finally made peace, giving up Scutari and Kroia, and agreeing to pay 10,000 ducats a year for trading rights in the Turkish dominions. They now held only Durazzo, Antivari, and Butrinto, all the rest of Albania being occupied by the enemy.

During these operations Ragusa was more than once in serious danger, and Pope Sixtus V. granted full indulgence to all those who contributed to the defence of the city, whether natives or foreigners. He said of it: “In oculis Turchorum quasi propugnaculum sita existit, maribus satis munita, florenti populo decorata ac armis et aliis instrumentis bellicis abundans, et hominum suorum virilitate parata adversus prædictorum incursus semper existit.” The Sultan, he adds, was planning to attack it with an immense army, and it could not hold out unless other Christians came to its assistance.[424] The city, however, was saved once more by the crushing defeat of the Turkish army by the Hungarians in Transsilvania.

In 1481 Mohammed II. died, and was succeeded by his son Bayazet. Iskender Pasha, Beglerbeg of Servia, then ravaged Dalmatia, with the excuse that on the death of the Sultan all the treaties made by him were invalid unless renewed by his successor. Venice at once sent ambassadors to obtain their renewal, but the negotiations proved difficult, and lasted over a year. Ragusa was more fortunate; all her privileges were confirmed, and the tribute reduced to 3000 ducats.[424] In 1483 Bayazet determined to complete the conquest of the Herzegovina, and sent a large force to invade it under one Gjursević Beg, a Bosnian renegade. This time the task proved easier, as the succession of raids had broken the back of the Herzegovinians’ resistance. Vlatko fled from Castelnuovo to Ragusa, and thence to Hungary. This so incensed the Turks that they again threatened to seize the city, but the Republic appeased them by a gift of 12,500 ducats to the Sultan and 500 to his Ministers as a bribe, while it agreed to pay an additional 100 a year to Aliza, the newly-appointed Sandjakbeg of the Herzegovina. It is said that Aliza had already come to an understanding with the commander of the Hungarian guard in Ragusa to enter the town, but the Senate discovered the plot in time, and had the traitor strangled, together with two accomplices.[425] A Ragusan citizen named G. Niccolò Palmotta was put to death for intriguing with the Turks at Castelnuovo.

With the conquest of the Herzegovina Ragusa’s relations with the Turks became more intimate. The whole of Bosnia, save Jajce and the surrounding district, the Herzegovina, all Albania excepting a few Venetian towns, parts of Croatia, Slavonia, and Hungary were in Turkish hands. Dalmatia as far as the Narenta’s mouth was still Venetian, and so was Cattaro, although a strip of the coast of the Bocche, including Castelnuovo, was held by the Turks. Ragusa’s land frontier was thus encompassed on all sides by the Infidel save in the north, where the marshy delta of the Narenta divided it from Venetian territory. Hungary was weak on her southern border, and much occupied with the German wars in the north; but although Ragusa could hope for little help in that quarter, she kept on good terms with the King, and continued to furnish him with information as to the movements of the enemy, and to pay him the tribute of 500 ducats at irregular intervals. This she did partly for commercial reasons, the Hungarian trade being still important, and partly because she hoped that the cause of Christendom in the Western Balkans might yet triumph under Hungarian auspices.

On the other hand, the old jealousy of Venice was by no means dead, and the Ragusans were suspicious of her every movement, fearing that by a coup de main she might capture the city, and thus unite her Dalmatian possessions with Cattaro and gain an unbroken line of posts all down the Adriatic. That Ragusa’s fears of Venetian hostility were not groundless became manifest the following year. Venice was then at war with Alfonso of Ferrara; the causes of that war offer a curious parallel with those of Venetian hostility towards Ragusa. Like Ragusa, Ferrara was an independent State placed between the main Venetian possessions and an outpost—in this case Ravenna. In addition there were disagreements on account of the salt monopoly and the navigation dues, as in the case of Ragusa. A Venetian flotilla was blockading the entrance to the Po and besieging the city. Some Ragusan galleys happened to be up the river, and were detained by Ippolito d’Este, who utilised them and their crews for the defence. When the Venetian fleet under Angelo Trevisan attempted to sail in it was repulsed by the shore batteries, with the help, it is said, of the Ragusan gunners. The Venetian Government out of revenge issued a decree which greatly hampered Ragusan trade with Venice and her possessions (September 21, 1484). Ragusan residents and merchants were expelled from Venice, and all Ragusan ships forced to pay 100 ducats as anchorage dues, while some of them were seized as compensation for the damage suffered at Ferrara.[426] Other impositions were also levied, and although the dispute was settled soon after, mutual distrust continued as before.

In 1490 Matthew Corvinus died, and the disappearance of that able and warlike monarch caused a recrudescence of Turkish activity in all directions. In 1492 the Republic suffered from the raids of Kosača’s renegade son Achmet. Kosača had left large sums of money at Ragusa in trust for his sons, and Achmet, who had already received his share, now demanded that it should be paid over again, and accused the Republic before the Sultan of having robbed him. Although the Ragusan ambassadors showed Bayazet Achmet’s receipt, the Sultan ordered the Republic to pay 100,000 ducats at once. The new King of Hungary, Ladislas II., promised help, but as it was not forthcoming the Republic had to pay.

In 1499 the city was again in danger of a Turkish attack, and envoys were sent to Hungary to raise a force of mercenaries. The reasons for this hostility, besides the usual desire on the part of the Turks to occupy so excellent a port, were due to the fact that many of the Bosnian and Herzegovinian nobles who had taken refuge at Ragusa frequently made raids into the conquered territory, doing much damage to its new occupants. The Turks also believed that the Ragusans sometimes helped even the Venetians. In fact, the reports of the Ragusan “exploratores” (spies) and traders in all parts of the Ottoman dominions were often transmitted to other Christian potentates besides the King of Hungary. On this occasion the Venetians were informed that the Turkish fleet was to be ready in May, and that bridges were being built across all the rivers in Albania.[427] But apparently the Sultan put off his expedition, and decided to send only four ships to Apulia to fetch the body of Djem.[428] He altered his plans again in June, got ready a large fleet, and concentrated the army at Üsküb. In July the land force had advanced northward to Pirot; by August it had crossed into Albania, and was encamped on the coast opposite Corfu. The fleet left Gallipoli, and artillery was sent to Albania and the Morea.[429]

The last years of the fifteenth century and the first of the sixteenth were marked by plagues and earthquakes at Ragusa. Razzi mentions epidemics of various kinds in 1500, 1503, and 1505, when 1600 persons died; and earthquakes in 1496 and 1504. The Republic’s trade was also harried by the numerous corsairs which infested the Adriatic and the Mediterranean. In 1510 seven Candiot pirate barques captured two Ragusan galleys laden with Ragusan goods worth 30,000 ducats, as well as valuable property belonging to some Florentines; but the stolen goods were recovered through the action of the Venetian Senate. The Sultan of Egypt, who, like other Muhamedan potentates, did not always distinguish between one Christian race and another, detained five Ragusan vessels at Alexandria as a reprisal for the capture of some Moorish ships by the Knights of Rhodes. But the Sultan was pacified, and he returned the ships and granted the Ragusans permission to trade with the East Indies through Egypt and Syria. In 1509 the Republic had availed itself of Venice’s difficulties consequent on the League of Cambrai to obtain the removal of trade restrictions, and it provided Venice with grain and war stores in return.[430] The following year it informed the Venetian Government that the Sultan had made a truce with Hungary in order to wrest Dalmatia from them. In 1512 the Sultan once more raised the tribute from 3000 to 5000 ducats, and threatened the city with an expedition of 500 sail, probably in consequence of the assistance given to Venice; but again the danger passed off.

In 1520 an earthquake, far more severe than any shock hitherto experienced, occurred, and did damage valued at 100,000 ducats in the town, and 50,000 in the neighbourhood. The Monte Bergato seemed about to fall and overwhelm Ragusa, “but the city was saved through the intervention of the San Biagio and of the Blessed Virgin.”[431] Twenty persons were killed and many injured. The little chapel of San Salvatore was erected as a votive offering to express the gratitude of the citizens at the salvation of the town. Six years later a terrible pestilence broke out, and wrought fearful havoc in spite of the precautions taken to isolate the sick. The death-rate was about 100 a day,[432] and in all 164 nobles, 184 monks and nuns, and 20,000 other citizens died. The city was abandoned by all save a guard of soldiers and the crews of two galleys remaining in the port. The Senate held its sittings at Gravosa, and the population only returned after twenty months.[433] Shortly after a pirate fleet of twenty-four sail appeared off Molonta threatening the town. But in spite of the disorganisation caused by the plague the Government was able to fit out a fleet of ten large ships, two galleys, one barque, and eighteen brigantines, under the command of Marino Zamagna, who, with the help of two Venetian ships, drove the pirates out of the Adriatic.

The year 1526 was a momentous one for Christendom. The Turkish wars with Hungary had been going on intermittently for many years, now one side gaining the advantage now the other, but no decisive operations had taken place recently. In Bosnia, the fortress of Jajce became the centre of the fighting, and was again and again besieged by the Turks, who were again and again repulsed with heavy loss. Besides Jajce, the Hungarians held a strip of territory south of the Save, including the fortresses of Zvornik, Szabács, and Belgrad. When Suleiman the Magnificent ascended the throne of Othman in 1520, he determined to seize these strongholds so as to open the way into Hungary. He collected a powerful army, and led it in person into the Banate. Szabács was the first to fall, in 1521; Semlin, Slankamen, Mitrović, Zvornik, Tešanj, and Sokol were next captured, and after a long siege Belgrad was taken by treachery. But the attack on Jajce, which was defended by the gallant Peter Keglević, failed completely. A second attack on Jajce was equally unsuccessful, owing to the arrival of a Croatian force under Frangipani. In 1526 Suleiman again invaded Hungary, and on August 29 the great battle of Mohács was fought, in which the Hungarians were totally defeated and 20,000 of them, including their King, killed. This disaster marks the end of Hungary for the time being. The Sultan conquered all that remained of Bosnia, including Jajce, in 1528, as well as a large part of Croatia and southern Hungary.

Ragusan dependence on Hungary now ceased, and the Republic refused to recognise any claim to allegiance on the part of either John Zapolya, who succeeded to what remained of the kingdom, or of Ferdinand of Austria, the German Emperor. In 1527 Ferdinand wrote to the Senate, requesting them to remain faithful to him as overlord of Hungary, as they had been to his predecessors. But no attention was paid to this demand, and the Republic remained more or less under Turkish protection until its fall.[434] But it obtained from the Turks all the commercial privileges granted by the King of Hungary, and its trade in the latter country flourished under the Crescent as well as under the Cross. After the capture of Buda some Ragusans actually farmed the taxes of the city.[435]

[Illustration: BIRD’S-EYE VIEW OF RAGUSA AND THE NEIGHBOURHOOD

(From an Old Map, 1670)]

CHAPTER IX

TRADE AND INTERNAL CONDITIONS DURING THE HUNGARIAN PERIOD

In spite of Ottoman raids, piracy, plagues, and earthquakes, the Republic prospered exceedingly in every direction. According to Palladius Fuscus, there were three hundred Ragusan merchantmen on the sea, visiting every port. Ragusa was the starting-point for journeys into Turkey, and the ambassadors of foreign Powers passed through the city on their way to Constantinople. Its traders were to be found in every part of the Mediterranean. At the end of the period of Venetian domination, in 1358, we have seen that “marineritia Rhacusii erat amissa.” But after the proclamation of independence it revived and increased to a far greater degree than ever before, and to this the permission granted by the Popes to trade with the Infidel contributed not a little. In 1434 the Bull Cœna Domini, based on the decrees of the Council of Bâle, was issued as follows:—

“To the city of Ragusa, situated on a hard rock, on the coast of the sea and therefore exposed to its ire, and in a most sterile land, wholly devoted to the Church of Rome and ever obedient to her, constantly faithful to the King of Hungary ... is granted permission to navigate with its ships even unto the Holy Land and to the ports of the Infidel, for the purpose of conveying pilgrims thither, and of trading; to maintain consuls, erect churches, and establish cemeteries in those countries.” That Ragusan trade extended as far as England is proved by the letter of Barbarigo, the Venetian ambassador to the Porte, who in 1513 passed through the city on his way to Constantinople. He wrote that in the harbour was a ship which “had come from England laden with 9000 pieces of cloth worth 85,000 ducats, besides tin and various kinds of stuff valued at 13,000 ducats, all belonging to Ragusans; and to-day, the third day, another ship of 5000 botti has departed laden with silks and Zambeloti worth 100,000 ducats, besides 12,000 ducats’ worth of gropi, all belonging to Ragusans and Florentines.” He adds that the wealth of Ragusa was very great and incredible.[436] In 1526 Clement VII. addressed a Brief to the Chancellor and Councillors of the Duchy of Brittany, who had seized a Ragusan ship coming from England laden with English goods, believing it to be English property.[437] Part of the cargo was recovered, but the loss amounted to 70,000 ducats, which caused a number of bankruptcies at Ragusa.[438]

Ragusan trade with the Greeks continued down to the fall of the last Greek despotates in the Morea. In June 1451, only two months before the capture of Constantinople by the Turks, the Republic received a Golden Bull from the Emperor Constantine Palæologus, decreeing that the Ragusans in the capital might build themselves a church and an official residence for the consul whom they elected; if a Greek claimed a debt of a Ragusan he was to appeal to the latter’s consul, while in the inverse case the Ragusan would appeal to the local authorities; Ragusan merchants might import and export goods free of duty save for a 2½ per cent. tax on the sale of imports; there was to be no limit to the number of Ragusans residing at Constantinople; if a Ragusan left the city owing money to natives, none of his compatriots might be arrested in his place. The same year two Silver Bulls of a similar character were issued to the Ragusans by Thomas Palæologus, Despot of Achaia, at Misithia, and by his brother Demetrius, Despot of the Peloponnesus, at Chiarenza. The treaties were negotiated by Volzo Bobali, who in 1451 made a journey through the remnants of the Greek Empire to improve commercial relations with his own city; but they were merely the renewal of old-established connections, for since the fourteenth century Ragusan traders had brought the famed silks of Chiarenza to Ancona[439] and Italy. In the treaty with Ancona of 1372 allusion is made to the Ragusan trade in spices, sugar, and silks from Tartary and “Gazaria,” which shows the wide extent of the city’s sea-borne trade.

At the same time, as we have seen, the Republic’s relations with the Turks and the Egyptians were by no means unfriendly, and every opportunity was seized to ensure a good understanding with the Court of Brusa and afterwards of Adrianople. The Turkish trade was chiefly carried overland, especially after the establishment of the Ottomans in Europe, and Ragusa’s friendly relations with the Slave princes gave her easy access to the Balkan trade-routes, and therefore an advantage over her Italian rivals. After the conquest of the Slave States by the Turks the Ragusans were granted the fullest privileges, although they were liable as before to attacks from brigands and arbitrary impositions on the part of the Pashas and Sandjakbegs. Some of their old settlements in the Balkans were destroyed, but others arose in their place. Of the older towns, only Belgrad maintained its former importance under the new rulers. But now Vrnbosna (Sarajevo, Bosna Serai in Turkish) arose, founded, it is said, before the invasion by Ragusan merchants. Instead of Novobrdo we find Novibazar and Prokopje (Prokuplje), Skoplje (Üsküb), Sofia, Travnik, and Mostar. In all these towns there were wealthy Ragusan colonies, each with its church and its consul. Some were found even at the mouths of the Danube.[440] The inland trade in Turkish times was carried on by caravan as before, and along the same routes. Turkish guard-houses were only two miles from the town, but the traffic became more active in the sixteenth century than it had ever been previously. Benedetto Ramberti, Venetian ambassador to the Porte, gives an interesting account of the journey from Venice to Constantinople via Ragusa in his Libri Tre delle Cose dei Turchi.[441] He took exactly one month to go from Venice to Ragusa, owing to the bora and the scirocco, which drove the ship back continually and forced her to remain in various ports for several days at a time. From Ragusa it took him thirty-four days to reach the Turkish capital, by the following stages:—

February 8th.—From Ragusa to Trebinje, 16 miles, by “a very bad and dangerous road, over steep and precipitous mountains, which we had to ascend more on foot than on horseback.... All this country formerly belonged to the Duke Stephen Herzeg, father of the young Herzeg who is now in Venice; it has become quite Turkish, and is under the Sandjak of the Duchy.”

February 10th.—Reached Rudine, 20 miles, passing by the castle of Cluaz (or Klobuk), then partly in ruins. On the 11th Curita (Korito) was reached, 28 miles, and on the 12th he passed Cervice (Cernica) and then on to Verba, 25 miles.

February 13th.—Priedio, 24 miles. “We passed through a mountainous gorge, on each side of which is a small castle, one of them in ruins, the other still in good repair, called Vratar.[442] Here Duke Stephen kept a guard-house, where all travellers had to pay a toll. The castles are built into the living rock; they are reached by a road by which only one person at a time can pass, and could easily be defended by twenty men against a whole army.”

February 14th.—Orach, 28 miles, passing through Cozza (Foča), “a large settlement with good houses in the Turkish style, many shops and merchants. Here resides the Sandjak of the Duchy, who has all Servia under his authority. By this spot all goods going from Ragusa to Constantinople must pass, as also those from Constantinople to Ragusa. No horse worth over 1000 aspers (20 ducats) is allowed to cross the river, but if any traveller brings one he must either spend more in bribes than the horse itself is worth, or sell it for what it will fetch.”

February 15th.—The first guard-house on the Kovaz Mountain, 25 miles.

February 16th.—Plevlje, 34 miles, “which is not an unattractive place for this country. Here five years ago a caravan of Venetian merchants of about one hundred horses was attacked by evil persons, who killed and wounded many, two Venetian nobles, Nani and Cappello, being among the dead. Watch against the brigands is kept in the following manner: one man from the village goes through the woods beating a drum and looking out to see if any person is lurking about, and this sound informs travellers that the passage is secure. The villages which provide these watchmen are free of taxes.”

February 17th.—Priepolje, 24 miles. “Here and at Plevlje, which are both very large and pleasant towns for this country, the people are all Christians;[443] but in the house where we lodged we found a woman with seven children, the eldest of whom had turned Turk (Muhamedan), and this because the Sultan Selim, wishing to increase the number of Turks, imposed a heavy poll-tax, called the Talotz, on all the Christians, but he exempted those families who made one of their sons a Turk. This induced many to free themselves thus from the tax; but the Sultan did not carry out the whole of his promise, and maintained the Talotz on all save those who actually turned Turks themselves.”

February 18th.—“Reached Vuatz, 32 miles, passing by St. Sava, where there is a very large monastery of Servian caloyers, who dress and live in the Greek fashion, but speak Slavonic. They show to travellers the body of St. Sava, which is still in a perfect state of preservation. They receive more alms from the Turks and the Jews than from the Christians.[444] At the mount of the Morlak (Molatschidi) ends the Sandjak of Servia and that of Bosnia begins, in which is Senice.”

February 19th.—Novibazar, 40 miles, “a very large and celebrated market-place, full of merchants and shops, both Turkish and Christian, some of them Ragusans. Close by flows a beautiful clear stream, which enters the Morava shortly after.”

February 20th.—Ibar, 16 miles, near the “Mountain of Silver, which should be the Mons Rhodopus.”

February 21st.—Statoria, 25 miles, which was reached by passing over the Mountain of Silver, “very high and difficult to climb, especially in winter, when it is covered with snow. On the summit is a road, a braccio and a half wide, by which one passes not without danger from the precipice.”

February 22nd.—Suatza, 25 miles. “We crossed the broad Toplitza, which is a plateau covered with little hillocks and surrounded by high mountains; but the country is agreeable, and produces delicious wines and much grain. The village of Toplitza is not only pleasant and beautiful, but fertile and well provided with all the necessaries of life. Here we begin to breathe again after the long travail and danger of the past journey.”

February 23rd.— Buovaga reached after passing through Nissa (Niš), “which was once a city, but is now reduced to a fair-sized village in the Turkish style.”

February 24th.—Clissariza, in Bulgaria, 28 miles, which is here separated from Servia by Mount Cunovizza.

February 25th.—Zaribrod, 28 miles (the present Servo-Bulgarian frontier), passing through Pirot, “formerly a walled castle built in the ancient style of very large blocks of stone.”

February 26th.—Bellizza, 25 miles, in the fertile plain of Sofia.

February 27th.—Sofia,[445] 15 miles. Here there are many Ragusan merchants and Jews, but the inhabitants are mostly Turks.

March 1st, 1534.—Vacarevo, 28 miles, reached after riding all day across a treeless plain.

March 2nd.—Vieterno, 28 miles.

March 3rd.—Celopinci, 32 miles, after passing Bazarcich (Tatar Bazarjik).

March 4th.—Cognuzza, after passing Philippopolis. “We still see the remains of the walls, which are in part entire and fine. There is a very long wooden bridge across the Maritza, which flows close by, consisting of over thirty arches. Under these many branches of the river pass.”

March 6th.—Chiudegegnibustraman (?).

March 7th.—Adrianople, 22 miles. “We crossed the bridge of Mostaffa Bassa (Mustafa Pasha) over the Maritza. It is very fine and wide, and has twenty arches, all of marble, with a gilded slab in the middle, on which are inscribed in blue Turkish letters the date, the names of the architect and the builder, and the cost.”

March 8th.—Sugutli, 20 miles.

March 10th.—Bergas.

March 11th.—Chiorlich.

March 12th.—Chiumbergasti.

March 13th.—Cocchiucchemeghi, 20 miles.

March 14th.—Constantinople, 12 miles. “On arriving here we felt as though we had issued out of Hell, for the whole country from Ragusa until within a few miles of Constantinople is for the most part uncultivated and horrible, not by nature, but by the negligence of the inhabitants, full of terrible forests and dangerous precipices, very unsafe on account of the brigands, very wretched as to accommodation, so that it is a fine thing to have been through it, but very strange and difficult while actually on the journey.” These words are applicable to this day to a large part of the country traversed, and will continue to be a true description so long as the Turks hold sway over it.

Caterino Zen, another Venetian ambassador to Constantinople, travelled through the Balkans by the Spalato route in 1550, employing fifty-two days between Spalato and the Turkish capital, of which three were spent at Novibazar and six at Sofia. He adds that without baggage the journey may be accomplished in one month, and from Ragusa in twenty-five days, while the Vlach runners do it in fifteen. An anonymous traveller describes the route from Ragusa to Constantinople via Dulcigno, San Sergio on the Boiana, Prizren, the plain of Kossovo, Üsküb, Tatarbaric, Philippopolis, and Adrianople, which he accomplished in forty-five days.

Trade with Italy continued to develop and expand on the same lines as before, and late in the fourteenth century direct intercourse with Florence was established. In 1406 the Florentine Government declared that the Ragusans had brought so much silver to Florence (from the Balkan mines) “that we have almost purchased Pisa with it.”[446] In 1429 a five years’ treaty between the two Republics was concluded, the Ragusans agreeing to bring gold, silver, skins, wax, and other Balkan produce to Florence in exchange for Italian wares.[447] Relations were maintained owing to the frequent visits of the Florentine ambassadors on their way to Constantinople, and many Florentine merchants resided in the town. Apparently the Pazzi family had property there, and after the famous conspiracy the Florentine Government desired to confiscate it. In 1479 an envoy was sent to Constantinople to obtain the extradition of one of Giuliano dei Medici’s murderers; he was instructed to stop at Ragusa on the way to get a guide who knew Turkey “persona pratica in Turchia.”[448] In 1495 mention is made of the appointment of a Florentine consul and magistrate at Ragusa, while in 1514 the Ragusan Lorenzo Ragni (Ragnina?) held office as magistrate and Councillor of Justice in Florence.[449] Various other Christian Powers made use of Ragusa for their relations with the Turks, and even Francis I. of France is said to have had recourse to a member of the Gozze family in his negotiations with the Sultan.[450]

[Illustration: ENVIRONS OF RAGUSA.]

Until the fifteenth century the vessels built on the territory of the Republic were small and chiefly used for the coastwise traffic, all foreign trade being carried on ships purchased from other Dalmatian towns or from Italy. Now, however, these sources of supply were found to be inadequate, and in 1525 the Senate decided to build a new shipping yard at Gravosa. This was completed the following year, and was a very admirable and elaborate establishment for the age. At the same time the docks at Slano, Isola di Mezzo, and elsewhere, which belonged to private persons, were enlarged and improved. But even these measures were insufficient for the ever-increasing business, and more ships were purchased at Curzola and at Messina.[451]

The harbour and wharfing accommodation were enlarged. Work of this kind had been partially accomplished in 1468 under the direction of the Florentine architect Niccolò di Pasquale;[452] further improvements were executed by Mastro Stazio in 1473, and in the following year dredging operations in the port were commenced. In 1475 the quays were enlarged, and warehouses for grain erected. The whole port was rebuilt on a larger scale between 1484 and 1500 by another Florentine, Pasquale di Michele. This same architect also planned the warehouses for goods coming from the interior. When the Republic received formal permission to trade with the Infidel the existing fondico was enlarged in 1432 and 1442. The discovery of the Cape route and the intrigues of the Venetians caused a temporary stagnation of Ragusan trade, but it soon revived, and on June 28, 1515, the Senate decreed “de providendo pro uno fontico spacioso in quo omnia mercimonia possint fonticari.”

Although internal industry never attained to the importance of the Republic’s foreign commerce, it was at this time fairly active. Manufacturers and traders together constituted (in 1514) no less than twenty-one guilds.[453] In 1348 the merchants formed themselves into the Guild of St. Anthony, which in the sixteenth century became so large that those of its members who dealt exclusively with the Eastern trade seceded from it and formed the Guild of St. Lazarus, or “Scuola dei Mercanti di Levante.” These two guilds comprised all the richest persons in the city, and came in time to constitute a separate privileged caste, whose members alone had the right to call themselves citizens, and were the inferiors of the nobles alone. The other lay guilds were: the Pentori, painters, with 19 members; the Callegari, or makers of leather slippers for the neighbouring Turkish provinces, with 146 members; the Pellizzai, or furriers, with 60 members; the Tessatori, or weavers of cloth, founded in 1491, after one Andrea Pantella of Florence had introduced the industry from Italy in 1416, and in 1514 it had 137 members. There were in addition many other guilds in other parts of the Republic’s territory, while a number of other industries, such as the goldsmiths, the tanners, the shipbuilders, the dyers, &c., were not represented by guilds at all.

Professor Gelcich quotes the opinions of a number of foreign writers on Ragusan trade in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The Abate Denina wrote: “The Ragusans were ever a nation of merchants and traffickers, and are well satisfied to do what the Neapolitans have failed to do, monopolising the export trade of the Kingdom (of Naples), and visiting with their ships all parts of the Mediterranean.” Luca de Linda wrote: “The Ragusans have put on the sea a number of large vessels both for war and for traffic, and on them have travelled as far as the New World. Among other enterprises they served the Catholic King with many ships but a short time since in the expedition against the Gerbi, and with forty vessels in the conquest of Portugal.” Amalthæus in a letter to a friend advises him to settle at Ragusa, as there were in that city many opportunities of becoming rich by trade, for there was much active traffic with the West, and the most industrious nations of Europe, such as the French, the Spaniards, the English, the Flemings, and even the Germans had established colonies there.

The above-mentioned writer, Benedetto Ramberti, gives a curious description of Ragusa as it appeared to him in 1533. Being a Venetian his account is somewhat contemptuous and not altogether flattering. “It is well populated,” he writes, “and in a beautiful situation by the sea, on the Dalmatian mainland. It possesses a small harbour and a very small mole.... It is exposed to winds and earthquakes, and is exceedingly cold in winter. The women are not very handsome, and dress very badly, or rather they wear clothes which suit them ill. They have on their heads a long linen covering, which in the case of noblewomen is of white silk and shaped like a pyramid, and thin stockings turned down to their shins. They rarely leave the house, but are much at the window. The young girls are never seen. The women nearly all use the Slavonic language, but the men speak Italian as well.[454] In the city are many fountains of excellent water brought from the hills. About a mile from the gates is a spot called Gravosa, which is a row of houses a mile in length, well built and attractive, with gardens full of oranges, lemons, citrons, and fruit-trees of various kinds, beautifully adorned with fountains fed by aqueducts.... The sea here forms a pleasant harbour large enough to contain a hundred galleys with ease. The Ragusans are usually rich and avaricious, like most merchant folk. They all buy wine in retail, and timber according to certain ordinances of their own. Friends and relations seldom if ever dine together. They think only of making money, and they are so proud that they think there is no other nobility than their own,[455] but I do not say that of all, for I have known some who were very urbane and courteous. And they deserve, indeed, much praise, for being placed in a most narrow and rocky situation they have obtained access to every commodity by means of their own virtue and industry alone, in despite of nature.... They pay tribute to the Sultan, to whom they send orators (ambassadors) every year with 12,000 ducats. The city is not very strong, especially on the land side towards the mountains, and as it is not well provided with walls and fosses it could be defeated.”[456]

CHAPTER X

RAGUSA INDEPENDENT OF HUNGARY (1526-1667)

The period between the establishment of the Turks in Bosnia and the fall of the Venetian Republic is one of great interest for the whole of Dalmatia. “In these events,” writes an anonymous author in the Annuario Dalmatico,[457] “every village has its part, almost every family its glorious record. And if on the one hand we still find the traces, I may almost say the smoking ruins, of the desolation wrought upon us by the Turkish armies; on the other we find many memories of the valour of the Dalmatians in the trophies of the families, in the rank of nobility obtained as a reward for incredible sacrifices, in the letters of commendation, even in certain religious festivals, and in a large part of those customs which time has rendered sacred to the heart of our people, and most of us observe scrupulously, without perhaps understanding their meaning.”

At the same time Turks and Christians through familiarity became less hostile, and did much business together. “Once the massacre was over the Turks spent much money, and thus after Castelnuovo had been captured, plundered, and 4000 Christians murdered, it became a source of great wealth to the Ragusans and to the people of Perasto. That is the reason why so many Jews from Spain settled on the Turkish shores of the Adriatic, especially at Castelnuovo.... Turkish customs spread among the Dalmatians, even as regards their clothes and their jewels and their harems. Stolivo and the Catena (Bocche di Cattaro) were regular slave marts; women led a retired life like those of the East.” Ragusa was especially affected by Turkish influence, owing to her semi-dependent position and her close intercourse with her powerful neighbour, and this led to many complications with Venice and other Christian States.

The first years after the cessation of the Hungarian protectorate were again disturbed by a quarrel with the Venetians. Some of the grain ships bringing foodstuffs to Ragusa were captured by Venetian cruisers in the Adriatic, as the Government of the great Republic accused its small but enterprising rival of playing a double game. The Ragusans, wishing to retaliate, thought that they could not do better than by tampering with the Venetian despatches. The Senate did not exactly authorise these proceedings, but the Archbishop Trivulzio, a Milanese,[458] who was very friendly to France and therefore hostile to Venice and Spain, had the messenger carrying letters to the Venetian Provveditore at Cattaro seized. The papers, which contained the announcement of an alliance against the Sultan, were at once forwarded to the French ambassador at Constantinople.[459] The Venetians were furious, and threatened vengeance on the Ragusans, in spite of the Senate’s protestations that the Archbishop had acted entirely on his own responsibility. They were partially appeased by the arrest and punishment of one Pozza, who had actually executed the Archbishop’s orders, but Venetian ships continued to harry the Ragusan coast for some time, inflicting much damage.[460] This same year (1538) the Pope Paul III., as head of the Christian League against the Turks, issued a decree, probably inspired by the Venetians, hostile to the Ragusans, forbidding all Christians to sell them arms, gunpowder, cables, ship-timber, iron, &c., because they were supposed to sell these articles to the Turks. He also ordered the Republic to shake off all allegiance to the Sultan, to cease to pay him tribute, and to join the League against the Infidel at once, contributing five galleys and 10,000 ducats to the common war chest. The citizens were filled with consternation at these peremptory commands, but the Senate sent one of its cleverest diplomatists, Clemente Ragnina, to Rome, and he proved equal to the emergency. Ragusa, he informed His Holiness, was situated between the Turks and the sea, and would, if she joined the League, be the first to fall a victim to the wrath of the Infidel. Owing, moreover, to the small extent of her territory, she was dependent for three-quarters of the year on foreign grain, which came mostly from the Turkish provinces; she could not, therefore, exist without intercourse with her neighbours. The only result of Ragusa’s joining the alliance would be the destruction of the city, with her churches, her convents and monasteries, and all her precious sacred relics would fall into the hands of the Infidel, without any advantage accruing to Christendom thereby. The astute Ragnina hinted that the Venetians were merely urging the Pope to take measures against Ragusa out of jealousy. These arguments had the desired effect, the Pope relenting towards the Republic and exempting it from joining the League, to the great satisfaction both of the Government and the citizens. There is no doubt that their position was always a very risky one, and it required all their diplomatic tact to save them from ruin. They were literally between the devil and the deep sea, but they always managed to steer a clear course between the many dangers which beset them.

But although they were on good terms with the Sultan, there was also danger to be apprehended from the turbulent Pashas and Sandjakbegs of Bosnia and the Herzegovina. Many of these men were the descendants of the lawless native princelings who had gone over to Islam, and still maintained their old ambition to win their way to the seaboard. The whole country of Dalmatia was now threatened. Clissa, Poljica, and even Montenegro had to pay tribute to the Turks after 1515. In 1522 Knin, the chief Croat fortress in the country, surrendered to the Pasha of Bosnia, and Scardona was also occupied. Sinj, Vrlika, Nučak, and Clissa fell in 1536, and the castles of Vrana and Nadin in 1538. The Turkish fortress of Castelnuovo was captured by the Venetians and Spaniards in that year, but in 1539 it was attacked by the pirate Haireddin Barbarossa and recaptured, the Spanish garrison being put to the sword. It is said that some Ragusan vessels took part in the siege, thus contributing to the success of the Turks, and that the Republic sent presents to Barbarossa so as to induce him to respect their territory. There now remained no part of Dalmatia under a Christian Government except the Venetian coast towns and the Ragusan State. On the whole, the Republic found the Turks in some ways less objectionable neighbours than the Christian Powers, especially the Venetians. In 1538 the allied fleet under the command of Grimani, the Venetian Patriarch, sailed down the Adriatic and touched at the Isola di Mezzo; a part of the squadron proceeded to Ragusavecchia, where it was received with great honour by the citizens, but some vessels remained at the island and sacked it, took 170 prisoners, including the Count, and did much damage to property. The Ragusan Senate protested to the Patriarch, who had all the prisoners liberated, the stolen property restored, and compensation paid. A certain number of Ragusans were detained as rowers, but at good salaries, and thirteen Ragusan ships were pressed into the Spanish service. The fleet then sailed southwards, and encountered the Turks off Prevesa; the engagement proved undecisive, but the honours of the day remained with the Turks. It was then proposed to attack Castelnuovo. The Venetian and Pontifical admirals objected, and suggested that Ragusa should be attacked instead, as she had shown herself so friendly to the enemy. But Doria, the Genoese admiral, and Don Ferrante Gonzaga refused to make war on a Christian city, and the Castelnuovo plan was adhered to. Thirteen thousand troops and 22 guns were disembarked, and an assault delivered by land and sea. The walls were soon battered down, and the town captured, the Sandjakbeg escaping with 200 horse. One hundred Ragusans fell in the attack. The Republic sent envoys to the Christian force with provisions, and requested the leaders not to invade Ragusan territory. This was promised, but nevertheless a Spanish column which was raiding the country round Castelnuovo also sacked Canali, carrying off 17,000 head of cattle, outraging many women, “and generally behaving worse than the Turks.” The Republic protested against these proceedings, and Doria, with whom it was on friendly terms, sent the engineer Mastro Antonio Ferramolino of Bergamo to Ragusa to strengthen the fortifications of the town. Under his supervision the Torre Menze or Minćeta, the bastion outside the walls under the Monte Bergato to guard the harbour, and the town gate close by were built. On the latter the following inscription was placed:

“Este procul sævi: nullum hæc per sæcula Martem Castra timent sancti, quæ fovet aura senis.”

Ferramolino remained four months at Ragusa, and refused all payment for his services; but the Senate presented him on his departure with a gift of plate and a fine horse, and conveyed him to Sicily on a Ragusan galley.[461]

The following year Barbarossa determined to recapture Castelnuovo, which was defended by 4000 picked Spanish troops and 54 guns. A first attempt from the land side in January failed; but in July Barbarossa entered the Bocche with 200 galleys, and after a series of engagements succeeded in landing an army and 84 guns. The Ragusans sent envoys to him with presents, and, it is said, ships and ammunition, in recognition of which he strictly respected the Republic’s territory. On August 7 an assault was delivered, and the first line of defence broken; on the 10th a second took place, and the Governor, Don Francisco Sarmiento, surrendered with his few survivors. According to Razzi[462] they were all put to the sword; but Professor Stanley Lane Poole says that the capitulation was honourably respected.[463] Three thousand Spaniards fell in the siege and 8000 Turks (50,000, according to Razzi).

Ragusan trade was now in a somewhat depressed condition owing to these various disturbances. Many Ragusan ships in the Spanish service had been lost in the expedition to Algiers,[464] and the pirates under Dragut Reis wrought much havoc among their ships elsewhere. While the Emperor Ferdinand was invading the Hungarian provinces occupied by the Turks, the Ragusan factories there suffered considerably; and the land trade was disturbed by the depredations of the Sandjakbeg of the Herzegovina. In 1544 the bankruptcies at Ragusa amounted to 80,000 ducats.[465] In 1545 peace was made between the Sultan and the Christian Powers, and the former issued severe injunctions to the Algerine corsairs not to molest ships flying the Ragusan flag. In the somewhat quieter period which followed, there was a partial revival of the city’s trade, which now extended to America by means of the favour of Spain. But in 1566 Suleiman the Magnificent died, and his successor, Selim the Drunkard, at once began to cast covetous eyes on Cyprus, instigated, it is said, by a Jew named Nassi, who had given him a glowing description of the Cyprian vintages.[466] War between the Turks and the Christian Powers was again imminent, and Ragusa began to fear that she might get into difficulties with either of the belligerents. She therefore applied to the Grand Duke of Tuscany, with whom she was then on excellent terms,[467] and he recommended them to the King of Spain on the plea that if their trade failed so would the greater part of their income cease, and they would be unable to pay the tribute to the Sultan. The latter would seize on this as a pretext for occupying the city, to the great detriment of Christendom.[468] The plea was successful, and, moreover, the same year Pius V. renewed the exemption to trade with the Infidel, because the city “in faucis infidelium et loco admodum periculoso sita est.” Ragusa now acted once more as intermediary between Christian and Turk, and obtained the liberation of many Venetians and Dalmatian prisoners captured by the Turkish pirate Ali-el-Uluj, or Occhiali as the Christians called him.[469] In spite of the citizens’ not altogether undeserved reputation for double-dealing, they were also true to their better reputation for hospitality. Their hospitality towards the Papal admiral Marc’ Antonio Colonna and the Venetian general Sforza Pallavicini, who were shipwrecked on the Ragusan coast in 1570, won them the gratitude of the Pope and of Venice.[470] Francesco Tron, who was pursued by Turkish corsairs, took refuge in the harbour of Gravosa, and in spite of the threats of the pirate commander the Senate refused to give him up. Finally they bought off the cousin with a sum of money, but he sacked the monastery of Lacroma. Complaints were sent to Constantinople, and the Sultan delivered up the pirate Karakosia to the Ragusan Government to do what it pleased with him; but it was deemed best to set him at liberty with a warning. It was justified in its clemency, for in future none of his ships ever harmed a Ragusan. Venetian intrigues again threatened the Republic’s independence, and during the negotiations for a new Christian League it required all the diplomatic skill and eloquence of Francesco Gondola, the Ragusan ambassador in Rome, to save the city from destruction. In a despatch to the Senate, dated April 1, 1570, he wrote as follows:—

“This war gives food for reflection to the thoughtful, especially with regard to the State of Ragusa, considering the capital malignity of the Venetians against us; it is recorded and confirmed that at the war of Castelnuovo in 1539 they tried to induce Andrea Doria, general of the Emperor (Charles V.), to capture Ragusa before aught else; and they were so keen on this proposal, that they only gave way when Doria opposed an absolute refusal. He informed them that the Emperor had expressly recommended the said Republic to him, and enjoined him to protect it and guard it in the same manner as the cities of his own kingdom of Naples.... Upon these words the Venetians abandoned their project; but it is believed that our country may suffer much, and that this war will not end without many tribulations.” On April 8 he added: “The Emperor’s ambassador in Rome has been informed from Venice that the Senate has determined to place a garrison in Ragusa, so that the Turks may not occupy the city; and that if the Republic refuses to admit it, they have decided to seize it by force, which means that they wish to capture the town with the excuse of preventing the Turks from doing so, in order that Christendom may not be shocked (‘perchè la Christianità non strilli’).” The Spanish and Imperial ambassadors took the side of the Ragusans, and the Pope also favoured them, the Venetian representative alone declaring that “it was right that the League should not only burn the city of Ragusa, but raze it to the ground and destroy its people, so that their seed should not be found anywhere.”

On June 27 he wrote as follows:—

“I have been to His Holiness, who had requested that your Lordships should provide him not with one ship, as Cardinal Rusticucci had said, but with many, so that he may transport his troops on them. I replied that on the previous evening Cardinal Rusticucci had spoken to me in his name, and added that I had written to your Lordships ... and that you hoped that as His Holiness had liberated you from so many troubles in the past, he would take care that you are preserved, nor will he permit that his many benefits to you be turned to your ruin. I informed him how, after the Maltese war, Piali had come with his fleet to Ragusa and threatened your Lordships because some of your vessels had been with the Spanish fleet, and swore that if a similar offence were again committed he would come to your destruction.” The Pope was convinced by these arguments and withdrew his demand for a Ragusan contingent, and made the other allied Powers realise the Republic’s danger. Venice alone remained obdurate, and continued to repeat “ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.” She believed that the only way of saving Ragusa from all danger on the part of the Turks was to occupy the town herself.

On June 28 Gondola suggested that the Senate should send an ambassador to the King of Spain requesting him, in memory of their ancient fidelity to his predecessors, to place the Republic officially under his own protection, because although the Pope was friendly, he was old and in bad health, and if he were to die the Venetians might seize the opportunity to molest the city. This advice was followed, and in the treaty of alliance the little Republic received the joint protection of Christendom, a clause being inserted in it to the effect that “no acts of hostility are to be committed against Ragusa and its territory, the Pope for weighty reasons having so decreed.” Thus by her successful diplomacy Ragusa was under the ægis of seven different Powers—Spain, the Papacy, the Empire, Venice, Hungary, the Turks, and the Barbary Deys—whence its citizens earned the sobriquet of “Le Sette Bandiere” (the Seven Standards); and although subsequently they often were in difficulties with some of their protectors, they could always play the one off against the other. This was the secret of their long-continued independence.

[Illustration: FORTE SAN LORENZO]

Although the Republic remained officially neutral in the war of Lepanto, numbers of Ragusan merchants and adventurers took advantage of it to make their own fortunes, many of them obtaining contracts for transporting troops, or hiring out their ships and crews. During the early part of the war Ragusan shipping suffered some damage, being plundered now by the Turks and now by the Christians, in spite of the treaty of protection; and as it was even feared that the city itself might be in danger, it was decided to strengthen the fortifications. An addition had been made to them in 1550-1558, when the large Forte San Giovanni was built; while the port was enlarged and improved with a new pier called the Diga delle Casse, constructed under the superintendence of Pasquale da Nola. In 1570 the Tower of Santa Margherita was begun by Sigismondo Hier;[471] and soon after Saporoso Matteucci, one of Piero Strozzi’s ablest pupils, was appointed commander of the garrison and director of fortifications. Santa Margherita was the last building erected from the foundations; subsequent additions were merely restorations, and the defences of the city have remained practically unaltered since that time.[472]

The following year the battle of Lepanto was fought, in which the Turkish fleet was completely defeated. From this moment the decline of the Ottoman power may be said to begin. It is asserted that Ragusan galleys were found on both sides in this fight. Afterwards the city became the meeting-place for the Christian and Turkish commanders to arrange for the exchange of prisoners and the preliminaries of peace. Numbers of illustrious foreigners from all countries filled the town, and according to Appendini, sixty noble Christian captives were exchanged for an equal number of Turkish officers. But the Republic’s equivocal attitude during the war caused trouble with the Sandjakbeg of the Herzegovina, who in 1572 made various raids into the territory, laying waste some districts and carrying off many captives. Turkish pirates landed at Meleda and massacred all the monks, save those who took refuge in the caves.[473] At last, in 1573, a general peace was concluded, much to the disgust of the Venetians, who saw that in spite of the victory over the Turks it was not properly followed up, and the enemy was allowed to recuperate. Ragusa, however, was delighted, for the peace removed her dangers from both quarters. But even this spell of quiet was destined to be short-lived, and now began a series of calamities culminating in the great earthquake of 1667, which brought about the gradual decline of the Republic.

The Reformation had some slight effect at Ragusa about this time, and during the archbishopric of Crisostomo Calvino (the name is a curious coincidence) some preachers were permitted to censure the loose morals of the clergy and even advocate changes in the statutes of the Church. But the movement was short-lived, and the Senate had the books of the Ragusan Matteo Flacco (born in 1520), who was suspected of heresy, burnt by the public executioner. After the death of Crisostomo in 1575 the Jesuits, who had made their first appearance in 1559 as missionaries, established themselves permanently and set up a college and a church. Thus all traces of Protestantism were stamped out.

A new disturbance was now caused by the Uskoks, a gang of Christian pirates. Originally these men were refugees from the lands occupied by the Turks. Many, as we have seen, settled at Ragusa and in other Dalmatian towns; but wherever they were they revenged themselves on the usurpers by raiding their territory, plundering their caravans, and keeping up a constant guerilla warfare on the frontiers. Clissa became their chief stronghold, whence they conducted operations against the Infidel; but when, in 1537, the Turks besieged and captured it, the Uskoks were forced to fly once more. The Emperor Ferdinand gave them a refuge at Segna (Zengg) in the Quarnero, a town protected on the land side by impassable mountains and forests. From Segna they continued their raids into Turkish territory, and also began operations by sea. The place soon became a refuge for outlaws of all nations, and the Uskoks ended by becoming as notorious pirates as the Narentans had been of old. They were always a trouble to the Ragusans, sometimes because they captured their galleys, and sometimes because by attacking the Turks they involved the Republic in difficulties with the Porte, who accused it of protecting the freebooters because they were Christians. In 1577 numbers of them were still hanging about in the Dalmatian mountains, and made raids as far as Trebinje, while others from Segna harried Turkish merchantmen. They professed to regard the Ragusans as vassals of the Sultan, and plundered their ships too; but the latter were able to give as hard knocks as they received, and in one encounter killed one of the Uskok leaders. Peace was restored through the mediation of Austria under whose protection the Uskoks were. But the Turks persisted in regarding the Ragusans as the accomplices of the pirates, and again the Sandjakbeg threatened to lay waste their territory. On the land side the Republic was vulnerable, while on the sea her shipping had suffered heavily in the Spanish wars. The incident ended in the Ragusans bribing the enemy into a more reasonable attitude.

In 1602 the inhabitants of the island of Lagosta revolted against Ragusan authority, because they complained that their ancient liberties guaranteed to them in the act of submission had been violated. The Ragusan count was driven out, and the islanders raised the banner of St. Mark and asked to be placed under Venetian protection. This was accorded, and a Venetian garrison landed on the island. Long negotiations ensued, and at last Lagosta was given back to Ragusa, but on very onerous conditions.[474]

In 1617-18 Ragusa was involved in the quarrels between Venice and Spain, which culminated in the famous Spanish conspiracy. The Venetians had been carrying on operations against the Uskoks since the end of the sixteenth century. The Provveditore Tiepolo took and destroyed Scrissa (on the site of the modern Carlopago) and hanged all the garrison. On his death he was succeeded in the command by Bembo, who, with a fleet of fifteen galleys and thirty long barques, manned by 800 soldiers, blockaded Trieste and Fiume, so as to bring pressure to bear on the Archduke of Austria. He also shut up 700 Uskoks in the harbour of Rogoznica. But on a stormy night they managed to escape, and Bembo, weary and disgusted, resigned his commission. His successor, Giustiniani, did some damage to the freebooters, and negotiations between Venice and Austria were commenced with a view to putting an end to their depredations. But nothing came of the discussions, and the Uskoks’ sack of Trebinje nearly involved Venice as well as Ragusa in a new Turkish war. In 1614 the Uskoks waylaid the Venetian Cristoforo Venier on his ship at Pago, murdered the officers and crew, and carried Venier himself to Segna, where they cut off his head and banqueted with it on the table, dipping their bread in his blood. Austria did nothing, and the pirates made fresh raids into Istria and the Venetian islands. The Venetians bombarded and captured Novi, and war broke out with Austria, which lasted until the Peace of Madrid in 1617. By this treaty Venice, Austria, and Spain bound themselves to remove the Uskoks to the interior of Croatia. A Venetian squadron sailed down the Adriatic, and with the pretext of capturing the Uskok galleys, anchored in the harbour of Gravosa, and blockaded Ragusa itself, which was defended by Marino Vodopić with a small body of Hungarian mercenaries. The Duke of Ossuna, the Spanish Viceroy of Naples, undertook the protection of Spain’s old ally, and sent a squadron up the Adriatic with the object of attacking Venice and co-operating in the Bedmar conspiracy. The plot was discovered and the fleet failed in its main object, but it succeeded in forcing the Venetians to abandon Gravosa. This, however, caused the Turks to accuse the Ragusans of having allied themselves with Spain to the detriment of the Ottoman Empire. At the same time certain persons whispered accusations of double-dealing against the Ragusans in the Spanish court itself. Venice nursed a resentment against the Ragusans for having been on good terms with Spain at the time of the conspiracy, and indulged in a “policy of pin-pricks” towards the little Republic. The latter also suffered annoyances from the Pashas of Bosnia, who were always imposing extortionate duties on Ragusan goods, and arresting Ragusan merchants as they passed through the country. These turbulent viceroys had to be pacified with presents and heavy bribes. When in 1647 the war of Candia broke out between the Venetians and the Turks, Ragusa feared that she too would be involved in the conflict, and appealed to the Pope for protection. But this time she succeeded in maintaining a neutral attitude without being molested, the Sultan’s plan for concentrating his troops at Ragusa for an invasion of Dalmatia having been luckily abandoned.

During the quieter period after 1631 the Ragusans turned their attention once more to the development of their commerce, but they discovered that the conditions were entirely changed from what they were a hundred, or even fifty, years previously. The whole of the Atlantic and East Indian trade was divided between the English and the Dutch, and such of the Mediterranean trade as was not also in their hands was in those of the Venetians. The Ragusan merchant navy had been for the most part lost in the service of Spain or captured by pirates, and a large proportion of their seamen killed in battle or drowned. Their shipping was therefore reduced to little more than a few coasting vessels, and the Republic’s only resource was now the land trade with Bosnia and the Herzegovina. But that too was less brisk than it used to be, as the general trade of the Balkans was tending more and more to follow the Budapest, Belgrad, and Sofia highway to Constantinople instead of the Adriatic routes. Decadence was setting in throughout Dalmatia, and the halcyon days of the Republic of Ragusa had passed away. The Italian trade now consisted of little more than the transport of grain necessary for the feeding of the inhabitants, and the Italian colony was very small. Few families from Italy, or even from other parts of Dalmatia and the Herzegovina, came to settle at Ragusa as heretofore. The old families were declining in wealth and activity, while a few newer ones from the neighbourhood monopolised the little trade that survived. On the other hand, luxury increased, public and private festivities became more frequent and more magnificent, so as to hide the symptoms of decadence, and the old accumulations of wealth were gradually squandered away. The old social distinctions, however, were kept up with even greater strictness, and the hereditary nobility continued to remain absolutely separate from all meaner mortals. The arts, too, languished, and no more fine buildings arose. The decline of Ragusa bears a striking similarity to that of Venice.

In 1667 a calamity befell the city which for a brief space made the name of Ragusa ring throughout the civilised world. As I have said, the citizens had had a foretaste of it in the small earthquake shocks which from time to time occurred; the most formidable of them had been that of 1520. But the worst was now to come. On Wednesday, April 6, 1667, in the early morning, when most of the inhabitants had either just risen or were attending early Mass in the churches, “there came from below ground a horrible and dreadful earthquake, which in a few moments destroyed the Rector’s Palace, the Rector himself (Ghetaldi) being killed, and all the other palaces, churches, monasteries, and houses in the city, everything being subverted, and there was much loss of life; the havoc was increased by the huge rocks which fell from the mountains; thus the city became a heap of stones. At the same time, a wind having arisen, misfortune was heaped upon misfortune, and flames burst forth naturally from the timber fallen from the ruins into the kitchen fires; the fire lasted several days, causing much suffering to the few survivors of this horrible disaster. These are not more than 600, besides 25 nobles, and it was a sad sight to see these people, most of them injured, wandering about almost beside themselves with despair in the ruined streets, imploring pity and pardon from the Lord God for their sins. Moreover, the Castle rock was seen to burst open and close again twice, and the waters of the sea sank back four times. Even the wells dried up completely. The land fort remained untouched, the sea fort, the dogana (custom house), and the lazaret were partially damaged, but can be repaired in a short time. Many, moved by compassion at hearing the lamentable cries of those buried among the ruins, struggled to remove the rubbish of stones and timber with which they were covered, and found some still alive, although they had been three, four, and even five days in that terrible condition.”[475]

[Illustration: GARDEN NEAR RAGUSA]

Another misfortune was added to these by the depredations of the neighbouring peasants and Morlachs who came pouring into the town, and it is said that even some of the citizens took part in the plunder, profiting by the wild confusion. According to Professor Gelcich, the fire was caused by incendiaries with the same purpose.[476] A large part of the Cathedral treasury was looted, and many of the sacred relics disappeared, although some of them were subsequently recovered. That the plundering was not more general was due to the efforts of two patriotic nobles, Biagio Caboga and Michele Bosdari, who armed bodies of their own peasantry and retainers, and kept watch over the ruined churches and public buildings. There was a regular battle between a few nobles and their suites and a horde of freebooters for the possession of the treasury. The latter were finally beaten off, and the State coffers and archives saved. The relics and the remains of the Cathedral treasure were removed to a chapel in the Dominican monastery, which was bricked up, only a barred window being left open so that the people might assure themselves of their existence and worship them.[477] The State treasure was removed to the Leverone fort, where the surviving nobles gathered together and constituted a provisional Government of twelve Senators. The situation appeared hopeless. “The city,” wrote the Abate Bosdari, “was so completely buried in the stones and rubbish of the ruined houses that every one gave up all idea of ever making it habitable again. The stench from the burnt or decaying corpses was so overpowering that it caused many people to suffer from nausea; and no one dared venture to the spot where he had lost his property, his relatives, and almost his own life, especially as other slight earthquake shocks were felt from time to time. Wherefore many of the most influential personages declared it to be necessary to change the site of the town, and they proposed that of Lapad as being the most convenient. This opinion was supported by the attractiveness of the position, its proximity to a harbour capable of sheltering many fleets, and the pure and more open air, and it would obviate the necessity of spending large sums in removing the rubbish.”[478]

Ragusa was not alone in her calamity; many places in the immediate neighbourhood had suffered considerably. The houses and churches of the Isola di Mezzo were all in ruins, as may be seen to this day, and many of the inhabitants were killed.[479] Stagno too was much damaged, and in the rest of Dalmatia the earthquake was equally severe. At Cattaro, according to Professor Gelcich, the ruin was even more widespread than at Ragusa itself.

In the meanwhile the news of this disaster had spread all over Europe, and help began to arrive from various quarters. The Empire, France, Spain, and several of the Italian States sent contributions in money, building materials, and men to help clear away the ruins. The Pope was the first in the field, and sent a body of troops to maintain order, and Giulio Cerruti, the engineer of Castel Sant’ Angelo.[480] The latter was sent to report on the advisability of transferring the population and the seat of the Government to Gravosa, but although he declared that that spot was very suitable, the majority of the survivors were still too much attached to their old home, ruined as it was, to desire to settle elsewhere. The proposal was dropped, and in fact, when the citizens came to take stock of the situation, they found that things were not quite so hopeless as they had at first appeared. Some five thousand people had been killed, but there must have been more survivors than the 625 mentioned by the anonymous author of the Relatione, if we accept Razzi’s estimate of the population at 30,000 in 1578. It may have decreased to some extent during the ensuing ninety years, but even in 1667 it must have been much more than 5600.[481] The damage done to the buildings was less than might have been expected. It is true that the Venetian Provveditore of Cattaro, who happened to be at Gravosa at the time, wrote that “with the exception of the public granary, the dogana, the fortifications, and the lazarets, all the buildings, both public and private, including the Palace, the churches, and the monasteries, were ruined and destroyed”; while Vitale Andriasci stated that “nothing of the city remained standing but the fortresses and the circuit of the walls, which were injured in many places, and a few dismantled houses.” But these writers were probably excited by the awful spectacle and fell into exaggeration. The Duomo was so greatly damaged that it was necessary to rebuild it from the foundations. The upper story of the Rector’s Palace was severely, but not hopelessly, injured. The church of San Biagio suffered considerably, but survived until destroyed by fire forty years later. The Dominican and Franciscan monasteries, including their towers, remained almost intact; while the Sponza, the clock-tower, the churches of St. Nicholas, the Ascension, St. Luke, the Saviour, the Annunciation, the granaries, the lazarets, &c., were in no worse condition. Of the private dwellings, those in the Stradone all fell down, and were rebuilt later; but many of those on the slopes of the Monte Sergio survived, as is proved by the numbers of fragments of Venetian Gothic which may be seen to this day. The general aspect of Ragusa is thus fortunately still what it was before the calamity.

The work of rebuilding the city on its ancient site was at once commenced, and the damages repaired. The Republic survived the earthquake for nearly 150 years more, and although it was not the Ragusa of the sixteenth century, it enjoyed intervals of revived prosperity, and even of political importance, from time to time. But the days for city-republics were gone for ever, and the existence of Ragusa during the eighteenth century can only be regarded as a relic of the past.

CHAPTER XI

RAGUSAN SHIPS AND SEAMEN IN THE SERVICE OF SPAIN

The great Spanish Empire of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries offered a wide field of maritime activity to the more enterprising spirits of Ragusa, of which they were not slow to avail themselves. The Dalmatians of other towns were under Venetian rule, and therefore precluded to a great extent from these expeditions; but the Ragusans, although their Government from time to time issued decrees forbidding them to serve under foreign flags, so as to avoid international complications, continued to do so, the prohibition being more honoured in the breach than in the observance. Throughout the seventeenth century we find Ragusan ships, manned by Ragusan officers and crews, taking part in all the Spanish naval expeditions. These active adventurers, whether serving in the war fleets of Spain or on board its merchant ships, usually succeeded in accumulating large fortunes; some of them came back to Ragusa to enjoy them, while others remained in Spain and rose to high positions at the court of His Catholic Majesty. But even these did not forget the land of their fathers, and utilised their influence in the Spanish king’s councils for its advantage, by obtaining favourable commercial treaties and valuable protection, which stood it in good stead in times of danger. On the other hand, the heavy losses endured in the many unsuccessful enterprises of Spain were a severe drain on Ragusa’s resources, and ended by ruining her commerce.

There were a whole series of merchant-adventurers, whose wandering, seafaring lives form a picturesque chapter in the history of Ragusa. One of the most remarkable of them was Michele Prazzatto, a native of the Isola di Mezzo. Like most of his fellow-islanders, he devoted himself at an early age to commerce; but his first two ventures failed, and his ships foundered. He was thinking of giving up trade in despair, “but a lizard that he saw trying to climb up a wall taught him the lesson of Robert Bruce’s spider. Like the lizard, having failed twice, he succeeded in a third venture, and rose rapidly to wealth.”[482] He served Charles V. with his galleys, and brought large cargoes of grain to Spain in a time of famine. The Emperor appreciated his services, and treated him with friendly familiarity. According to a local tradition, on one occasion Prazzatto was assisting at Charles’s toilet, and on being asked what reward he wanted for his services, replied: “I am rich enough not to desire wealth; I am king on board my own carracks, and have no need for honours; I am a citizen of Ragusa, and desire no titles; but, as a memento of your favour, you may give me this shaving towel.” The request was granted, and the towel is religiously preserved to this day in the parish priest’s house at Isola di Mezzo. At his death Prazzatto left his whole fortune, amounting to 200,000 ducats, to the Republic, which rewarded his munificence by placing his statue in the courtyard of the Rector’s Palace—the only public monument ever erected to a citizen of Ragusa. The fame of Charles V. and of his exploits, owing to the part which Ragusa took in them, are a living memory to this day.

Another distinguished family of Ragusan mariners was that of Ivelja Ohmučević, Count of Tuhelj. The Ohmučevići were among the earliest exiles from the Herzegovina, who took refuge at Ragusa at the time of the Turkish conquest, and were granted lands at Slano. They at once began to devote themselves to maritime affairs, and in 1540 and 1541 the Republic hired their ships to transport grain from Italy. Their house at Slano was a miniature court, and fitted up with every luxury and elegance. It was a haven of refuge, where hospitality was dispensed to all sailors or voyagers who entered Slano harbour to escape from the tempest or from the pirates. Thus the Greek prince Alexius Comnenus, after having been defeated by the corsair Karakosha, put in at Slano and repaired his ships in Ivelja’s docks in 1569. He eventually settled there, and married into the Count’s family. Ivelja’s sons all entered the Spanish service, in which they greatly distinguished themselves. The most famous of them was Don Pietro d’Ivelja Ohmučević-Grgurić, who took part in the expedition to Portugal in 1580, where it is said that forty Ragusan vessels were lost, and in 1582 he commanded some Ragusan ships in the expedition to the Azores, under the Marquis de Santa Cruz. Later he raised a force against the pirate Passareto, who was eventually killed. He fitted out a fleet of twelve ships, known as the “Twelve Apostles,” for the service of Spain, manned by 3200 Ragusans and other Dalmatians, at a cost of 190,000 ducats.[483] This squadron took part in an expedition to the Indies and in the Invincible Armada. One of the ships, the Annunciation, was commanded by Count Peter’s brother-in-law, the Almirante Don Estevan de Olisti-Tasovčić, “a very brave youth, of high spirits and beautiful manners,”[484] who behaved with conspicuous gallantry in the Armada. “Finding himself separated from the body of the Spanish fleet, he was bombarded by the enemies’ batteries, and escaped out of the range of their fire with difficulty, and in such a terrible plight that he was in danger of foundering, and unable to repair the damages. The Duke of Medina-Sidonia, grasping the situation, at once sent two pataches[485] to the rescue, so as to save at least the crew. Don Estevan made for the Irish coast near Limerick, and succeeded in transferring his men from the doomed galleon to the pataches under a heavy fire. He then burnt his ship, to prevent her falling into the hands of the English, and sailed away to Santander, which he reached without the loss of a single man.[486] Afterwards he joined Count Peter at Cape Finisterre with a new galleon, which he had fitted out at his own expense, so as to complete the “Twelve Apostles.” When Count Peter died he left the fleet as an inheritance to the King of Spain. But the vessels foundered soon after, and Don Estevan was sent to Terceira with another squadron. This, too, came to a similar end, and sank with all hands in a sudden Atlantic storm.

Count Peter’s other son, Don Jorge d’Olisti-Tasovčić, served under Francisco de Mendoza in various expeditions to Tunis and elsewhere. With his brother Estevan he provisioned Naples during the famine of 1592-94—a risky operation owing to the perpetual raids of the pirates. After various encounters with the latter he fell in with a fleet of them of a hundred sail, commanded by one Cicola, in the Straits of Messina during a calm. After a very severe engagement, overwhelmed by numbers, he was forced to surrender, and sent as a prisoner to Constantinople, losing his three galleons, valued at 80,000 ducats, and their cargo valued at 20,000. He remained in captivity for three years, until he managed to raise the 3000 scudi required as his ransom, and returned to Spain a ruined man. But the King gave him a new command, and a pension of 40 scudi a month. He served with distinction with the Levant fleet on the coasts of Anatolia and of Albania in 1605-6, and later with the Western fleet. He died, loaded with honours, in 1625.

Another member of this family, Don Juan d’Olisti-Diničić-Tasovčić, was equally conspicuous, and fought under Stephen and George, and then under Don Luiz Faxardo in the attack on the coast of the Sea of Marmara (1614). He subsequently commanded twenty-six galleys in Catalonia, fought with the corsairs, and was appointed Captain-General of the Neapolitan Vice-regal fleet in 1639.

With the death of Count Peter in 1599 the male line of the Counts of Tuhelj became extinct, but some years previously he had arranged a match between his daughter Aurelia and Andrea Ohmučević-Grgurić, of the cadet branch of the family, also a captain in the Spanish service. The marriage did not take place until 1617. Andrea’s brothers were all sea-dogs in the Spanish service. One of them, Don Pedro, led a successful expedition to Brazil, and was afterwards appointed Spanish consul at Ragusa (1623-1631). Don Pablo, after knocking about in various parts of the world, ended his life in retirement at the family place at Slano. Don Andrea himself served Spain for fifty-seven years, commanding various fleets, and was created Spanish Admiral of the Neapolitan fleet, which position he held during the Masaniello rebellion. In 1614 the Tuhelj estates in the Herzegovina, which after the Turkish conquest had been confiscated and then restored to the family on payment of a tribute, were once more confiscated on account of the part which its members had played in the Spanish wars against the Turks. Don Andrea tried in vain to obtain redress from the Pasha of the Herzegovina, and then appealed to the King of Hungary, who in two rescripts of 1650 and 1654 recognised Don Andrea’s rights and those of his heirs, but there was no hope of enforcing them until the country should again be under the rule of a Christian Power; 224 more years were to elapse before this consummation came to pass!

[Illustration: ISOLA DI MEZZO]

Owing to the annoyances and prohibitions imposed by the Venetians, all the more enterprising Ragusan captains gradually abandoned the Adriatic, and extended their operations to the Mediterranean and the Atlantic. Another of the great seafaring families was that of the Mašibradi. Girolamo Mašibradi was the founder of its fortunes, but his first ventures, like those of Prazzatto, proved unsuccessful, and he was surprised and captured by a fleet of twenty-two pirate galleys from Rhodes, and sent as a slave to Scio. But he was soon ransomed, and with his brothers ended by accumulating great wealth. He was eventually appointed Captain-General of Spain, and granted a salary of 2400 scudi a year. His brother Nicholas was in the Spanish service for many years, and was created Marquis and Knight of St. James of Compostella, and granted a large pension. Other Ragusan families attained to eminence, such as the Martolossi, the Bune (Bona), &c. All this brought riches to the citizens, but, on the other hand, it denuded the city of both ships and men. Gradually all the Ragusans who were not in the Spanish service sold their vessels, notwithstanding the laws forbidding these sales. The number of new ships built at Ragusa decreased to an alarming extent, and soon even the Spanish merchant navy began to decline owing to English and Dutch competition. Don Andrea, Count of Tuhelj, Admiral of Naples, made a series of proposals with the object of reviving the shipping and the trade of Spain and its vassal States, especially Ragusa. In a letter to the Senate of that city, dated March 4, 1634,[487] he mentions the fact that there had been at one time from 70 to 80 large ships of 1000 to 5000 salme flying the banner of St. Blaise, manned by 5000 sailors, “employed in traffic throughout the Adriatic and the Mediterranean, voyaging even unto Lisbon, Flanders, and England. These vessels were well armed with artillery and ammunition, and manned by excellent officers and crews who were ever ready to withstand any enemy attempting to molest them. The assurance that the ships were so good and so well armed, and that the seamen were so brave and trustworthy, induced all European merchants to employ them for the transport of their goods. They were consequently almost always making voyages, and the profits were so large that not only were they kept in good repair, but new vessels were constantly built, and the full number was thus maintained. Ragusa increased in wealth, in honour, and in population, for the Republic was greatly esteemed by the princes and potentates of the world. But in consequence of the recent truce concluded by His Catholic Majesty with the Netherlands, Michael Waez, Count of Mola, was able to introduce Dutch ships into the Mediterranean and the Adriatic for the purposes of commerce, and these vessels, not being exposed to the attacks of the Turks, the Moors, the English, and the other enemies of Spain, were under no necessity of defending themselves. They were therefore able to sail with small crews at small expense, and charge lower freights. Wherefore most of Ragusan ships began to fall into disrepair and were not renovated.... The only remedy for this woeful decline is that His Catholic Majesty, in the interests and for the maintenance of this most excellent Republic and of his own vassals, should grant to all those who build large ships special exemptions and privileges throughout his kingdoms of Spain, Naples, Sicily, and Sardinia, and that preference should be given to those designed for the transport of grain, salt, wool, and other similar goods.”

The Dutch now almost monopolised the carrying trade of the Mediterranean, and it became cheaper not only to obtain northern products, but even the spices of the East from Amsterdam, where they arrived by the Cape route, than directly overland and distributed by Italian or Dalmatian ships. Neither Spain nor Ragusa paid attention to his proposals, and both allowed the fatal decay to continue. But still the Ragusans continued to distinguish themselves in the Spanish service, especially the members of the Tuhelj family. One of them, Don Antonio, when he heard of the terrible earthquake at Ragusa, gave up his brilliant career in Spain and came to the help of his distressed fatherland. He was subsequently sent as Ragusan envoy on a number of diplomatic missions. His branch of the family finally entered the Austrian service, and received high emoluments from the Emperor Leopold. The reason of these favours lies in the fact that the Tuhelj still claimed their ancestral estates at Castelnuovo, Risano in the Herzegovina, and at Kastoria in Macedonia, and were therefore likely to prove useful in the Austrian campaigns against the Turks. Don Antonio Damiano, in fact, served for five years in the frontier wars, and ended his military career after a severe wound at the battle of Dervent in Bosnia (September 5, 1688). He was then appointed Imperial Resident at Ragusa, and devoted himself to the cause of the emancipation of Bosnia and the Herzegovina from the Turkish yoke. He visited those provinces repeatedly, and when he himself could no longer travel he arranged an elaborate system of secret information. In 1701 he was created Knight of Justice and Commissary-General of the Order of St. George, the object of which was to redeem Christian lands from the Infidel, and he took up his residence in Vienna to prepare his plan. But in his old age he retired to Ragusa once more, and spent his last days in studying the city archives, reconstructing the history of his own family. He too tried to revive the practice of inducing his countrymen to enter the Spanish service, and wished to enrol numbers of experienced Ragusan officers and sailors to man the navies of Spain, saying that they were far better fighters than the Neapolitans. “Ten Ragusans,” he wrote, “are worth more than a hundred Lazzaroni.”[488] But it was now too late, and decadence had gone too far. The large number of Ragusan vessels lost in the service of Spain discouraged the citizens, while the population and wealth of Ragusa was greatly reduced by the earthquake. The Republic was now suffering from the vexatious attitude of the Venetians and the Turks, who were conspiring together for the destruction of the last “Antemurale Christianitatis” in the Balkan peninsula, and the citizens actually proposed to ask for a Spanish-Neapolitan “Governatore delle Armi.” Don Antonio’s scheme having fallen through, he returned to his historical studies, and collected a mass of more or less unreliable information, chiefly culled from local traditions and native historians.

CHAPTER XII

FROM THE EARTHQUAKE TO THE NAPOLEONIC WARS (1667-1797)

Of all the Ragusan aristocracy, in whom the whole power of the Republic was vested, only twenty-five adult males survived this terrible calamity, and not all of these were eligible for the highest offices. They organised themselves into a provisional Government, and after some demur decided to ennoble eleven burgher families and receive them into their order. They did not, however, grant them full privileges nor admit them to all the offices, and this exclusion subsequently led to internal difficulties. The question of depopulation was now a serious one. According to Coleti, 600 Orthodox Christian families from the neighbouring districts applied to the Senate for permission to settle in Ragusa to fill up the gaps, and offered to pay 2500 ducats each to the State treasury. But even the earthquake had failed to make the Republic more tolerant of schismatics, and permission was refused.[489]

Very slowly Ragusa rose from her ruins, and the work of rebuilding began. Help came to the stricken city from all parts of Christendom. The church of the patron saint was the first edifice to be repaired, and then the Sponza, the chief source of the Republic’s revenues. But it was a very different Ragusa to that which existed before the earthquake. The merchant navy, save for a few coasting vessels, had now disappeared, and with it the sea-borne trade, while the land trade was also reduced.

On September 29, 1669, after one of the most memorable and heroic sieges in history, lasting twenty-five years, the Venetian garrison at Candia surrendered to the Turks. For this irreparable loss Venice obtained some poor compensation in Dalmatia, viz. Clissa, Novigrad, and a few other towns. The Venetians tried to improve their Dalmatian trade at the expense of Ragusa by inducing the Porte to direct the Bosnian caravans towards Spalato and Castelnuovo instead of to Ragusa and Stagno. The Turks, although their power was on the wane, had become more arrogant than ever after the conquest of Candia. Kara Mustafa, who was Grand Vizier, a fanatical hater of Christians, took it into his head to make an end of Ragusa, and as a pretext blamed the citizens for having resisted the bands of armed marauders from the Herzegovina who had come into the town to plunder after the earthquake, and accused them of having sold goods to the Turks during the late war at famine prices. As a punishment he raised the tribute and demanded in addition 146,000 ducats, threatening to annex the Republic in case of non-compliance. The Ragusans in vain declared themselves too poor to pay owing to the earthquake; but Kara Mustafa remained firm, and even supported the extortionate demands of the Pashas of Bosnia and the Herzegovina. The Senate assembled hurriedly and decided to send two ambassadors to Constantinople and two envoys to Bosnia to try to appease the brutal Turks. But the difficulty was to find the men, for no one relished the idea of this very dangerous mission—the Ragusans well knew the way in which recalcitrant diplomats were treated by the Ottoman when he lost his temper. At last four courageous nobles offered to go for their country’s sake, namely, Marino Caboga and Giorgio Bucchia for the mission to Constantinople, and Niccolò Bona and Marino Gozze for Bosnia. The life of Caboga is so romantic that it deserves some mention. He was born in 1630, and after a youth of riot and dissipation, at the age of twenty-five he was engaged in a law-suit with a relative, whom he accused of having defrauded him. The trial took place before the Senate, and the accused reproached Caboga with his disorderly life and cast doubts on his honour. Stung to the quick, the young man drew his sword and murdered the slanderer. Flight to a sanctuary saved him from capital punishment, but he was condemned to perpetual imprisonment. During his confinement his only book was a Latin Bible, and he covered the walls of his prison with verses expressive of the deepest contrition. When the earthquake occurred he escaped from prison with difficulty; but instead of trying to get away he devoted himself to the work of rescue, and displayed great energy in repelling the attacks of the Morlachs, whom he drove from the city. When some sort of order was re-established and the Council met, he presented himself before the Conscript Fathers. One of them at once declared him disgraced and incapable of sitting, but the majority decided that as a reward for his great services in this time of danger he should be forgiven; he was thereupon readmitted to all his privileges. It was this same man who now offered to risk his life for his city once more. On their departure he and his companions bade farewell to their friends as though they were going to certain death.

Caboga and Bucchia reached Constantinople on August 8, 1667. The former showed so much diplomatic skill in the negotiations that Kara Mustafa had him and his colleague cast into prison on December 13, in a building that served as a lazaret for plague patients. But even then they refused to advise the Republic to consent to the Turkish demands. When asked if he would advise the Senate to agree to annexation by the Porte, Caboga replied that “he was sent to serve, not to betray his country”; and he succeeded in sending a message to the Senate encouraging them to hold out to the last regardless of his own fate, and only showing anxiety that his children should receive a sound religious education. The ambassadors were transferred from one dungeon to another, and threatened with all manner of punishments, but in vain.

Worse befell the envoys to Bosnia. When the Pasha heard that they had not brought the money demanded he threw them into an unhealthy dungeon, and after a few months transferred them to Silistria at the mouth of the Danube, where the Sultan Mohammed IV. was residing, and here they were kept in still severer detention. But they too held firm, and advised the Senate not to give way. In 1678 Bona fell ill, and, being utterly untended, died.

The Republic meanwhile applied to the King of Naples for arms and troops, expecting a Turkish attack, raised a loan for defensive purposes at Genoa,[490] and negotiated with the Emperor Leopold. Kara Mustafa, on being informed of this action, vowed vengeance, determined to capture the city, and only delayed the operation until he should return from the siege of Vienna. But fortunately his armies were defeated by John Sobieski, King of Poland, and this Christian victory saved Europe, shaking the Ottoman power to its very foundations. The ferocious vizir was disgraced and beheaded in consequence, and the projects against Ragusa abandoned. Caboga, Bucchia, and Gozze were then liberated and allowed to return home. “As he (Caboga) approached the city every knoll, villa, and house-top was covered with an admiring, almost adoring, people; every bell in Ragusa rang a merry peal, and the Rector and Senate, in full robes, went out of the city to give a cordial welcome to the wonderful Marino Caboga.”[491] He had indeed deserved well of his country, for never had the Republic been in more imminent danger, from which she was saved by this respite.

In March 1684 a new Holy League was formed between the Emperor Leopold I., the King of Poland, the Pope, and the Venetians, in which Ragusa was forced to join. But the danger from such a proceeding was now less great, for the Turkish power was now broken. As the Austrians had reconquered a large part of Hungary, Ragusa was considered to be under the protection of the Emperor as ruler of that country, and on August 20, 1684, a treaty to that effect was signed at Vienna by Baron von Strattmann, representing Austria, and Raphael Gozze, the Ragusan envoy, under the auspices of the Marquis of Borgamenero, the Spanish ambassador, for Spain still had certain rights over the Republic. The agreement was ratified by the Senate on December 1. It declared that this protection was merely a renewal of the old Hungarian protectorate over Ragusa, “hactenus per vim Turcicam aliquantisper interpolata,” which the citizens requested that they “quasi postliminio gaudere et fieri possint.” The Emperor promised to protect and defend Ragusa, to confirm all the privileges and commercial immunities which the kings of Hungary, his predecessors, had granted her, in exchange for which she was to pay him a sum of 5000 ducats per annum. This payment, however, was only to be made if and when the Austrian armies conquered the Herzegovina. The Empire was successful in the war, and the Turks were steadily driven back out of Hungary, where they now only held a few isolated posts. Venice too displayed an energy and achieved a success remarkable for a decaying State. She conquered the greater part of the Morea, captured Athens and a number of islands, and occupied Castelnuovo and the whole of the shores of the Bocche di Cattaro, as well as several positions in the Herzegovina. The Morlachs in the Venetian service made raids into Turkish territory, and did not spare that of Ragusa. Venetian privateers threatened to destroy what remained of the Republic’s sea-borne trade, while the closing of the land routes practically stopped all intercourse with Turkey. The citizens applied now to their new protector, the Emperor of Austria, who at once sent Herberstein to Ragusa as Imperial Commissary, and he induced the Venetians to desist from their molestations.

As, however, the Austrian armies did not conquer the Herzegovina, Ragusa never paid the tribute to the Emperor, and as soon as there was a prospect of peace on lines contemplating the maintenance of the status quo as regards the hinterland, the Republic hastened to come to an agreement with the Porte, and sent an ambassador to Constantinople with the arrears of tribute since 1684. After some years’ fighting the Tsar Peter’s capture of Azov, the Austrian victory of Zenta, and the Venetian successes in the Adriatic induced the Sultan to sue for peace, and in October 1698 the delegates of the Powers, including England and Holland, met at Carlovitz in southern Hungary. On June 26, 1699, the treaty was signed. The Porte ceded all Hungary save the Banat of Temesvar, Transsilvania, Slavonia, and Croatia as far as the Una, to the Emperor; Poland obtained Podolia, the Ukraine, and Kameniek; to Venice were assigned the Morea, some islands, and several fortresses in Dalmatia. An important article from the Ragusan point of view, which was obtained by bribing the Turkish negotiators, was that two strips of Turkish territory should intervene between the dominions of the Republic of St. Blaize and those of the Republic of St. Mark, viz. the enclaves of Klek, near the Narenta’s mouth, and of Sutorina in the Bocche di Cattaro.[492] Ragusa thus became tributary to the Porte once more, and deliberately preferred to be surrounded by the Turkish dominions rather than by those of the Venetians. This result brought about a partial revival of the land trade.

In 1714 war between Venice and the Turks broke out once more, the Sultan desiring above all to reconquer the Morea; he succeeded in his purpose very quickly, for the Venetians, relying on the peace of Carlovitz, which was to last twenty-five years (the Turks never concluded treaties of perpetual peace), had made no adequate preparations for defence. They allied themselves with the Emperor (April 13, 1716), and Prince Eugene led an army into southern Hungary. The Imperialists defeated the Turks first at Peterwardein, and then at Belgrad, which they captured. In 1718 the representatives of the various Powers met at Passarovitz (Požarovac) in Servia, and on 18th July signed a treaty of peace, by which the Emperor retained all his conquests, but the capture of the Morea by the Turks was confirmed, the Venetians thus losing their last possessions in the Levant save the Ionian Islands. With regard to Ragusa the arrangements of the peace of Carlovitz were reconfirmed, Venice giving up the posts of Popovo, Zarina, and Subzi on the Ragusan border.

[Illustration: COURTYARD OF THE RECTOR’S PALACE]

For the next few years the Republic was undisturbed by wars and rumours of wars, but its general conditions showed little improvement. The tribute to the Sultan was 12,500 ducats a year, and with gifts and bribes amounted to 16,000; but since the earthquake it had been paid every three years instead of annually. The Ragusans also paid blackmail to the Barbary States, and a tribute at irregular intervals to Austria. Every year a present was sent to the Pope, and twelve astori (falcons) to the King of Naples.[493] The population was now no more than 20,000, and the value of property had so decreased that the incomes of the archbishops and clergy were utterly inadequate. Education was in the hands of the Jesuits, who had established a college. But in the rest of the territory there were no means of instruction or religion. Archbishop Galliani, in a report to the Propaganda Fide,[494] complains that the upper classes were beginning to read French books and talk mockingly about fasting, flagellation, and other practices of the Church. When he remonstrated with them he was told that the Index had not been proclaimed at Ragusa, and had therefore no authority. He afterwards had it proclaimed from the pulpits, but the only effect was that the Senate in a fit of zeal ordered the burning of the Jewish Thalmud, a work which can hardly have had many readers, nor shaken the piety of the people. But in spite of their scepticism the Ragusans were as intolerant as ever towards the members of the Orthodox Church. In 1724 a rich Servian, named Sava Vladislavić, who had a house and garden at Ragusa and many friends among the aristocracy, asked permission to build a Greek chapel in his own grounds. But even this modest request, although backed by a letter from the Tsar Peter the Great, was refused.[495] The incident is not without significance; the Catholic Slaves have always been particularly bitter against the Orthodox Christians, while the letter from the Tsar is an early symptom of the interest taken by Russia in the welfare of Orthodox communities outside her own territory, an interest, then as now, essentially political rather than religious. In 1743 Pope Benedict XIV. wrote to the Senate encouraging them in their religious refusal to permit the building of Greek churches and to admit Greek priests into the town.

But another revival in the city’s prosperity seemed to be at hand. Trade, which had been apparently in a hopeless condition, began to show signs of improving. In 1727 Ragusan ships once more extended their voyages beyond the limits of the Adriatic; in that year a vessel went to Smyrna for the first time for many years. The wars between England, France, and Spain in 1739-1750, and in 1755-1763, proved advantageous to Ragusan shipping, and much of the commerce of the Mediterranean passed into their hands as neutrals.

Ragusa had her last dispute with Venice in 1754, when she complained to the Porte that the Venetians had illegally cut down forests on Ragusan territory, and levied exorbitant tolls on Ragusan vessels. The Pasha of Bosnia acted as mediator, and Venice agreed to renounce the dues, but Ragusa was to pay homage to the Most Serene Republic by presenting a silver ewer and twenty sequins every third year to the Capitano in Golfo, or Admiral of the Adriatic, as compensation for the rights of transit paid to Venice by Ragusa “da tempi immemorabili fino al presente anno.”

During the Seven Years’ War Ragusa had a diplomatic incident with Great Britain. The Republic was suspected by the British Government of allowing French ships to be fitted out in her own harbours. The Jesuit scientist Ruggiero Bosković was sent to England as Ragusan agent to convince the authorities of the groundlessness of the accusation; he succeeded in his mission, and was well received.

In 1763 a revolution broke out at Ragusa, the first since 1400, albeit a bloodless one, and the fourth in the whole course of her history. It arose through the antagonism between the old and the new nobility, the latter created after the earthquake. The two orders did not intermarry, and had always lived on terms of mutual jealousy. The older nobles were called Salamanchesi, and the newer Sorbonnesi.[496] The immediate cause of the outbreak was a romantic incident. A young Caboga, a member of the old aristocracy, fell in love with, and became betrothed to, a daughter of a Sorbonnese family. The affair caused great scandal, and was discussed in the Grand and Minor Councils. The Salamanchesi wished to forbid the marriage and to expel Caboga from the assemblies, while the newer order and many young members of the old wished to see these absurd barriers removed. As the former would not give way, the latter made overtures to the people, who were beginning to be somewhat dissatisfied with the existing Government. An émeute broke out; the Rector’s Palace was stormed by an armed band, the old nobles were turned out, and the officials forced to relinquish their functions. But the new nobles had not the courage to take possession in violation of the established rules of centuries, and for a time complete anarchy reigned. There were no law courts, no provincial governors, no commanders of the forts. The people, however, who had always been accustomed to absolute submission to the oligarchy, made no attempt to disturb the peace. They pursued their usual occupations, and awaited the result of the quarrel with equanimity, hoping that the outcome would be a reduction of their taxes. Negotiations between the two parties were opened, but the Salamanchesi proved intractable; and when the Sorbonnesi suggested Papal intervention they threatened to bring the affair before the Sultan and to apply for assistance to the Pasha of Bosnia, saying that they would rather give the city over to the Turks than resign their privileges! At last the new nobles declared that if their opponents did not give way in three days they would appoint their own Rector and the other officials. This decision ended the dispute, and a number of the Salamanchesi went over to the new party, which thus formed two-thirds of the Grand Council, so that the elections could be validly held. A compromise was arrived at: the Rector was chosen from the old nobility, the taxes were somewhat reduced, and the restrictions abolished.[497]

In 1768 war broke out between Russia and Turkey, in consequence of the interference of the former in the affairs of Poland and various incursions of Russian troops across the Turkish frontier. A Russian fleet, under Admiral Orloff and the Englishman Elphinstone, entered the Mediterranean and sailed up the Adriatic. Finding that a number of Ragusan ships were carrying foodstuffs from Alexandria and other Levantine ports to Constantinople, Orloff treated these and all other Ragusan vessels as enemies, although their captains protested that they had been forced to ship the cargoes by the Pasha of Alexandria. He summoned the Republic to renounce Turkish suzerainty, and to place itself under the protection of a Christian Power. He demanded that all the larger Ragusan ships should be sold to Russia, to whom the State must also make a loan, and permission was to be given for the erection of a Greek church in the town. The admiral threatened bombardment in case of non-compliance. The Government first thought of resisting, and tried to place Ragusa in a state of defence. But on examination it was discovered that of the 400 cannon in the forts only 40 were mounted, while the ammunition consisted of less than 2000 lbs. of powder and about 5000 cannon balls. A force of 5000 men might have been raised, but there was no means of arming or feeding them. The Republic then resorted to bribery, and offered Orloff 120,000 sequins, by which the storm was for a moment averted,[498] but the Russian fleet continued to harry Ragusan trade. The citizens, fearing further trouble, applied to France for assistance, and this not being forthcoming, to Austria. The Ragusan envoy at Vienna, Francesco Giuseppe Gondola, a descendant of the poet and the last of that name, did all in his power to induce the Empress Maria Theresa to intervene on behalf of Ragusa. But she was at that time on bad terms with Catherine II. of Russia, and the negotiations failed to have the desired effect. The Senate then sent Francesco Ragnina to St. Petersburg as envoy, but Catherine refused to receive him. At last, after long negotiations, when peace was made between Russia and Turkey in 1774, a special agreement was concluded at Leghorn between Orloff, who was there with his fleet, and Ragnina, settling the differences. A clause was inserted that a Greek church should be built, but it was not executed.

A quarrel arose between the Republic and the Kingdom of Naples in 1782. The Neapolitan Government, for some unknown reason, suddenly claimed to revive its old rights over Ragusa, and demanded the privilege of appointing a Governatore delle Armi in the town and a Neapolitan official as Resident. These requests being refused, it tried to enforce them by placing an embargo on the Ragusan ships in the ports of the Two Sicilies, and seizing all Ragusan property in the kingdom. The Ragusan Minister at Vienna, Count d’Ajala, induced Count Kaunitz, Austrian Minister at Naples, to intercede in the Republic’s favour, “as energetically as was consistent with the good relations between the two Courts.” But the Neapolitan Government held firm for the time. Eventually a compromise was arrived at, the embargo was removed, the confiscated property restored, and a Governatore delle Armi appointed on condition that he refrained from interfering with the affairs of the Republic. The salary paid to him was 30 soldi a day and an old turret to live in.[499]

The peace was again disturbed in 1787 by a new war between Russia and Turkey, Austria siding with the former. This time the Republic was more circumspect, and through the ability of d’Ajala suffered no harm beyond a little plundering. More serious trouble arose in 1792, when war having been declared by the European Coalition against the French Republic, the Court of Vienna complained that Ragusan ships were carrying grain to French ports. The Senate protested that such acts had been done against its orders, and that it had no objection to the punishment of Ragusan captains caught in the act. It is the same old story—Ragusan seamen profiting by foreign wars, while the Government casts off all responsibility.

[Illustration: MOSTAR IN THE HERZEGOVINA]

Before coming to the concluding chapter of the Republic’s history, I shall quote a few descriptions of Ragusa in the eighteenth century by different travellers. Prévot, who was French consul in 1750, gives a curious picture of the town, showing the character of its narrow oligarchy. “The Republic,” he writes, “i.e. those who govern it, do not care that foreigners of distinction, whether consuls or traders, should come to Ragusa, because they are obliged to use a certain measure of respect and justice towards them which they do not show to any of their own subjects. The pride of the nobles, who make everything give way before their authority, is hurt at being obliged to show the least consideration to those who are not of their own order, lest they should lose caste in the eyes of their slaves, by whom they wish to be regarded as the lords of creation. Trade carried on by foreigners seems to them a trespass on their own ventures, even when it does not actually compete with them; for they dread even potential rivalry. Hence their system of exclusion, for they prefer to be absolute masters of very little rather than share a few benefits with people who are not their slaves. Above all, they imagine that the French, being sharper than other people, see the viciousness of their rule, the injustice of their administration, and the absurdity of their pretensions; they blush for very shame, and wish to be isolated so as to avoid being exposed to criticism. It is their sensitive spot. One may well be circumspect, but they have too much intelligence not to know their own defects, but too much obstinacy and pride to wish to correct them, and to suffer other witnesses of their conduct than those who are forced to applaud it. One may say that Ragusa is less a State than a private house, of which both masters and servants prefer to shut the doors to strangers so as to remain unknown.”[500]

Pouqueville, who was at Ragusa in 1805, also describes the social conditions of the people. “The nobles had places of honour in church, at the café, at the theatre, and the noblewomen had sedan chairs adorned with their armorial bearings, and took precedence at all meeting places. The days on which the Rector went to church were marked in red letters in the Ragusan calendar with the words, ‘Oggi Sua Serenità si porta al Duomo.’ He went there in a much patched red toga, preceded by a valet carrying a red silk umbrella ... followed by the Senators in black threadbare gowns. Before him marched two musicians, one with a hunting-horn and the other with a fiddle.

“The citizens form three corporations: the cittadinanza, recruited from the commoners having a capital of 20,000 francs, who were like the Roman liberti. Their women-folk were admitted to the theatre in a row of boxes parallel to that of the noblewomen, whom they eclipsed by their beauty and their attire. They had to pay visits to the noblewomen on certain days.

“The second class was the bourgeoisie, the industrious part of the population, for it included the sea captains, men of great honesty, sailors, and agents in foreign countries. Their wives were not received by the nobility, and might only go to the parterre of the theatre; but at the promenade they shone by the elegance of their figures and their wealth. The men spent most of their lives at sea, and when they had accumulated a fortune they often retired to foreign lands, as they had no consideration at home.

“The peasants were serfs, and attached to the land and sold with it. But their master could not kill them, and if he ill-treated them they could go to another.

“In 1805 the nobles were usually estimable men, and among them were many littérateurs of great merit. The religious Orders, who had produced Banduri, Bosković, Zamagna, and other men of letters and science, kept alive the sacred fire.... The cittadinanza contained many rich families, and the merchants owned over 3000 ships, which carried nearly all the trade of the Mediterranean. The peasants did not complain of their lot, and, the men being much better than the laws, the State was flourishing.... The peasants were splendid fellows, but absolutely obedient to their masters. It was the ancient respect for a caste which, being unmilitary, was peaceful and debonair. There was no secret police, no gendarmes. In 1805 the first capital sentence in twenty-five years was pronounced; the city went into mourning, and an executioner had to be sent for from Turkey.... The Ragusan serfs are extremely brave. They are in perpetual war with the Montenegrins, who are savage and without honour. There was a constant blood-feud, and the book of blood was preserved by the Senate to remind the Ragusans of their duty. When a feud had gone on for a long time, and too many murders had been committed on both sides, a composition was agreed to for a small sum.”

In spite of its defects, which French writers, imbued with the ideas of the eighteenth-century philosophers and of the Revolution, would naturally tend to exaggerate,[501] the Republic of Ragusa very favourably impressed an Englishman, Thomas Watkins, who visited the town in 1879. “Of the Ragusans I cannot write too favourably, especially of the nobles and superior order of citizens, who, generally speaking, possess all the good qualities that virtuous example and refined education can bestow, without those vices which prevail in countries more open to foreign intercourse, and consequently more practised in deception. They have more learning and less ostentation than any people I know, more politeness to each other, and less envy. Their hospitality to strangers cannot possibly be exceeded; in short, their general character has in it so few defects that I do not hesitate to pronounce them (as far as my experience of other people will permit me) the wisest, best, and happiest of States.”[502] Later the author compares the condition of the Ragusans to those of the Dalmatian subjects of Venice, very unfavourably to the latter. “I discovered that the wretched Government of Venice had, by sending out their Barnabotti or famished nobility to prey upon the inhabitants, rendered ineffectual the benefits of nature. What a contrast between them and the citizens of Ragusa, who live protected and exempt from all taxes, while they can scarcely subsist upon the rich lands they inhabit, being harassed by every species of extortion that avarice can devise and power execute.”[503] The picture is somewhat idealised, and, as we have seen, even the Ragusans had taxes to complain of; but there is no doubt that they were far better off than the Dalmatian Venetians, or, indeed, than the citizens of most other States at that time.

During the protracted wars between England and France, and between England and America, Ragusan trade revived to an unexpected extent, and the prosperity of the inhabitants increased a hundredfold. In 1779 there were 162 ships flying St. Blaize’s banner, of 10 to 40 guns each, and 27 more lay at the wharves. The land trade also flourished, and the old routes became alive with caravans once more. By the year 1797 the fleet had increased to 363 ships of over 15 tons, valued at 16,000,000 piastres, bringing in an Income of 2,400,000 piastres to the owners, and a revenue of 152,000 piastres to the State. The coastwise trade employed 80 boats, worth 400,000 piastres. The tax on oil brought in 27,000 piastres; the exports by sea were valued at 420,000 piastres, the imports at 1,800,000 piastres; the exports by land at 1,500,000 piastres, the imports at 900,000 piastres. Agriculture was very flourishing. The population had again risen to 35,000, and their income increased every year by 700,000 florins.

The Republic maintained an ambassador at Vienna (Count d’Ajala), a Minister in Rome, political agents in Paris, Naples, and Constantinople, and consuls at Venice, Alexandria, and various other towns. At Ragusa there was a French and an Austrian consul; Naples and Russia were represented by Ragusan merchants.

CHAPTER XIII

ART SINCE THE YEAR 1358

After the departure of the last Venetian Count from Ragusa in 1358, although Hungarian political supremacy succeeded to that of Venice, the artistic and civilising influence of the Most Serene Republic survived, and its impress in the town is unmistakable to this day. The pointed arches in the Venetian Gothic style, the carved balconies, the two-light and three-light windows, the general character of the stonework and sculpture, in spite of certain distinctive features, bear witness to the strength of Venetian example. Venice was the nearest centre of civilisation to Ragusa, and the fountain-head of art. In spite of the jealousy and suspicion which the little Republic always felt towards its powerful neighbour, many Ragusan artists received their training in Venice, while many Venetians came to execute work on the public and private buildings of Ragusa. Venice was not, however, the only city which thus influenced Ragusa; other Italian towns, such as Ancona, Florence, Padua, and Naples, contributed towards her artistic development, in which even Hungary had some small share.

[Illustration: “ÆSCULAPIUS” CAPITAL, RECTOR’S PALACE]

The most important and interesting building in the town is undoubtedly the Rector’s Palace, which is to Ragusa what the Ducal Palace is to Venice. It was commenced by architects inspired by Venetian ideas, and completed by others devoted to Renaissance art. The site of the existing edifice was originally occupied—in the days when the whole town was confined to the seaward ridge, and separated from the mainland by a marshy channel where the Stradone now runs—by a castle as a defence against the Vlach settlement on the opposite side. When this was absorbed, and the marshy channel filled in, the castle was enlarged and strengthened, and later became the seat of the Government and the residence of the Count. Beyond the fact that it was protected by four towers,[504] we know nothing about this early building. Already, in 1272, it was spoken of as a very ancient edifice,[505] and in 1349 the Council decided “quod sala veteris palatii ubi dominus Comes habitat reaptetur et altius elevetur,”[506] which seems to show that it had been allowed to fall into disrepair. In 1388 it was demolished, and on its site the foundations of a larger and more commodious building were laid. The new palace was not completed until 1420, and of this also little is known, as fifteen years later a fire destroyed “the spacious palace of Ragusa, which was in ancient times the castle, together with certain towers, and nearly all the ammunition and arms which were kept for the defence of the city and the armament of the galleys.”[507] “Then the Ragusan Government decided that the Palace should be rebuilt with more magnificent construction, sparing no expense, and that the greater part of the former castle which the fiery flame had not consumed should be levelled with the ground, the architect being a certain Mastro Onofrio Giordani of La Cava, in the kingdom of Naples. The walls are made of ashlar stone (De Diversis was a witness both of the fire and of the reconstruction), finely wrought and very ornamentally carved, with great vaults resting on tall and stout columns, which were brought from Curzola.[508] The capitals, or upper parts of these columns, are carved with great pains. There are five large entire columns, but two other half-columns, one attached to one tower, the other to the other; on the first was carved Æsculapius, the restorer of medical art, at the instigation of that remarkable poet and most learned man of letters, Niccolò de Lazina (Larina or Laziri), a noble of Cremona.... For since he knew, and had learned in his literary studies, that Æsculapius had his origin at Epidaurus, which is now called Ragusa,[509] he took the greatest pains and trouble that his image should be carved on the building, and he composed a metrical epitaph to him, which was fixed in the wall. On a central column of the entrance to the Palace is seen sculptured the first righteous judgment of Solomon. In an angle of the principal door is the likeness of the Rector hearing offences. At the entrance of the Lesser Council, of which I shall have to speak by-and-by, is a certain sculpture of Justice holding a scroll, on which is read as follows: “Jussi summa mei sua vos cuicumque tueri’.”[510]

But even this second palace was destined to suffer a similar fate. On August 8, 1462, it was destroyed by fire and the explosion of the powder magazine. Other buildings were also consumed or greatly damaged, including the Palace of the Grand Council; of the Rector’s Palace the ground floor alone remained. Steps were at once taken to repair the damage, for which purpose the celebrated architects Michelozzo Michelozzi of Florence and Giorgio Orsini of Sebenico were commissioned. Of Michelozzo, who had been a sculptor and a pupil of Donatello, Vasari says: “In one thing he surpassed many, and himself also, namely, that, after Brunelleschi, he was acknowledged the most able architect of his time, the one who most conveniently ordered and disposed the accommodation of palaces, convents, and houses, and the one who showed most judgment in introducing improvements.” He was at Ragusa in 1463 engaged on the town walls, and in 1464 the Senate ordered the palace to be rebuilt according to his designs (11th February). He left Ragusa in June, and was succeeded by Giorgio Orsini of Sebenico. The latter, a scion of a branch of the great Roman family of that name, which had settled in Dalmatia before coming to Ragusa, had helped to rebuild the cathedral of Sebenico. The style of his early work had been Gothic, but even while at Sebenico he was half converted to Renaissance ideas.[511] When he came to Ragusa he had adopted them completely, and his work on the Palace shows no traces of Gothic. Thus we have parts of the building in the Gothic style by Onofrio, and parts in that of the Renaissance by Orsini and Michelozzo. The earthquake of 1667 did some damage to the upper story, but it was soon repaired, and the general character of the structure remains practically unaltered.

The façade consists of two stories, the lower consisting of a loggia of six round arches between two solid structures, while the upper is pierced by eight two-light Venetian Gothic windows. The two solid structures contain windows, and originally supported square towers, of which only the lower parts remain. The capitals of the columns in the loggia are partly Gothic and partly Renaissance work, while the arches which they support are all in the latter style. Examining the capitals in detail, we find that the elaborate half column adorned with the figure of Æsculapius is obviously the work of Onofrio, and so are the other three outer capitals. They are far bolder in design and more perfect in execution than the three classical ones in the centre. The Æsculapius is a very interesting piece of work. It represents an old man seated with an open book in his hand, a number of alembics, retorts, and other scientific instruments by his side, and two men standing beyond, one with a fowl in his hand. It is evidently intended to represent an alchemist or physician giving advice. The capital next to this one is considered by Jackson to be the finest of all: “The tender rigidity of the foliage, the delicate pencilling of the fibres, and the just proportioning of light and shade in this lovely piece of sculpture can hardly be surpassed.”[512] The columns themselves are all by Onofrio, and the wall belongs to the same period, as is proved by an inscription recording the erection of the Palace in 1435.

The three middle capitals, all the heavy abaci, and the round arches which they support are the work of Orsini. It is extremely probable that the original arches of Onofrio were pointed, but that they and the middle capitals were so injured by fire that new ones had to be provided, and Orsini, wishing to give the building as much of a Renaissance character as possible, built round arches in the place of pointed ones. But to do this he had to supply the heavy abaci which we now see in the place of Onofrio’s shallow ones, so as to make the arches high enough to support the vaultings. It is curious that the upper story, above the restored Renaissance arches of the loggia, should belong to the earlier period. According to Mr. Graham Jackson, the explanation lies in the fact that in the restoration the old materials—columns and other adornments—which had fallen without being hopelessly damaged were used. The capitals of the upper windows are small, but excellent in design. Their chief motif is foliage intertwined with faces of human beings and lions. Some of them remind us distantly of the capitals in the Franciscan cloister, although the latter are of course of a much earlier date.

[Illustration: SCULPTURED IMPOST, RECTOR’S PALACE]

Within the loggia are various sculptured ornaments. The doorway leading into the courtyard is decorated with a little scroll of foliage round the arch, and small half-length human figures. The capitals and imposts are admirably carved with groups of figures full of movement. The impost to the right bears on the front face a group of putti or angels playing various musical instruments, quite in the style of Michelozzo, while on the return face is a group of armed men. Of the left-hand impost the front face is adorned with the figures of a man and woman embracing each other, a boy standing at their side; and the return face, with a group of dancing figures, one of whom is blowing a horn—a curious specimen of perspective. The small brackets whence the vaulting springs are also beautifully carved with groups of men and animals. The best of these is the one with a shepherd boy and a dragon, both full of movement and grace, and likewise interesting in perspective.

All this sculpture is Onofrio’s work, and so is the Porta della Carità to the right, otherwise called the “Porta è l’Officio del Fondico.” Here in times of famine the poor received their doles of bread, sold below cost price or on easy credit. Adjoining is the small door leading to the hall of the Minor Council on the mezzanine floor. To the right and left of the main entrance are rows of carved marble benches. The ones to the right are in double tiers, and here on grand occasions the Rector would sit with the Minor Council, the Archbishop, and, in later times, the Imperial Resident. The lower single-tier seats were for the Grand Council. The whole loggia was known as “sotto i volti.”

The courtyard beyond is a square space surrounded by two tiers of round arches. The whole effect is graceful, attractive, and airy. Both the loggie are vaulted, but the arches of the upper story are twice as numerous as those of the lower. The columns of the latter are of plain classical design, with carved capitals and shallow abaci, of which the foliage is so simple as to recall Romanesque work. The arches are plain and without mouldings. The upper arcade is formed by square piers of masonry, alternating with twin columns, one behind the other. This part of the building is the work of Orsini, but on the wall behind the arcades there are doors and windows in the pointed style of the earlier edifice. Two open-air staircases lead from the courtyard to the upper stories. The principal one, to the left of the entrance, is poor in design, but the general effect is large and stately. The smaller flight to the right leads to the little terrace on the mezzanine floor. The latter has low round arches, but the balustrade is adorned with a Gothic frieze, like that of the seats, “sotto i volti.” At the head of the stairs is a sculptured capital representing the Rector administering justice (the officer here is wearing the traditional opankas or sandals still common in Dalmatia); and opposite is a symbolical female figure of Justice, the “quædam justitiæ sculptura” of De Diversis, holding a scroll with the words, “Jussi summa mei,” and two lions. The draperies are flowing, and not, I venture to think, at all Düreresque, as Mr. Graham Jackson considers. The two lions’ heads and part of the scroll-work has been very clumsily restored. This, again, is Onofrio’s work. In this same loggia is a sculptured group in a niche representing Samson breaking a column, which is probably early quattrocento work, or perhaps even of the end of the fourteenth century. Here and there are other good fragments of carving.

The interior calls for little mention, having been completely restored and modernised. There is, however, one small room on the ground floor, with a wooden ceiling charmingly painted with arabesque designs and gilding, dating, I should imagine, from the sixteenth or early seventeenth century. Below the small loggia is the entrance to the state prisons, very gloomy dungeons indeed, in some of which prisoners were walled up alive. But the worst cells are those under the theatre—a strange contrast; they are below the level of the sea, and flooded at high tide.

On the whole, the Rector’s Palace is the most interesting and beautiful building in Dalmatia, with the exception perhaps of the Romanesque cathedral of Traù. Its graceful design, its perfect proportions, and its many charming details of stone work make of it a worthy rival of many of the famous palazzi pubblici of the Italian towns. It bears a strong analogy to the Loggia dei Mercanti at Ancona, on which some of the same artists were employed. The sculptures, however, labour under one disadvantage, viz. they are carved out of poor material. The Curzola stone, which is admirable for building purposes, for columns, and plain adornments, is not quite hard enough for elaborate sculpture, so that although the designs of the artists may be admirable, the result has sometimes a rough and unfinished appearance. It would form an interesting speculation to study what effect the nature of the material had on the artist. At Ragusa one certainly longs for the accurate and finished work of the Florentines. But nevertheless the Palace of Ragusa is in its way a little masterpiece.

[Illustration: SCULPTURED BRACKET, RECTOR’S PALACE]

During the Renaissance period a number of new churches and chapels were built at Ragusa, the majority of them quite small. The most beautiful of these is the votive church of San Salvatore, built to commemorate the earthquake of 1520. “This shock caused much spiritual benefit, for many people confessed their sins, and said prayers, and gave alms. Each Sunday the Government with all the people went in procession to implore the Divine mercy, and vowed to build a church in honour of the Saviour, on which it was decided to spend 1500 ducats.... For the building of it Messer Daniele di Resti, Messer Damiano di Menze, and Messer Giunio di Sorgo were appointed Provveditori. These nobles raised the cost to more than 2500 ducats, and the building proceeded so slowly that it was not finished for ten years.”[513] It is said that noble matrons went barefoot carrying materials for the building, but the three noble Provveditori employed the masons for their own private houses as well, and this caused the delay. The façade is a simple but very beautiful specimen of Renaissance architecture, recalling that of the Lombardis’ church of the Madonna dei Miracoli in Venice. Both the façade and the roof are built in the same manner as those of the cathedral of Sebenico. The interior consists of a nave and rounded apse, divided into three bays by classic pilasters. There are some traces of Gothic in the vaulting and narrow side windows adorned with plain tracery. The cornice is arcaded, but each arch contains a Renaissance shell.[514] With regard to the authorship of the building, the acts of the Grand Council mention architects summoned from Italy in 1520, whose names, however, are not given, and one Paduan working at Sebenico. The latter seems to have been Bartolommeo da Mestre, described in the deeds of a Sebenico notary as “protomagister fabricæ Sancti Jacobi,” who was in that town between 1517 and 1525, but absent at Ragusa in 1520. This would explain the similar roof construction in the two churches.[515]

Among the other chapels, that of the Santissima Annunziata deserves mention. The front is unadorned, but in the tympanum of the Gothic doorway is a group of three figures in high relief, representing St. John the Baptist and two other saints. There is much dignity about the figures, but the execution as usual is somewhat rough. This chapel and the one next to it, from which it is separated by a wall space with a rectangular sixteenth-century doorway, are almost under the lee of the town walls, which at this point make an abrupt outward curve, so as to include the Dominican monastery.

Close by is the church of St. Luke, with some good Renaissance decorations and an elaborate tympanum. More important is the church of the Confraternità del Rosario, now desecrated and used as a military storehouse. The interior consists of two naves with a colonnade of three arches, and a low, dark story above. The capitals are of a handsome classical design with good mouldings, but the proportions are bad, the church being much too high for its length.

In the upper part of the town is the interesting little chapel of the Sicurata or Transfigurata, its façade on a tiny piazza, almost a courtyard. To reach it one passes under an old archway with a fig-tree growing out of it. It contains one or two curious paintings. San Niccolò in Prijeki, at the end of the street of that name, has a Renaissance doorway with Ionic columns and a classical pediment, the adornments being very pure and sober; the rosette window is of a wheel pattern common at Ragusa. The belfry is adorned with excellent mouldings and a twisted stringcourse. The date 1607 over the door refers to the restoration, the building being at least eighty or a hundred years older, while the little figure over the door is still more ancient.

Outside the walls, a few minutes from the Porta Pile, is the tiny Chiesa alle Dance, on a rocky beach by the sea, commenced in 1457 as a chapel for the cemetery of the poor, as is attested by the following inscription:—

DIVÆ MARIÆ VIRGINI S.C. DECRETO AD PAUPERIEM SEPUL. EX ÆR. PUB. DOTIBUS VIII IDUS. DECEMRIS. M.CCCCLVII D.

The west door is a handsome piece of Venetian Gothic with mouldings and a sculptured group of the Virgin and Child in the tympanum. To the right is another group on a font. In the front of the church a platform spreads out, where a portico must formerly have been, as there are the bases of six large piers.

Of the lay buildings in Ragusa besides the Rector’s Palace we may mention the clock-tower in the Piazza, and the fountain at the Porta Pile. The latter was built by Onofrio of La Cava on the completion of his great aqueduct, and bears the following inscription:—

P. ONOFRIO I. F. ONOSIPHORO PARTHENOPEO EGREGIO N. I. ARCHTITECTO MUNICIPES.

The story of this aqueduct is rather curious. In previous times the city was supplied with water from cisterns, but in 1437 the Government decided to seek for springs in the Gionchetto hills, and invited Onofrio, who was as excellent a hydraulic engineer as he was an architect, to construct it. The sum of 8000 ducats was devoted to the purpose, but before its completion 12,000 were spent. The people began to say that the enterprise such as Onofrio had designed it was impossible, and he was summoned before the magistrates as an impostor. But the evidence of the experts proved favourable to him, and he succeeded in completing the work in the prescribed time. Nothing remained now to be done but to erect a fountain, and the funds were provided by public subscription. Of this monument only the polygonal basin and a few columns and heads remain. The twelve bas-reliefs of the constellations were destroyed by the earthquake, and so with one exception were the figures of animals round the cornice. Another fountain, also by Onofrio, is the very handsome one in the Piazza, decorated with putti and shells.

There are a few private houses at Ragusa of architectural pretensions. Those of the Stradone were, as I have said, destroyed by the earthquake; but in the Prijeki, a street parallel to the Stradone, on the slope of the Monte Sergio, there are several picturesque old palaces. This thoroughfare is very narrow, and the houses are of great height; many of them are adorned with charming Venetian balconies and fragments of sculpture. The general prospect of this dark, narrow street, lit up here and there by patches of brilliant sunlight, showing some vine pergola clinging on to a broad balcony, or a many-light window in the purest Venetian style, is most striking. One might imagine oneself in Venice, until a side street leading up a steep hillside tells us that we are not in the city of the lagoons. The most remarkable of these houses is the one numbered 170, which has a fine doorway, with a rectangular entablature enclosing a pointed arch. In the corners thus formed are two centaurs, very spirited and full of movement, though not quite perfect in drawing. The balcony above, which is exceptionally wide in proportion to its length, is supported by three carved brackets. The beautiful little balcony with marble colonnade on the palace numbered 316 is a veritable gem of Venetian work. On several other houses there are similar fragments, and others are to be found elsewhere in the town, especially in the streets near the Duomo. The Stradone itself is an attractive thoroughfare, broad, airy, and full of sun. The houses are plain and unadorned, but the rich yellow hue of the Curzola stone of which they are built give them a harmonious appearance. The shops to this day are mostly of a very Eastern appearance, the door and window being formed of a single round arch partly divided by a stone counter which cuts half-way across the opening.

A conspicuous architectural feature of the city is its defences. The town walls form a most perfect circuit, of a beauty and completeness rarely surpassed, even in Italy. From whichever side we approach Ragusa, whether from the sea or by the land gates, we are confronted by an imposing mass of battlemented towers, solid bastions, thick walls and escarpments, which conceal the whole town save the steeples and one or two churches. Few cities present such a perfect picture of a mediæval fortress, and few form so fair a picture—this cluster of fine buildings on steep precipitous rocks rising sheer up out of the azure sea, with the exquisite purple hues of the Dalmatian mountains in the background, and the bright patches of rich vegetation all around. Rarely does one see so admirable a combination of strength and beauty. The walls are pierced by three gates—the Porta Pile, the Porta Ploce, and the sea gate. At the Porta Pile there is a double circuit of walls; the outer gate is a round arch in a semicircular outwork, with gun embrasures on either side. To the right the walls extend seawards to a massive round bastion, and then up the rocky ridge; to the left they ascend the steep hillside to the graceful Torre Menze or Minćeta. On entering this gate the road descends, making a sharp curve, passes under a second arch, and opens out into the Stradone. This leads straight to the Piazza, where the chief public buildings stand. We pass under another arch below the clock tower, and reach the Porta Ploce. This too is approached by a winding road passing over two bridges, one of which was formerly a drawbridge, and under several more arches. The solid mass of the Dominican church and monastery formed part of the defence works. From the road between the Piazza and the Porta Ploce the gate opens out on to the quays of the harbour. The latter is small, and incapable of sheltering large modern steamers, which now always put in at the ample port of Gravosa; but it was quite sufficient for the famous “argosies” which visited every known sea during the heyday of the Republic. It is protected by the huge mass of the Forte Molo and other towers, while the pier built by Pasquale di Michele juts out into the sea. Large walled-up arches led to the shelters for the galleys—“arsenatus galearum domus, in qua triremes pulchræ et biremes resident, quibus armatis, cum opus fuerit, utuntur Ragusini.”[516]

[Illustration: CHURCH OF THE CONFRATERNITY OF THE ROSARY]

In other parts of the Republic’s territory some few buildings of architectural interest survive. At Gravosa there are no churches of importance, but some fine villas, of which the most remarkable is that of Count Caboga; in the general style of its architecture it recalls the loggia of the Rector’s Palace. It was at Gravosa that the nobles of Ragusa had their villeggiatura, and all about among the pleasant groves of the Lapad promontory or on the banks of the Ombla rose many a stately pleasure-house, filled with works of art and books, and surrounded by lovely gardens. Most of them, alas! were plundered and burnt during the French wars and the Montenegrin invasion, and only a few now remain. Other more modern ones have sprung up, some inhabited by the descendants of these same noble families, others by wealthy merchants who have acquired fortunes in America. The villas among the hills at Giochetto and Bergato have nearly all been destroyed.

On the Isola di Mezzo there are two castles, several churches and monasteries, and ruins of other edifices. The principal church is that of Santa Maria del Biscione, on the south side of the island; it is a fifteenth-century building, in the Venetian Gothic style, and contains, among other objects, an altar-piece of quaint design—a group of wooden, painted figures; according to the local tradition they were brought by a native of Mezzo from England, where he had bought them from Henry VIII.’s private chapel, as that monarch, having become a Protestant, was selling its effects by auction. But Professor Gelcich gives extracts from local records, proving it to be seventeenth-century work by one “Magister Urbanus Georgii de Tenum Derfort Banakus fabrolignarius.”[517] The chancel has a good waggon ceiling of blue panels, and some handsome stonework. The Dominican church, also in the Italian Pointed style, is dismantled; its campanile of the fifteenth century has the “midwall shafts” of the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries.[518] In the Franciscan monastery, of the same period (1484), there are some beautiful Gothic choir-stalls, of which Mr. Graham Jackson remarks that it is interesting to find that even in this late work the leaves retain “the crisp Byzantine raffling, and are packed within one another and fluted quite in the ancient manner, while the little capitals of the elbow posts have still more thoroughly the look of Byzantine work.”[519] The two castles are little more than picturesque ruins, and scattered about the islands are the remains of some eighteen or twenty chapels; in the village several houses that once belonged to families of position bear traces of carving, Venetian balconies and windows, and coats-of-arms.

At Stagno there are some interesting fortifications of the fourteenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries. This position was of great strategic value, as it is a narrow isthmus connecting the long peninsula of Sabbioncello with the mainland. A large square castle was erected at Stagno Grande, looking southwards towards Ragusa, another with a round tower at Stagno Piccolo, on the north side of the isthmus, and a third at the top of the hill between the two. Both towns were surrounded by walls;[520] a long wall goes right across the neck of land, and another clambers up the hill to the highest of the three castles and down the other side to Stagno Piccolo. The appearance of these battlemented walls, with towers at frequent intervals, is most impressive, and they were a most remarkable piece of work for their time. They secured Ragusa from attack, whether from the Venetians at the mouths of the Narenta, or from the Slavonic princelings of the hinterland, and later from the Turks. Both in Stagno Grande and in Stagno Piccolo there are some churches and private houses with architectural decorations. The Franciscan monastery at the former place has a cloister in the best Dalmatian style, and in a field near the salt-pans is a small church, which may be of the Romanesque period.

It is obvious that Ragusan architecture was strongly, indeed prevalently, inspired by Venetian example, both in the work which we have called Venetian Gothic and in that of the Renaissance period. Although, as a rule, the earlier artistic forms survived much longer in Dalmatia than in Italy, the Dalmatians showed what Graham Jackson calls “a natural and almost precocious liking for the Renaissance style.” Giorgi Orsini’s work at Sebenico actually preceded that of Leon Battista Alberti at Rimini by nine years. Another peculiarity of Ragusan architecture is that the names of so few of the artists themselves are preserved, and most of those who are remembered were foreigners. There were doubtless many native artists, but Ragusan talent seems to have been of a collective rather than an individual character, and much of the work was probably done by master-masons, stone-cutters, and similar craftsmen, and may have been the outcome of the general artistic feeling of the people rather than the conception of great masters.

In painting the Dalmatians were less conspicuous than in architecture, and if we except the tradition that Carpaccio was a native of Cattaro, we know of no great painter of that country. With regard to Ragusa there are a few specimens of native art, but hardly a record of the life of any painter. Appendini (ii. p. 170) does not know of any Ragusan painter earlier than the fifteenth century, but it is probable that some of the pictures in the Dominican monastery, which are of an earlier date, are by a native brush. Professor Gelcich mentions a guild of painters in the sixteenth century with nineteen members, all so poor that they had to be subsidised by the State. But there is one Ragusan artist whose works are preserved, and whose name at least is recorded. This is Niccolò Raguseo, or Nicolaus Ragusinus as he signs himself. Several of his paintings may be seen in the Dominican monastery and in the Chiesa alle Dance. In the latter he is represented by a triptych of very considerable merit, with a predella and a lunette. The middle panel is a group of the Virgin and Child surrounded by cherubs. The Madonna wears a red robe with a cloak of rich cloth-of-gold, on which an elaborate pattern is picked out in dark blue. This design is not adapted to the folds, but drawn as though on a flat surface. The Child is holding some fruit; the cherubs have scarlet wings, and in the background is a gilt nimbus. At the feet of the Virgin kneels the infant St. John, in whose hands is a scroll with the words: VOX CLAMANTIS IN DESERTO DIRIGITE VIAM DNI.

On the plinth of the throne is another inscription:

M. CCCCC.XVII—MENSIS FEBRVARII—— NICOLVAS—RHAGVSINVS—PINGEBAT.

In the right-hand panel is a St. Martin on horseback cutting off half his cloak to give to a beggar. He is attired in a green tunic, over which is a golden coat with a design picked out in red lines; the cloak which is being cut is of a bright scarlet. In the left-hand panel we see St. Gregory holding a crucifix in his hand, with a dove on his shoulder; he is attired in pontifical robes—a richly embroidered cope of cloth-of-gold adorned with a red pattern, and figures of saints in niches along the border. Above is a lunette representing the Crucifixion, with the Virgin, St. Mary Magdalen, St. John, and other figures at the foot of the Cross, and some cherubs. The robe of the Virgin is of a rich deep blue, those of the others red or green. In the background is of gold. The predella is divided into three panels; in the centre one is a St. George and the Dragon, very spirited in composition, and quite in Carpaccio’s manner, with a charming pale blue landscape in the background and a glimpse of the sea. In the right-hand division we see a saint receiving a mitre from two bishops, and surrounded by other bishops, monks, choir-boys, &c. To the left a pope in a golden robe is being crowned by two cardinals; all round is a host of cardinals, bishops, Dominicans and Franciscans, and behind a landscape with smaller figures. The faces are all very pale, and somewhat northern in character, but those of the Virgin and Child in the principal panel are of great tenderness and feeling. In the colouring lies the chief merit of the picture; it is indeed exceptionally rich and brilliant, especially in the robes, which are characteristic of the painter’s work. The whole is enclosed in a handsome carved frame, divided by pillars into compartments. The groundwork of this frame is dark blue, with designs picked out in gold, and adorned with arabesques of a good Renaissance pattern.

[Illustration: TRIPTYCH BY NICCOLÒ RAGUSEI IN THE DOMINICAN MONASTERY

(St. John the Baptist, St. Nicholas, St. Stephen, St. Mary Magdalen, and St. James)]

On the high altar of this same church is another picture, also attributed to Raguseo. It contains figures of the Virgin and Child, St. Nicholas, St. George, St. Blaize, and St. Francis. It is altogether inferior to the one on the north wall, in a much worse state of preservation, and almost hidden under silver ornaments, plaques, ex-votos, and artificial flowers.

In the Dominican church there are quite a number of early pictures, some of them evidently the work of Raguseo. To the right of the high altar is a large triptych, with St. Stephen the Protomartyr in the centre, St. James and St. Mary Magdalen to the right, St. Nicholas and St. John the Baptist to the left. The St. Stephen is seen absolutely full face, looking straight out of the picture, with an expression of calmness and benevolence. The Magdalen has also a very sweet look, and is beautifully painted. The robes, as in the Dance pictures, are all very rich and splendid, especially that of St. Stephen, which is of gold, with the pattern diapered in dark lines and adorned with figures of saints along the border.

To the left of the high altar is another triptych in the same style: the Virgin and Child, the former with a lily in her hand and the moon lying at her feet, surrounded by cherubs, in the centre; St. Paul and St. Blaize to the right; St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine to the left. The St. Blaize bears in his hands an interesting model of Ragusa, in which one can make out three large towers and several small ones. The gold background has been restored, and is rather too garish.

In a side chapel is yet another Raguseo—a Madonna and Child, supported by St. Julian, St. James, St. Dominic, and St. Matthew. The drawing is bold and strong, perhaps more so than in any of the artist’s other works, and some of the faces, especially that of the Child, very fascinating: the robes, as usual, are magnificent. That of the Virgin forms a curiously stiff platform, on which the infant Christ is standing. Below are two little angels, one holding a lily and the other roses. In the background is a faint suggestion of landscape. Unfortunately, the lower part of the picture has been barbarously mutilated to make room for a window.

These, with the possible exception of one or two more paintings in the Isola di Mezzo, are the only known works of this artist. Who he was, what was his story, where he worked, remain a mystery. From the date on the Dance triptych we learn that he flourished at the beginning of the sixteenth century, and it is fairly certain that he must have studied in Italy. His style distinctly shows traces of the influence of Crivelli’s school, and in this, as in other arts, the Dalmatians continued to work in the older manner long after it had been abandoned in Italy. Professor Gelcich doubts if this painter were really a native of Ragusa at all, arguing that if he had been he would not have called himself Rhagusinus in his own city. It is of course unusual (though not unheard of) that an artist should call himself by the name of his own town while actually living in it; but in this case he may have done so because the Ragusans were so used to having their pictures painted by foreigners, that when a native of the town actually painted them the fact was worthy of being especially recorded. But it is mere conjecture, as there is no mention of him or of his work in any known document. Perhaps some day a record of his life may be found in some forgotten MS., or obscure municipal entry, or in the list of the pupils of some Venetian master. Professor Eitelberger says that these pictures “bear some resemblance to certain paintings in the Marca of Ancona; it is not impossible, however, that even from Apulia some influence may have reached the Ragusan painters, but we have too little information to enable us to express an opinion as to the connection between the Ragusan school and that of Italy.”[521]

Appendini says nothing about Raguseo, although he speaks of some other native artists whose works are nearly all lost. It will be sufficient to recall the names of Pietro Grgurić-Ohmučević, who painted some pictures at Sutjeska[522] and flourished about 1482; Vincenzo di Lorenzo, who in 1510 decorated a church and monastery at Trebinje; Biagio Darsa, author of a pictorial globe and some studies of perspective; and Francesco da Ragusa, one of whose works is said to be in Rome, and another at Brescia (1600-1620). We may also mention the handsome altar in the Franciscan sacristy, the work of a painter and a sculptor, both unknown; it is constructed in the form of a press or cabinet, and is adorned with some excellent gilt carving and a number of paintings, of which the most important is a Resurrection of Christ. Internally it is also painted, but by a later hand.

There are at Ragusa several pictures by foreign painters, but with few exceptions they are of little merit. The most interesting is undoubtedly the small triptych in the cathedral by a Flemish artist, which was carried by the Ragusan ambassadors when they went to Constantinople with the tribute to the Sultan as a portable altar. The subject is the Adoration of the Magi. In the centre panel the Virgin is seated with the Child on her lap: He is kneeling and extending His right hand to the oldest of the kings, who has placed his sceptre and gifts at the feet of the Saviour; behind Him is another king also offering gifts, and through the arches at the back one sees a landscape. On the left-hand wing stands the third king, a Moor, and behind him is a group of figures and a landscape. On the right is a bald-headed man in a rich robe, probably the donor, with a castle in the background. This work is undoubtedly of the Flemish school, and, according to Eitelberger,[523] is reminiscent of Memling. “The technique,” he says, “is extraordinarily careful, and the picture, in spite of having been damaged by wax candles, is yet so well preserved that it needs only the hand of a good restorer for it to make a great impression even on the uninitiated. The head of the Virgin has an expression of lovingness and purity such as is peculiar to the Flemish school alone.” As to how it found its way to Ragusa we know nothing. Eitelberger conjectures that it must have come from Naples, as the Republic was in constant intercourse with that city, which in its turn had connections with Flanders, and the Neapolitan painters were greatly under the influence of Flemish art. But it is quite possible that it came direct from the Low Countries to Ragusa, where, as we have seen, there was a colony of Flemish merchants.

Of the other foreign paintings at Ragusa the following deserve notice: a head of Christ by Pordenone; a head of St. Catherine by Palma Vecchio; four pictures by Padovanino of second-rate interest; an Assumption of the Virgin attributed to Titian, but certainly not genuine, though possibly by a pupil; a spurious Andrea del Sarto, and an equally spurious Raphael. All these are in the Duomo. In the Dominican church is a St. Mary Magdalen, attributed to Titian, and probably that master’s genuine work. One or two more Titians of very questionable authenticity may be seen at the Isola di Mezzo and at Cannosa.

A form of art which flourished exceedingly at Ragusa was goldsmith’s work. The goldsmiths and silversmiths of Dalmatia were famous, and many of the church treasuries in the country are very rich and splendid. That of the cathedral of Ragusa is one of the finest, in spite of the earthquake and the depredations of the freebooters after that calamity. Its two most interesting pieces, however, are not by natives of Ragusa. One is an enamelled casket enclosing the skull of St. Blaize. The groundwork of copper is concealed by twenty-four plaques of metal, on which enamel and filigree are laid; each of them, save four triangular plaques on the top, contains a medallion with the head of a saint in the centre, the name written in Lombardic letters. The surface not covered by the plaques is filled in with the most delicate enamels of flowers, fruit, leaves, pearls, insects, and scroll work. This reliquary is said by Resti to have been brought to Ragusa in 1026, but Graham Jackson proves it to belong to two widely different periods. The medallions are Byzantine work of the eleventh or twelfth century, whereas the intervening scrolls of flowers, &c., are of a much later date, and, in fact, Jackson discovered the inscription in a corner of the lower edge: “Fran^{co}. Ferro Venet^o. F. A. 1694.”[524]

Another treasure is the curious silver-gilt basin and ewer attributed to Giovanni Progonović, a jeweller of the fifteenth century, but more probably foreign work, as the plate mark—an N within a circle—is not that of Ragusa.[525] The ewer contains imitations of bunches of dried leaves and grasses in silver, and the basin is strewn with ferns and leaves, in the midst of which creep lizards, eels, snakes, and other animals, all wrought in silver, and enamelled and tinted so as to deceive one into believing them real. It is an extraordinary piece of work, but more strange than beautiful. It is probably not older than the early seventeenth century. There are many other specimens of the jeweller’s art in this collection, reliquaries, chalices, cups, &c., mostly by natives, and some of them very handsome.

The little silver statuette of St. Blaize in the church of that saint is interesting historically as well as artistically, because the figure bears a model of the town before the great earthquake. The head is excellent both in expression and workmanship, and the exquisitely chased chasuble reminds one of the robes in Raguseo’s paintings. The original figure is, according to Graham Jackson, as old as the church, i.e. about 1360, but it has been restored at various times. The mitre, the crook of the pastoral staff, and the dalmatic have been renewed, while the lower part of the statuette has evidently been cut away. The model shows us the Ragusa of the fourteenth or fifteenth century, not very different from that of to-day, save for the Duomo and the church of San Biagio, which have been rebuilt, and the little church of the Three Martyrs of Cattaro in the Stradone, which has disappeared. Many of the houses in that street have gabled fronts and some have projecting pents to shelter the shops. The Orlando column supports a huge standard.

At Mezzo is preserved some church plate, of which the most beautiful piece is a large silver-gilt chalice. On the foot is a figure of St. Blaize in relief, and on the lower part of the cup are the emblems of the four Evangelists. The handles are formed by two graceful little angels poised with one foot on the top and the other hanging in the air, their hands clinging on to the edge of the cup. The hall-mark—a bishop’s head—is that of Ragusa, and the chalice is probably Mezzo work, the island having been famous for its goldsmiths. Many other specimens of this art exist in the various churches of Ragusa and the neighbourhood, and some perhaps may be found in those of other parts of Dalmatia, and in the monasteries of Bosnia, the Herzegovina, and Albania.

CHAPTER XIV

LITERATURE

Owing to her position between the Italian and Slavonic elements, and her connections with Venice and with the Serb States, Ragusan literature was of a twofold, or indeed of a threefold, nature. There were Ragusans who wrote in Latin, others in Italian, and others in Slavonic. But so mixed was the character of the people that in many instances the same author composed works in all the three languages. “Dalmatia, and especially Ragusa, which represents the highest degree of Slavonic culture, shows at the end of the Middle Ages a peculiar and characteristic blend of Italian and Slavonic elements, which even to-day is a remarkable trait of this people.”[526] Venetian influence strengthened the original Latin element of the population, and most of the nobles had Italian names, although later these were given a Slavonic form as well. Thus Gondola is sometimes written Gundulić, Palmota, Palmotić, Bona Bunić, &c. The collapse of Venetian power in Dalmatia in 1358 opened the way to Slavonic influences, for Hungary was too alien to the Dalmatians to impress more than her political sovereignty on them. But Latin and Italian culture was maintained by the side of that of the Slaves, and indeed the Slavonic literature at Ragusa was wholly inspired by that of Italy.

“Under the influence of peculiar historical conditions there arose on the Serbo-Croatian littoral an important poetical literature, of which Ragusa was the centre, and the pure vernacular the organ.”[527] It had, however, no connection with the old Slavonic tradition or the Servian popular songs, but was based almost exclusively on Italian influences, for Ragusan culture was purely of Italian origin, and the conditions utterly unlike those of the people of the neighbouring Slavonic States. The literary movements and forms of Italy were all reflected at Ragusa, and thus we find specimens of Latin ecclesiastical literature, of the Provençal troubadours, of Renaissance culture and the revival of learning. In the Ragusan epic Italian influence is conspicuous, and also in the native lyric poetry, which is chiefly inspired from Petrarch’s Canzoni; while the Ragusan dramas are imitated from the mediæval mystery plays, the pastoral plays of Tasso, and Italian popular comedies. Even the so-called “macaronic” verses were adopted at Ragusa, i.e. a medley of dog-Latin and Slavonic. The outward forms of Italian literary life were copied no less than literary styles, and learned literary academies were established at Ragusa, where men of culture met to discuss their favourite topics. The city came to be known as the “Slavonic Athens.” Learned Italians were invited to lecture at Ragusa, for the Senate maintained chairs of Italian and Latin literature since the early fifteenth century. The study of Greek had been to some extent kept up owing to the old Byzantine tradition, and it was now promoted by the influx of learned Greeks who took refuge at Ragusa after the fall of Constantinople. On the other hand, many Ragusans went abroad, especially to Italy, for purposes of study, and some of them achieved considerable fame in various spheres of life, such as Stoicus or Stoiković one of the most celebrated theologians of the fifteenth century, and Anselmo Banduri, the archæologist.

The Ragusan poets who wrote in Latin may be dismissed in a few words. The most celebrated of them was Elio Cerva, who went to Rome in 1476 at the age of sixteen, where he studied the humanities, and joined the Quirinal academy. He Latinised his name according to the fashion of the time into Ælius Lampridius Cervinus, and two years later he was crowned Poet-laureate. He soon returned to Ragusa, married, and determined to devote his life to the public service, but on the death of his wife he took Holy Orders, and spent most of his time at Ombla. He died in 1520. He was much appreciated by his contemporaries, especially by Sabellicus and Palladius Fuscus. His chief compositions are an elegy on his retreat at Ombla, another on the tomb of Cicero’s daughter, and a number of odes, epigrams, and hymns.

Another Latin poet of some reputation was Giovanni Gozze. He was employed by the Republic on various embassies, in the course of which he made the acquaintance of a number of statesmen and men of letters, among others that of the celebrated Agnolo Poliziano. To the latter he afterwards sent some of his own works, and Poliziano’s letter of thanks, in which he expresses admiration for the poems, is published, together with his other epistles. Giovanni Bona, who died in 1534, was the author of several poems of a religious character. Niccolò Bratutti (1564-1632) of Mezzo was made Bishop of Sarsina in Italy, but was afterwards imprisoned, during which period he began to write religious poems. These were published in 1630 under the title of Martyrologium Poeticum Sanctorum Totius Italiæ. The name of Stefano Gradi may also be mentioned as the author of sundry works in Latin on philosophy, epistles, poems, &c. He did much for the relief of his fellow-citizens at the time of the earthquake, and was instrumental in obtaining help from the Pope and other foreign potentates. He died in 1683.

Far more important is the Slavonic literature of Ragusa, Slavonic, as I have said, only in language, but Italian in character. The first Ragusan to write verse in the vernacular was Šiško Menčetić or Sigismondo Menze (1457-1501), who may be called the father of Ragusan poetry. His compositions were chiefly love lyrics of the Provençal troubadour character, a form introduced into Ragusa through the Republic’s connection with the Spanish court of Naples. His canzoniere is entitled Pjesni Ljuvesne.[528] Of a similar character are the poems of Gjore Držić (died 1510), and those of Hannibal Lučić or Lucio (1480-1540), author of a play called Robinja, or the Slave girl, of which the subject is an episode of the Turkish wars.[529] He also wrote an ode in praise of Ragusa, of which the following is an extract: “My songs cannot in any way tell of all the lands with which the famous Ragusa trades. Over mountains and through forests, all the world over, does she send her merchants without let or hindrance, through lands where the sun shines from afar, where it burns moderately, and where it blazes overmuch. All receive the wares which they peacefully bring, and what is given in exchange they peacefully carry away. Worthy is the city that she should everywhere be praised, that God and men should bless her!”

Nikola Vetranić-Čavčić (1482-1576) was much admired as a poet. He belonged to a noble Ragusan family, and was abbot of a monastery, but later in life he retired to a hermitage on a small island off the coast, where he continued to write poetry and keep up his intercourse with literary friends. His Sacrifice of Abraham is considered one of the best of the Slavonic mystery plays, for it contains really artistic presentations of character and situations, while some of the episodes begin to resemble Servian popular poetry. In a poem called Remeta, or the Hermit, he describes his island retreat, and in the Putnik (the Wanderer) Ragusan scenery. His Italija is an ode to Italy, in which he shows that the Ragusans considered themselves almost Italians, for he hopes that her ancient glory may return to Italy, and that she will remain independent of the heathen (the Turks), and that neither the Eagle nor the Cock (the Empire and France) will do her any harm, and he wishes her freedom and unity. Vetranić is also the author of a translation of the Hecuba of Euripides. Andrija Čubranović (died about 1550), unlike the other poets mentioned, was a man of the people. His best known poem is the Jegjupka, or the Gipsy.[530] It seems to have been a carnival song, and recalls some of the Italian Canti Carnascialeschi. It is said to have been publicly recited at Ragusa in 1527, and is considered remarkable for the purity of the language.

[Illustration: GIOVANNI GONDOLA

(From the Galleria di Ragusei Illustri)]

A form of literature much in vogue at Ragusa was the pastoral play or idyll, based on Italian models. The Slavonic pastoral play is of two types, that of Ragusa, which is comic, and that of Lesina, which is more purely idyllic. The mathematician and astronomer Nikola Nalješković (1510-1587) achieved some poetic fame as a writer of these plays, in which the shepherd falls in love not with the classical nymph, but with the vila of South-Slavonic popular legend. Another writer of plays was Marino Držić, praised by his Italian contemporaries for “il puro vago e dolce canto.” His principal works are Tirena,[531] Dundo Maroje,[532] and Novela od Stanca (the tale from Stanac). He also wrote sacred poems.

Dinko Ranjina or Domenico Ragnina (1536-1607) was the most famous Ragusan poet of the sixteenth century. Born of one of the noblest families in the town, he spent some years in Italy attending to his father’s business. Subsequently he returned home and entered the service of the Republic, and was elected Rector several times. His poems are chiefly love lyrics; but he also wrote epistles, didactic poems, and idylls in the classical Renaissance manner, as well as translations from Tibullus, Propertius, and Martial.

Dinko Zlatarić (1556-1510), also a noble, studied at Padua, and at the age of twenty-three was appointed Rector of the University gymnasium. Thence he went to Agram, and then home to Ragusa. He translated Tasso’s Aminta under the title of Ljubomir, the Electra of Sophocles, and the episode of Pyramus and Thisbe from Ovid, and is the author of a number of love idylls and didactic poems. With his name is coupled that of Floria Zuzzeri, a Ragusan lady renowned for her beauty and her virtue, also a poetess of distinction, whom he adored. She had been the centre of a little circle of literary ladies at Ragusa until her father took her to Ancona on business. There she married Bartolommeo Pescioni, a wealthy Florentine, in 1577. She settled in Florence, where she kept a salon frequented by many famous Italian authors and dilettanti, and also by Ragusans, such as the aforesaid Zlatarić, Ragnina, and Giovanni Gondola. She wrote sonnets both in Italian and Slavonic, some of which became famous throughout Italy. She died in 1600.

The most celebrated of all the Ragusan poets is Ivan Gundulić or Giovanni Gondola (1588-1638). Very little is known of his life beyond the fact that he studied the classics, philosophy, and law, and that he was a great admirer of Italian literature. He desired to introduce the harmony of Italian verse into Illyrian, and to purify that language. He preferred the style of Tasso, which he closely imitated, to that of Petrarch, till then the favourite model of Ragusan poets. Instead of a line of ten, eleven, twelve, or thirteen syllables, he adopted that of eight, in rhymed strophes, which he deemed more fluid and vigorous, capable of expressing feelings with greater power, and more in accordance with the genius of the language. His first essay was a translation of Tasso’s Gerusalemme, after which he devoted himself to the drama, composing or translating from the Italian a number of plays, which he and a circle of literary friends produced on the stage. The chief of these are Dubravka, Arijadna, Armida, and Galatea. But the work on which his fame chiefly rests, and is regarded as the most important composition in the Servian language, is the Osman, an epic in twenty cantos. The subject is the war between Turkey and Poland, and the fall of the Sultan Osman after his defeat. The Polish victory of Koczim in 1621 forces the Turks to make peace, and the action of the poem begins at this moment. After the defeat of the Turks Osman deplores the disaster and attributes it to the decadence of the Ottomans, and proposes a number of reforms. He orders the arrest of his uncle Mustafa, who had already usurped the throne once, sends Ali to Warsaw to sue for peace, and Cislar to the provinces to find a number of fair damsels, from among whom he will choose the Sultana, and orders that the Polish prisoner, Prince Koreski, immured in the Castle of the Seven Towers, shall be carefully watched. Ali goes through Moldavia, where he finds Kronoslava, Koreski’s wife, attired as a warrior, and tells her of the imprisonment of her husband. She resolves to go to Constantinople in disguise to obtain his ransom. The Poles celebrate the anniversary of the victory of Koczim, when Prince Ladislas of Poland has an encounter with Sokolica, the daughter of the Grand Mogul, and her amazons; he captures them, but out of admiration for their courage sets them free, and they return to Constantinople. Ali reaches Warsaw and enters the Royal Palace, where he notes the splendour of the court and sees the tapestries representing the battle of Koczim, here described in detail. He concludes the treaty of peace and returns home. Cislar has collected a number of maidens from Greece, Macedonia, and the Archipelago, and goes to the borders of Moldavia to capture Danica, the daughter of Prince Ljubidrag, who, having lost his estates, is living in a rural retreat. While he and his friends are performing rustic games, Cislar and his companions arrive and carry off Danica. Satan, enraged at the victories of the Christians, summons his demons, and flies with them to Constantinople to raise trouble. There, too, Kronoslava has arrived in search of her husband; she is told that he is in love with the daughter of the governor of the prison, and although not quite convinced, she begins to feel jealous. By bribery she manages to see Prince Koreski, is convinced of his fidelity, and falls into his arms. The Sultan soon afterwards sets him free, and he returns home with his wife. Cislar appears with his fair captives, but Osman, seeing Danica’s despair and hearing her story, sends her back to her father. Sokolica, too, comes to Constantinople, and Osman chooses her as first Sultana, and marries two Greek maidens as well. He then prepares for an expedition to Asia against the rebels, but the Janissaries revolt, and demand the heads of Dilaver Pasha the Grand Vizir, of the Hodja, and of the chief eunuch. The rebellion spreads, the Grand Vizir is murdered, and Osman’s uncle Mustafa freed and proclaimed Sultan. While Osman is deploring his misfortunes and recalling the glories of his ancestors, he, too, is assassinated by Mustafa’s orders.

This poem, although not of first-rate quality, has some originality, and is interesting from its subject. It is only at Ragusa that a Christian writer would have made a Turkish Sultan his hero, and it is only here and there that a few passages are introduced reflecting unfavourably on the Turks. A great deal of it is simply an adaptation of Tasso, and whole passages are translated from that work. It is full of repetitions and exaggerations and useless accessories, but it also contains many passages of real beauty and feeling, such as the address to Ragusa: “O mayest thou ever live peaceful and free as thou art now, O white city of Ragusa, famous throughout the world, pleasing to the heavens.... Bondmen are thy neighbours, oppressive violence grinds them all down, thy power alone sits on the throne of freedom” (Canto viii.). Gondola also apostrophises Stephen Dušan, the Nemanjas, Marko Kraljević, and other Servian heroes. Cantos xiv. and xv. were lost, and have been rewritten by Petar Sorkočević, Marino Zlatarić, and Ivan Mažuranić. The interest is divided between the two heroes, Osman and Ladislas, and a great deal of the work is lyrical rather than epic in character.[533]

Of the prose writers of this time, the one most deserving of notice is Mauro Orbini, who died in 1601. His chief work, which is written in Italian, is entitled Storia del Regno degli Slavi. It is of no great historic value, but it is important as being the first attempt to deal with the history of all the Slaves as a comprehensive whole. Other historians are Niccolò Ragnina, author of the Annali di Ragusa, Giacomo Luccari, whose Copioso Ristretto degli Annali di Ragusa contains much interesting information about the constitution of the Republic, and Giunio Resti, author of the very detailed Cronaca Ragusina, in thirteen books, a most unreliable work. None of these writers have shown any conspicuous qualities as historians of their native city, being inspired by a strong political bias, and are only to be consulted with caution.

Ragusa gave birth to several men of science, of whom two deserve to be remembered—Marino Ghetaldi and Ruggiero Bosković.[534] Ghetaldi was born in 1566, and studied in Rome and Paris. After travelling about Europe he obtained the professorship of mathematics at Louvain. He subsequently returned to Ragusa, and served in the Government offices. In summer he would retire to his villa by the sea to meditate and make experiments in a cave on his estates. He was regarded by the people as a magician, and his experiments in setting fire to boats out at sea by means of mirrors and burning-glasses were considered quite diabolical. He wrote Promotus Archimedes, seu de variis corporum generibus gravitate et magnitudine comparatis (Rome, 1603), and many other mathematical works. He is said to have applied geometry to algebra before Des Cartes, and to have been the first to discover equations of the fourth degree. He died in 1627. Bosković was born in 1711, and became a Jesuit at an early age. He obtained the professorship of mathematics in Rome, and measured the meridian between Rome and Rimini with the Englishman Maire. He made a map of the Papal States, and wrote a work on the molecular theory of matter, Theoria Philosophiæ Naturalis redacta ad unicam Legem Virium in Natura existentium. In 1759 he was sent to England on a diplomatic mission, where he made the acquaintance of Dr. Johnson, and was elected Fellow of the Royal Society, to whom he dedicated his Latin poem De Solis et Lunæ Defectus. He afterwards travelled in Turkey for scientific purposes, and was then appointed Professor of Mathematics at Pavia (1764) and Director of the Brera Observatory. His vanity and egoism made him many enemies, and in 1770 he left Italy for Paris, where he was made Director of Optics to the Ministry of Marine, an office which he held for ten years. In 1783 he returned to Italy and published all his works. His health was failing, his reputation on the wane, and he soon fell into melancholy and madness, and died in 1787. Besides other works, he wrote the Elementa Universæ Mathesos, published in 1754.

CHAPTER XV

THE FALL OF THE REPUBLIC

Ragusa now enters into the vortex of the Napoleonic wars, in which she, like her great rival Venice and many another still more powerful State, was to disappear. The story of her end is but an incident in that wonderful drama, but it affords some curious side-lights on the history of Europe at that period, and exhibits for the last time the peculiar character of the Ragusan Government and people.

In 1797 the French armies occupied Venice, put an end to the Republic, and annexed its possessions, while a French fleet seized the Ionian Islands. In the meanwhile Austrian troops were advancing into Dalmatia, which, as part of Venetian territory, in theory belonged to France, and ships of war of all nations began to appear in the Adriatic. The aristocratic Government of Venice was for a time succeeded by a democratic one modelled on French lines, and the new régime was to have been applied to Dalmatia as well. But by the preliminaries of Leoben that province and Istria were given over to Austria. The Dalmatians did not want a democratic constitution, and for some time Austrian agents had been preparing them for an Austrian occupation. They succeeded in inducing the people to acclaim the Emperor Francis II. as their King, and in July 1797 General Rukavina landed at Zara with an army; in a few weeks he had occupied the whole of Dalmatia and part of Albania. But trouble arose at Cattaro among the turbulent Bocchesi; some of them favoured the Austrian régime as the heir to that of Venice, others, chiefly Orthodox Christians, desired a union then, as now, with the Vladika of Montenegro, while a third party was imbued with French ideas and clamoured for a democratic constitution. The Vladika himself was hostile to Austria, and encouraged a rising in Albania. But General Rukavina conciliated the Cattarini and entered the town without opposition. By the Peace of Campoformio, Istria, Dalmatia, and Cattaro, as well as Venice and her mainland possessions, were ceded to Austria (October 18, 1797).[535]

The fall of Venice was on the whole satisfactory to the Ragusans, but the close proximity of the Austrians, who were useful protectors so long as they remained at a safe distance, was regarded as a danger. They sent protestations of fealty to Vienna and to the local Austrian authorities; their fears were not groundless, for Rukavina did actually intend to violate their neutrality, as appears from a despatch from the Austrian Minister Count Thugut to Count Thurn, who had been appointed Governor of Dalmatia. Thugut disapproved of this project, as he feared that it might cause trouble with the Turks as protectors of the Republic. But he complained to d’Ajala, the Ragusan Minister, that Ragusa was a hotbed of revolutionary ideas.[536] The Emperor, however, expressed his intention of protecting the Republic in every way.

At the end of October a French squadron under Brueys appeared at Gravosa, and the Admiral offered the Republic the “good offices” of France, which were politely declined on the ground that Ragusa was under Turkish suzerainty. In August 1798 the French military authorities demanded the loan of some ships for the expedition to Egypt, and the request was granted. This caused General Brady, in command of the Austrians at Cattaro, to reprimand the Senate severely for its breach of neutrality, and he had to be appeased by a loan of 12,000 florins for his war chest. A short time afterwards a French agent named Briche came to Ragusa to raise a loan of 1,000,000 francs for France, and by means of threats induced the Senate to pay 400,000 down and issue two bills for 100,000 each. Austrian spies discovered this transaction, and informed their Government that the young men of Ragusa were imbued with French ideas. But the Senate cleverly protested against this forced contribution both in Vienna and in Constantinople, and suggested that the most adequate protection against similar extortions would be the presence of a few British frigates in the Adriatic. Caracciolo, their agent at Naples, opened negotiations with the British Minister for the purpose. At the same time their agent in Paris tried to obtain the remission of the bills, but without success, and the 200,000 francs had to be paid to Dubois, the French Commissary in the Adriatic. Another misfortune befell the Republic, which had a large sum of money invested in the Bank of Vienna. As the Emperor was again going to war the Bank made a call on the shareholders of 30 per cent. of their capital. Ragusa tried to shirk this payment, but in vain, and somehow the sum was procured. To meet these liabilities new taxes had to be raised, which fell chiefly on the peasants, hitherto almost exempt; the price of salt was increased, and every one was forced to buy a large amount of that commodity. This caused serious discontent, especially among the peasants of Canali, who had never been too loyal to the Republic; they now refused to pay the taxes, and rose in revolt. Eight Senators, who owned land in that district, went to try to induce them to hear reason, and this mission having failed, the Pasha of Trebinje was asked to place a corps of observation along the frontier to prevent the rebels from crossing over into Turkish territory, while General Brady was asked to send an Austrian detachment to help to quell the revolt, expressly requesting that they should be Germans, and not ex-Venetian soldiers. Brady, however, had too few troops to dispose of, and no authority to enter Ragusan territory. At the same time a deputation of Canalesi called on him and explained their grievances and the persecutions inflicted by the Ragusans, which they attributed to the fact “that they (the Canalesi) had refused to follow the nobles in their Jacobin ideas.” This was enough for Brady, to whom the very name of Jacobin was anathema; he at once took the Canalesi under his protection, and wrote to the Senate demanding that their grievances should be redressed. The Canalesi also sent a memorandum to the Emperor of Austria, complaining of the increase of the taxes since 1750, of the kidnapping of boys to serve on board Ragusan ships, and of girls to be used by the nobles for illicit purposes, and imploring him to free them from Ragusa’s yoke and take them under his protection. At the same time the Republic sent two envoys to Vienna to explain the situation from the Ragusan point of view, and to represent Brady as an accomplice of the Turks and the schismatics and a protector of rebels; and also an envoy to the Divan, to say that Austria was meditating an invasion of the Herzegovina.[537] The Emperor ordered Brady to pacify the insurgents, but without using force. When the Austrian Foreign Office heard of the mission to Constantinople it was much incensed, but d’Ajala managed to hush the matter up. The Senate then redressed the grievances of the Canalesi, and succeeded in restoring order. But the leaders of the movement were subsequently punished on various pretexts, and this led to further trouble in future. The deficit was met by the suppression of the rich monastery of Lacroma, and the seizure of its property.

These immediate troubles and dangers having been warded off, there follows a period of five years (1800-1805) which is perhaps the most prosperous in the whole history of the Republic. All the other States of the Mediterranean, large or small, were involved in war; Ragusa alone remained neutral, and therefore enjoyed almost a monopoly of the carrying trade. Her ships were more numerous than they had ever been before, and her income enormous. English privateers harried French commerce, and French ones that of England; Venice was no longer of any mercantile importance; the Turks plundered all Christian ships except those of Ragusa. The Senate, with its traditional diplomacy, kept on good terms with everybody, especially with the Turks. A few frontier incidents with Austria occurred, but they were settled amicably. In 1804 Timoni was appointed Austrian consul at Ragusa. His instructions were to protect Austrian commercial interests, and to assure the Senate that the Emperor intended to protect the Republic and guarantee the integrity of its territory. When war broke out between France and Austria in 1805 Ragusa refused to commit herself, but Timoni informed his Government that the sympathies of the citizens were with the French, and when the “bad news” (of Austerlitz) arrived they did not conceal their satisfaction. Even in the Senate more than half the members were Francophil. “It appears,” wrote Timoni, “that this Government, of which the apathy, indolence, and venality are at their height, will undergo the fate for which it is destined.... I am convinced that if peace be not concluded, the French will try to get possession of this Republic, and form a body of troops here with whom to attack Cattaro. The only means by which this could be avoided, and which I venture to submit to the superior intelligence of your Excellency, is that in case hostilities should recommence you should place a garrison in the town until peace is declared, without, however, interfering in the affairs of the Government.”[538]

Bruère was at this time French consul at Ragusa. He was a cultivated, brilliant man, and had charming manners. He was also a littérateur, and composed sonnets and epigrams in French, Italian, and even in Slavonic. He thus soon acquired considerable influence over the young men of the town, and aroused French sympathies among them, for which, indeed, the reading of French books had prepared the way. But these sentiments did not prevent the Senate from politely refusing to make a further loan of ammunition and provisions to France, which Murat demanded in 1801, for they remembered what bad paymasters the French were. On the contrary, they tried once more to get their previous loan of 600,000 francs refunded. While the negotiations were going on the Senate wrote most respectfully to the First Consul, and when he was proclaimed Emperor they congratulated him enthusiastically in the best Ragusan style, and he replied with a letter in which he called them his “dear and good friends.”

The Russians had long desired to establish a footing in the Mediterranean, so as to attack Constantinople from both sides, and after various fruitless attempts they determined to seize Ragusa. In 1802 they appointed Charles Fonton their consul in the town. During the siege of Malta the French had received some provisions from Ragusan ships, and the Tsar Paul, deeming this a good excuse for aggressive action, instructed Fonton to assume the most brutal manner towards the authorities. He neglected no opportunity of making a quarrel. First, he demanded that a house should be provided for him at the Republic’s expense, and when this was complied with, he said it was not good enough. This ridiculous dispute lasted two years, and in his correspondence with the Government he was as insolent and arrogant as only a Russian consul knows how to be. He also insisted on the execution of the clause of the treaty of 1775, that Orthodox services should be held at Ragusa, and, although a Catholic himself, he converted an abandoned chapel into an Orthodox church, where a Montenegrin pope conducted the services. The Senate made remonstrances to Vienna, Constantinople, and St. Petersburg about Fonton’s outrageous behaviour, and tried to obtain his removal. But when these manœuvres were discovered, and the anger of Russia was feared, the Senate very ungratefully made d’Ajala their scapegoat, disowned him, and forced him to resign after thirty years of faithful service to the Republic.

[Illustration: TORRE MENZE AND THE WALLS]

The Russians, naturally, were anything but popular at Ragusa, and this strengthened the French sentiments of the people. César Berthier, the nephew of the Marshal, flaunted about in the public places and private houses surrounded by the young men of the best families, discoursing loudly of the glories of Napoleon, to the extreme disgust of Fonton.

By the Peace of Pressburg France regained Venetia, and consequently Istria and Dalmatia. To this last possession Napoleon attached great importance, as it formed an excellent base for operations in the Balkans and in the East. In February 1806 the French troops under General Molitor occupied the country as far as Makarska, and preparations were made for an attack on Cattaro, where resistance was expected on the part of the Montenegrins and Albanians, supported by the Russians.

During the war of 1805 Russia had sent a fleet of forty-two ships and transports, under Admiral Siniavin, into the Adriatic. After the battle of Austerlitz it concentrated at Corfu, and the Admiral was invited by the Montenegrins to occupy Cattaro. This he did, obliging the Austrian garrison to retire. Ghislieri, the Austrian Commissary, who had arranged the evacuation, was accused of cowardice, for although Austria had given up Dalmatia to France, he had not yet received orders to quit his post. The French were furious, and declared Austria responsible for the Russian occupation of Cattaro, which they would now have to attack in force. These events disturbed the Ragusans, who feared lest the passage of French troops through their territory should end in a permanent occupation. The Senate sent conciliatory letters to Napoleon, congratulating “the most glorious of Emperors” on his victories, and to Talleyrand, “the most virtuous of Ministers.” They offered to transport the French army by sea from Stagno to Ragusavecchia or Porto Rose, thus avoiding the passage through the town of Ragusa, and voted 30,000 piastres for the purpose. Unfortunately, Sankovski, the Russian Commissary, heard of the offer, and threatened that if these were the Republic’s intentions he would order the occupation of Ragusavecchia, adding that the garrison would be a Montenegrin one, well knowing how the Ragusans hated and feared those lawless mountaineers. Another Russian agent came to Ragusa on board a frigate, insisted that all arrangements with the French should be cancelled, and ordered the Senate to inform the Russians as to the movements of the French troops. The Senate instructed Bassegli and Zlatarić, their agents in the French camp, to do everything to hinder Molitor’s advance, by describing the strength of the Russians and the risks of the march. This they did, and Molitor was so impressed by their statements that he gave up the plan for the moment. His demand for a further loan of 300,000 francs was refused on the plea that the treasury was empty, although as a matter of fact it was not. Siniavin now proposed to attack Ragusa and occupy it, but the Senate’s protestations of loyalty to the Tsar, and possibly its bribes, induced him to desist from a move which would have secured him from all fear of a French attack.[539]

But now the French General Lauriston came on the scene, and prepared to advance; he concentrated a force at Makarska, and then moved on to Slano in Ragusan territory. The Senators were at their wits’ end; the old diplomacy had broken down in the clash of the Napoleonic wars; they could no longer temporise, and were under the necessity of calling in either the French or the Russians. The latter seemed the more dangerous, especially on account of their allies, the Montenegrins. Moreover, the French consul had made many friends, while his Russian colleague was deservedly hated. Count Caboga’s proposal that the population should emigrate en masse to Corfu or Turkish territory was rejected, and the majority decided in favour of the French. On the evening of May 27 Lauriston, with 800 men, reached Ragusa after a forced march of twenty hours. He found the gates closed and the drawbridge up; two Senators met him and requested him not to enter the town, but this was a mere formality. He repaired to the Palace, where the Minor Council was assembled, and declared that his orders were to occupy the fortified points of the State of Ragusa, but to respect the liberty of the Republic and the persons and property of the inhabitants. He offered them the protection of Napoleon, and said that as the Austrian Emperor had closed all his ports to the Anglo-Russian fleets, it was important that Ragusa should not remain the only harbour in the Adriatic open to the enemies of France. Meanwhile Colonel Teste with the troops had entered the town and seized the forts: Ragusa was thus occupied for the first time in her history by uninvited foreign troops. Great consternation ensued, and the Russians at once seized all the Ragusan ships in the harbour of Gravosa. On May 29 Lauriston issued the following proclamation:—

“Repeated concessions to the enemies of France had placed the Republic of Ragusa in a state of hostility, all the more dangerous inasmuch as it was disguised under the appearance of neutrality and friendship. The entry of the French troops into Dalmatia, far from putting an end to such conduct, has only given occasion to our enemies to exercise their influence on the State of Ragusa still further, and whatever may have been the motives of the condescension shown by the magistrates of this State, the Emperor could not fail to be aware of them; he desired to put an end to intrigues so contrary to the laws of neutrality.

“Consequently, in the name and by the authority of His Majesty the Emperor and King of Italy, I take possession of the town and territory of Ragusa.

“I declare, however, that it is the intention of His Imperial and Royal Majesty to recognise the independence and neutrality of this State as soon as the Russians evacuate Albania, Corfu, and the other former Venetian possessions, and the Russian fleet ceases to disturb the coasts of Dalmatia.

“I promise succour and protection to all Ragusans; I shall see that the existing laws and customs and the rights of property be respected; in a word, I shall so act that, according to the behaviour of the inhabitants, they will be satisfied with the residence of the French troops in the country.

“The existing Government is maintained; it will fulfil the same functions and have the same attributions as before; its relations with States friendly to France or neutral will remain on the same footing.

“M. Bruère, commissioner of commercial relations (consul), will act as Imperial Commissary to the Senate.

“ALEX. LAURISTON.

“RAGUSA, May 28, 1806.”

This coup de main was most successful, but Lauriston did not execute the rest of his programme by attacking Cattaro, for he was himself besieged in Ragusa instead.

His forces amounted, as I have said, to about 800 men, but he sent to Molitor at Zara for reinforcements and supplies, which arrived from Spalato soon after; the garrison was thus raised to 2000. Ragusa was put in a state of defence, the guns in the arsenal were mounted, a cargo of powder for the Turks seized, and the Ragusavecchia-Obod line held by 200 Frenchmen. A few days later the Montenegrins and Orthodox Bocchesi, instigated by the Russians, advanced into Canali, which they proceeded to pillage, while 500 more landed from Russian ships near Ragusavecchia. The French drove them back, but fearing to be cut off if the Russians landed at Breno, they withdrew to that point, and then to Bergato, where they were joined by reinforcements under General Delgorgue. The Russian squadron sailed up and landed a force at Breno, which encouraged the Montenegrins to attack Delgorgue. He was hard pressed by the enemy, who availed themselves of every inch of cover. On June 17 he attempted a bayonet charge, which failed, and he himself was killed in the mêlée; the retreat became a rout, Bergato was abandoned, and the Russians seized Monte Sergio and Gravosa. Ragusa was filled with refugees flying before the Montenegrins, and from that day was closely invested. A Russian attack on Lacroma was repulsed, but on the 19th the bombardment commenced. The battery on Monte Sergio discharged 3374 shells in seventeen days, but only twenty-three people were killed. All the houses round the town were razed to the ground; the villas of the rich nobles were plundered, the more valuable contents being seized by the Russian officers, and the rest left to the Montenegrins, Bocchesi, Canalesi, Bosnians, and even Turks, who had swarmed down in the hope of loot. The inhabitants who did not get away in time were murdered and even tortured. On June 22 there was a suspension of hostilities, and the nobles tried to induce Lauriston to surrender, which he refused to do. On the 28th Admiral Siniavin summoned him to capitulate without success; the bombardment recommenced, but without much vigour, and the siege became a blockade.

Suddenly on July 6 a body of French troops appeared before the Porta Ploce, and soon after Molitor himself arrived, drove off the Russians, and entered the town. When the news of the defeat at Bergato reached Zara he had quickly collected 2000 men and advanced on Ragusa. He sent a message to Lauriston which was designed to fall into the hands of the Russians, announcing his arrival at the head of 10,000 men; he also made a small body of troops march several times past a spot near Ombla whence they could be seen by the enemy. The Russians, thus deceived as to the strength of the French, abandoned Monte Sergio, and together with the Montenegrins fled to the coast and embarked on board ship. The French were received at Ragusa with much show of enthusiasm, for although a large part of the population had no sympathy with them, they rejoiced that the siege was at an end, and the fear of a sack of the town by the Montenegrins removed.

Molitor returned to Zara, Lauriston remaining behind to organise the French protectorate at Ragusa. He discovered that the Senate had sent an agent to Constantinople with a report bitterly reviling the French, another to Vienna and St. Petersburg asking for intervention in favour of Ragusa, and a third to Paris with a humble letter to Napoleon, and instructions to ask the Turkish ambassador to protest against the occupation of a State tributary to the Porte. He also learned that the Republic had deposited 700,000 florins in Schuller’s bank at Vienna, of which a part had been withdrawn in March and June. The French Commissary thereupon declared that henceforth all affairs dealt with by the Senate and the Minor Council should be first communicated to him, and that no payments were to be made without his authority.

Although Lauriston in his proclamation of May 29, 1806, had promised that Ragusa would be evacuated when peace was declared, the French had no intention of doing so, and on July 21 Napoleon wrote to Eugène Beauharnais: “You will make General Lauriston observe that if I have said in the treaty (the peace of Oubril, which the Tsar afterwards refused to ratify) that I recognise the independence of Ragusa, that does not mean that I shall evacuate it; on the contrary, when the Montenegrins have gone home, I intend to organise the country, and then abandon it if necessary, retaining only Stagno.” The Ragusans did not know of this, and believed that they would soon be free, but their hopes were dashed to the ground when, on August 24, war broke out again.

The French paid the indemnities for the siege very liberally—13,000,000 francs—as the money was to be provided for by Austria, whom they held responsible for all the consequences of the Russian occupation of Cattaro. On the strength of this generosity the Senate tried once more through Count Sorgo, a Ragusan resident in Paris, to get the other loan of 600,000 francs refunded, but without success. At last, on July 8, 1807, the Peace of Tilsit was signed, by which Russia gave up Cattaro to the French. Berthier, in a letter to General Marmont, who was now in command in Dalmatia, wrote: “Ragusa must certainly be united to Dalmatia; you must therefore continue to fortify it.” On August 13 Marmont stopped at Ragusa on his way to Cattaro, and received the Senators very affably; but in the course of conversation he said to one of them: “Vous allez être des nôtres.” On being asked for an explanation of these ominous words, he added “that in the present circumstances they could not remain free: the delegates having said that without merchant shipping the State could not exist, Marmont replied that by belonging to the great Emperor His Majesty would find means of compensating them. The next day the General told the delegates who had called on him that he was instructed to inform them of their future destiny, and that pending the arrival of those to whom the organisation of the new Government was entrusted, that of Ragusa might continue in its functions.”[540]

The declaration seemed the death-knell of Ragusan independence, and Timoni describes the condition of the State in consequence of the French occupation: “Agriculture ruined, the merchant navy reduced to inaction, public finances dilapidated, private citizens crushed down by requisitions, the monasteries converted into barracks, the invasion of the Jews as army contractors, the establishment of a masonic lodge and a club, and on the top of all this the blindness of the people and the bourgeoisie who receive the French with open arms.” As Timoni observes, the French party was still strong among the middle and lower classes, who were tired of the oligarchic rule of the nobles.

As soon as Marmont had departed a secret meeting of the Senate was held, and it was decided to send a disguised messenger to Vienna with a petition to the Emperor of Austria. As usual insufficient secrecy was observed, and Marmont heard of their action, but did nothing for the moment. On November 4 a demand was made for 300 sailors for the Franco-Venetian fleet, to which the Senate replied that in Ragusa there was always an insufficiency of seamen, that a third of the crews were foreigners, and that many of their ships had been captured by the Russians or were abroad. Instructions were sent to Kiriko, the Ragusan consul at Constantinople, to try to obtain Turkish intervention. But the French ambassador, General Sebastiani, had so much influence with the Porte that Kiriko had been obliged to remove the Ragusan arms from his house, and to request the Ragusan ship-captains to substitute the tricolor for the banner of St. Blaize. For this the Republic dismissed him from his office, and sent Antonio Natali to inform the Sultan of the dangers which menaced “the oldest and most faithful tributary of the Porte.” On December 21 Lauriston informed the Minor Council that Ragusan ships must take out Italian patents within three days on pain of being seized on leaving the port. The Senate replied that it could not take such a step without consulting the Ottoman Government. Two days later Lauriston left Ragusa, and on the 26th Colonel Godart put up a notice declaring that any captain who did not hoist the Italian colours at once would be imprisoned. On January 2, 1808, General Clauzel took command of Ragusa, and on the 6th the tricolor was hoisted on the flagstaff in the Piazza. The Senate tried to send Count Caboga to the Emperor of Austria, but Clauzel prevented his departure. Urgent messages were despatched to Constantinople, and overtures were even made to Timoni. “Consul,” they said significantly, “Ragusans or Austrians.” The Pasha of Bosnia was also approached, but he was friendly to the French, and informed them of all the Ragusans’ communications. On the 30th Marmont returned to Ragusa, and summoned the Senate, saying that he had a declaration to make. “The Council,” writes Timoni, “gathered together in less than an hour, and Colonel Delort repaired to the Palace, followed by the Consul Bruère, the war commissary, the commander of the garrison, the interpreter Vernazza, and two other officers. The Colonel sat down beside the Rector, and read out to the Senate a document in which the Government of Ragusa was accused of disloyalty, of having set the Pasha of Bosnia against the French, of having tried to raise an agitation among the people; the intimation made by Marmont the preceding August not having had any effect, it was now necessary to take further measures. He then drew another paper from his pocket, and read as follows:—

“‘The General Commander-in-Chief in Dalmatia orders: The Republic of Ragusa has ceased to exist; the Government and the Senate, as well as the law-courts, are dissolved. M. Bruère is appointed provisional administrator of the State of Ragusa.’

“The Senators were silent for a while; then Count Biagio Bernardo Caboga arose, and informed the Colonel that neither the moment nor the circumstances permitted him to enter into a long justification; that, as far as concerned himself, his conscience was pure and clear, and that he could answer for the loyalty of his colleagues. The Senate was ready to submit to the Divine Will as manifested through the organ of His Majesty Napoleon the Great.”

Meanwhile troops seized the Palace, the Segreteria, and the custom house, on which seals were affixed. That night the burghers of Ragusa gave a ball to celebrate the end of the oligarchy! But though resistance might now seem indeed hopeless, the Senate continued to intrigue for a little while longer. Napoleon then ordered Marmont to arrest ten of the chief agitators and send them to Venice as hostages, and to threaten to shoot all who were found to be in correspondence with foreign Governments. The nobles ceased to agitate openly, but they did not yet renounce all hope of regaining their independence.

In March, 1808, Marmont was created Duke of Ragusa, a title of which, according to Pisani, he was not very proud, for in his memoirs he mentions it as having been conferred on him in 1807, perhaps because he did not like to be reminded of the fact that it was a reward for his services in the suppression of a free Republic.

Napoleon had appointed the Venetian Dandolo Provveditore of Dalmatia, while General Marmont retained the supreme military command. But Ragusa and Cattaro were given a separate administration under G. D. Garagnin, who was independent of Dandolo, and responsible only to Marmont. The territory of the Republic was divided into three districts: Ragusa, Stagno, and the Islands. Ragusa was given a council of eighteen members (six nobles, six burghers, and six plebeians), with Count Sorgo as mayor, and four adjoints. The State’s finances proved to be still in good condition in spite of all the troubles and the requisitions, and large sums were invested in foreign banks.

After the departure of the Russian fleet the British squadron appeared in the Adriatic and began to prey upon French and Dalmatian shipping. During the next three years fighting continued in Croatia between the Austrians and the French, and trouble was threatened in the Bocche by the native Orthodox Christians supported by the Montenegrins. The French General Pacthod visited Cattaro, made some arrests, shot three of the agitators, and calmed the rest of the population. But the British fleet ceaselessly cruised up and down, and prevented the French from maintaining secure communications between Italy and Dalmatia. The British crews had one great advantage over the French—they were all Englishmen, and veterans; whereas the French ships were manned by scratch crews, consisting of Italians and Slaves, as well as of Frenchmen. In 1810 Lissa was made the port of call for British ships, but not fortified. In October a Franco-Italian squadron under Captain Dubordieu, in the absence of British men-of-war, seized the island and captured a few merchantmen; but he abandoned it again on the return of the fleet, and the British now decided to occupy it permanently. Dubordieu received orders to try to recapture it, and on March 11, 1811, he set sail from Ancona with nine warships, 271 guns, and 2655 men. On the 13th he encountered a British squadron under Captain Hoste, consisting of four ships with 188 guns and 985 men. In spite of this great disparity of forces Hoste gave battle, and was completely victorious; most of the enemies’ ships were sunk or captured. The British were equally successful in subsequent engagements, and Lissa was strongly fortified and formally taken possession of in 1812. The island prospered enormously under British rule, and the population rose from 4000 to 11,000. In January Sir Duncan Robertson, commanding at Lissa, occupied Curzola, which was given a government like that of Lissa under Lowen, and became equally prosperous. The Ragusan island of Lagosta was occupied at the same time.

In the following May the British determined to occupy the other Ragusan islands. On February 18 an attack was made on Mezzo, but repulsed. The island was then blockaded; part of the garrison deserted, and the rest under Lieutenant Tock retired to the Forte della Montagna. A British force landed, seized the Forte Santa Maria, and placed a battery on a hill commanding Tock’s position. Unable to hold out any longer, he surrendered to Blake with the honours of war. Giuppana was also captured, and then Calamotta, and the Ragusan Count Natali was appointed Governor of the Archipelago under British protection. An attack on Ragusavecchia was repulsed by a Croatian battalion on October 11; but two days later that same battalion deserted from the French to the English side, and Count Biagio Bernardo Caboga was appointed Governor of the town. The same day another Croatian detachment abandoned the island of Daksa at the entrance of the harbour of Gravosa, and a British force occupied Stagno. Thus Ragusa was blockaded from the sea on all sides. On November 11, 1813, Hoste attacked the island of Lesina, and captured it without difficulty.

In this same year an Austrian army invaded Dalmatia and co-operated with the British fleet; the population being tired of French exaction rose in arms in favour of the Austrians. The French, attacked on all sides, were forced to abandon many towns and fortresses. For a time the British under Cadogan, the Austrians under General Tomasić, and the Dalmatian insurgents under Danese all worked together for the expulsion of the invaders. But in the operations round Ragusa and Cattaro a certain amount of friction arose between the British and the Austrians. The French forces too, however, were not homogeneous, and the number of desertions from the Italian and Croatian regiments, whose hearts were not in the fight, was very large. The Allies were assisted by an anti-French movement in Ragusa itself; but while the nobles and the peasantry desired the restoration of the Republic, the bourgeoisie still evinced French tendencies. The other Dalmatians wished to be under Austrian dominion.

The British fleet, as I have said, had occupied the Ragusan islands, where a provisional Government was set up under Ragusan nobles, and the old Ragusan laws were revived. With the capture of Stagno the whole country west of the Ombla rose in favour of the Anglo-Austrians, and Captain Lowen issued a proclamation to the Ragusans from Mezzo, declaring that “the English and Austrian forces were advancing towards this country to give it back its liberty.... Remember that you bear a glorious name, and fight as the Spaniards and the Russians have fought to restore your independence.” The Austrian proclamation issued by General Hiller contained no mention of the word independence.

[Illustration: TERRACE OF THE VILLA BRAVAČIĆ, NEAR RAGUSA]

In the meanwhile the Ragusans Count Caboga and Marchese Bona raised a force of 3000 Canalesi; as this was not sufficient to recapture Ragusa, it became necessary to apply for British assistance. But no one wished to be the first to ask for it, as it was feared that if the British did seize Ragusa they might end by retaining it; while if they failed, the French would show no mercy on the rebels. At last it was agreed to send a popular deputation of twenty-five peasants to Captain Hoste, who was in command of the squadron at Cattaro, asking for help from the Allies to re-establish the Republic. According to Bona, Hoste and Lowen gave them a safe-conduct, declaring that the Canalesi, under the protection of the Allies, were to act for the common cause, and promised to send an English force to Canali. The Canalesi rose in revolt, and drove the French gendarmes and patrols out of the country. As no English force arrived, a second deputation went to Hoste, who sent Lowen to Ragusavecchia, but no men to Canali. Caboga then proclaimed the general revolution, but was forced to fly from the French police. On October 28 a small British detachment under Lieutenant Macdonald landed at Ragusavecchia, raised the British flag, and declared that the ancient laws of Ragusa were revived in the place of the French ones, and Count Caboga was made commandant of the town pro tempore. The raising of the British flag and the appointment of Caboga displeased the Ragusan nobles, who regarded these acts as infringements of their own rights. They met in council, and proposed to send an agent to Constantinople to notify the restoration of the Republic to the Sultan and place it once more under his suzerainty. Caboga spoke against the proposal as constituting a slight to the English, whereupon he was at once accused of having sold himself to them. Lowen was then asked for permission to raise the Ragusan standard, but he said that he had no authority, and that application must be made to Admiral Fremantle, who held the chief command in the Adriatic. But when Hoste arrived at Ragusavecchia on November 15, he at once had the standard of St. Blaize hoisted, saluted it with twenty-one guns from his frigate, and proclaimed the independence of the Republic.

Caboga then determined to begin the attack on Ragusa with his insurgents. The town was at that time a first-class fortress. The Porta Ploce was defended by the Revellino, and the Porta Pile by the Forte San Lorenzo; while on Monte Sergio the Forte Imperiale had been erected the previous year. An assault on the latter having failed, the blockade was commenced. At first the operations were not very successful, for although Bona raised some of the people of the Primorije, the chiefs of the villages beyond Slano told him that they had been ordered by General Tomasić to swear fealty to Austria alone—a proof of that Power’s intentions with regard to Ragusa. Captain Hoste also refused to provide a landing party or a siege train. Lowen was next applied to, and he landed fifty men, appointing Caboga “Commander-in-Chief of the Insurgent Forces besieging Ragusa.” But the besiegers had no artillery, and at their headquarters at Gravosa there were only 300 or 400 men, while a party of the French-Ragusan National Guard, under Colonel Giorgi, had succeeded in arresting some of the nobles at Gravosa on November 25. Montrichard, who commanded the Ragusan garrison, determined on a sortie on the night of December 8. Native spies informed the besiegers of the plan, and an ambuscade was prepared to meet the attacking party as they issued from Porta Pile. But midnight, the hour fixed for the sortie, having passed, and no one appearing, the insurgents thought that the idea must have been given up, and returned to Gravosa. Then a Croatian detachment under Grgurić, and an Italian one under Paccioni, issued forth from Ragusa and attacked the insurgents’ headquarters at 2 A.M. But the advance was revealed by two deserters who fired off their rifles, and Paccioni failed to co-operate with Grgurić. The sortie was therefore repulsed, but with small losses on either side.

On January 3, 1814, the Austrian General Milutinović arrived before Ragusa at the head of two battalions, bringing letters from Baron Tomasić, who thanked Caboga and Bona for their services. His first act, however, was to attempt to disband the local volunteers, to which Caboga refused to agree, demanding the recognition of the insurgents as independent belligerents. This Milutinović granted, as he was not strong enough to refuse, and he left Caboga in command of the besiegers during his own absence at Cattaro. Having failed to take that town he returned to Gravosa on the 13th. The nobles were dissatisfied with Caboga, whom they regarded as being in the pay of foreigners, and on the night from the 17th to the 18th of January they met at Count Giorgi’s house at Gravosa, and proclaimed the re-establishment of the Republic. D’Ajala and Bosgiović notified the event to the Emperor of Austria and the Sultan respectively, and a deputation waited on Milutinović for the same purpose. The General pretended to acquiesce, as he was not in a position to do otherwise. Hoste, although he had little sympathy for the rebels, was not sorry to see Milutinović in difficulties. When the latter, however, asked him for artillery, after refusing, he agreed to supply two guns and four mortars, which were landed on the 20th. On the 21st the bombardment was commenced, but did little damage at first. An attack on Forte Imperiale failed, but a few days later another battery was raised at San Giacomo, and armed with ten British guns, brought into position by a difficult and circuitous route; it opened fire at once on Forte Imperiale and Lacroma.

On the 25th Montrichard, who was certainly no hero, communicated with the besiegers with a view to capitulation, and on the 26th explained their proposals to his council of defence. Grgurić, Paccioni, and Major Sèbe, who were the most energetic of his officers, replied that as the walls were intact, the population quiet, provisions ample, and there were 152 guns, the garrison was not in any of the cases justifying a capitulation according to the regulations. Montrichard pretended to give way, but the next day he arranged for a popular demonstration of some 200 people, who hooted the Italian troops, while a member of the crowd raised the Ragusan standard on one of the towers. This gave him the required excuse, and some hours later a capitulation was agreed upon, by which the Anglo-Austrians were to enter the town at midday on the 28th, but the insurgents were not to be admitted until disarmed. The French and Italian troops were to be shipped to Ancona without the honours of war. When Caboga heard the terms of the capitulation he was most indignant, because a few days previously Milutinović had promised that on the surrender of the town 200 armed insurgents should enter it together with the troops, that the Ragusan flag should be raised on the forts with that of Austria and Great Britain, and that the civil government should be carried on by Caboga and the commission of nobles. Finding himself thus betrayed, he ordered Count Natali to be ready with an armed body of insurgents at the Porta Ploce, to enter as soon as it was opened and proclaim the restoration of the Republic. The citizens got wind of this plan, and fearing that the insurgents might think more of plunder than of the Republic they informed Milutinović. The General worked all night to get the Porta Pile, which had been blocked up during the siege, open by dawn. In this he succeeded, and at an early hour his Croatians entered the town with two guns. In the meanwhile the insurgents were waiting outside the other gate, and when, at twelve o’clock, it was opened and they rushed towards the bridge, they found themselves faced by the Austrian troops with fixed bayonets and the two guns. They saw that the game was up, and dispersed to their homes. They returned later unarmed, carrying instead of rifles fruit and vegetables to sell in the market.

Milutinović dissolved the National Guard organised by the French, and the Austrian troops seized all the posts. On the 29th the Austrian standard was raised on the Orlando column, and Austrian and English detachments occupied the forts. The French garrison left, and a few days later the British fleet set sail. Its share of the booty consisted of a few guns, some powder, and tobacco.

The party of the nobles, although it was obvious that the Republic was no more, especially after the departure of the English, did not yet abandon all hope. On February 15 the civil officials swore fealty to the Emperor of Austria as King of Dalmatia, Ragusa, and Cattaro, and on March 2 the clergy did the same. The latter had sworn fealty a short time before to Napoleon, but Milutinović had won them over by his respect for Catholic ceremonies, although he himself was a member of the Orthodox Church. The Austrians now wished to round off their Dalmatian possessions by occupying the Ragusan islands; but Count Natali declared that the government of them had been entrusted to him by the British before Austria had joined the coalition, and that he would not surrender them until he received an authorisation from Admiral Fremantle. Count Caboga was appointed by Austria provisional Intendant of Ragusa, with instructions to follow the ordinances established by the French. The bourgeoisie accepted Austrian rule as a pis aller rather than return under the oligarchy. The peasants were overawed by the troops, and gave no further trouble. The nobles, however, were profoundly dissatisfied, and still continued to agitate in secret for a return to the status quo. General Tomasić instructed Milutinović to spare their feelings as much as possible. “In dealing with them,” he wrote, “you must not use the words müssen and sollen, but instead bitten, ersuchen.”[541]

In January Marchese Bona had gone to Vienna to plead the cause of Ragusan independence. He was at first received at the Imperial Chancery with great courtesy, but obtained no promises. When, however, the Ragusan intrigues at Constantinople and the double game played by the nobles were disclosed, he received orders from the police to quit the town within a fortnight. He then departed, leaving a dignified protest against the insults offered to him, and against the denial of justice to the claims of his fellow-citizens.

At Ragusa the nobles continued in their opposition, and assailed all the magistrates who did not belong to their own order. General Tomasić, to please them, dismissed three officials who were of the bourgeoisie and put nobles in their places. Emboldened by this concession, they went about declaring that the Congress of Vienna was going to proclaim the independence of Ragusa, like that of the Republic of Cracow. “The Ragusans,” as Pisani writes, “had but too much reason to compare their own fate to that of Poland, and in seeking the causes of their misfortunes one may find more than one feature of resemblance between them and the Poles.”[542]

At last General Milutinović lost patience, and when a deputation of nobles came to propose a series of administrative reforms which would have prepared the way for the restoration of the Constitution, he threatened to imprison all who took part in secret conclaves, and in his report of April 4 he denounced the nobles for their correspondence with the Turks. But when he departed to attack Cattaro for the second time, he left a Hungarian officer named Wittman, a weak and incapable person, in charge, and under his feeble rule the plots began again. The nobles succeeded in winning back Caboga to their side, by showing him (according to Pisani) some forged documents, in which it was stated that the Congress really intended to re-establish Ragusan independence; fearing, therefore, that if the nobles came into power once more they would exile him and confiscate his property, he communicated some valuable documents to them, such as Lowen’s proclamation at Ragusavecchia of Ragusan independence, which they sent to England to be submitted to the Congress by the British Ministers. But when Caboga saw that he had been hoodwinked, he returned to Austrian allegiance. A deputation of nobles went to Zara to wait on General Tomasić, but without result. On July 13 Milutinović returned in triumph from Cattaro, which he had reduced to order, and made the following proclamation:—

“The Imperial and Royal Chancery has been pleased to inform me by a Note of January 3 that, in consequence of an agreement between the allied Powers, the territory included under the name of Illyria during the rule of Napoleon, and consequently the State of Ragusa, the islands depending from it, and the Bocche di Cattaro are definitely made over to the Imperial and Royal Court of Austria.

“I notify this decision so that the inhabitants of the said provinces may learn their fate, and try to deserve, by a prompt and loyal submission, the effects of the benevolence of Our august Sovereign the Emperor and King Francis I.

“By the Civil and Military Government of Dalmatia, Ragusa, and Cattaro.

“Baron TOMASIĆ, Feldmarschall-Lieutenant.

“By authentic copy.

“MILUTINOVIĆ, General-Major.

“ZARA, July 7.”

This proclamation was received respectfully and in silence. Only one noble, Marchese Francesco Bona, tried to raise a rebellion among the peasants, and was at once arrested and imprisoned in the Forte San Lorenzo. On August 29 the Municipal Council was summoned to elect a deputation to the Emperor-King. Milutinović had returned to Cattaro, and although Wittmann, who was in charge, was present at the sitting, it proved a stormy one. Count Pozza-Sorgo declared that if a deputation were sent to the Emperor of Austria, another should also be sent to the King of England, whose forces had contributed at least as effectively as those of Austria in driving out the French. But as Marchese Michele Bona was already on a mission to the Allies it was useless to send another; the choice of the delegates was therefore adjourned, and the motion accepted by ten votes to eight. Caboga summoned the Council again on September 1, when the delegation was chosen; the Council was about to break up when the Mayor, Bosdari, received a sealed packet. On opening it he found that it contained the solemn protest of forty of the nobles who had signed the act of January 18. “It is we,” they declared, “who have been constituted from that day the sovereign Council, and have the sole authority to speak in the name of our country.” Wittmann took the protest and forwarded it to Zara, and he also informed Milutinović of the occurrence. The next day all the signatories of the document were arrested save eighteen, who fled to the islands under British protection. At 11 A.M. Milutinović arrived, and issued a proclamation describing the protest as an “act of frenzy,” and inviting the people to sign a counter-protest. This was done, and Bosdari requested the General to liberate all the nobles who were willing to sign a declaration of submission to the Emperor. Milutinović agreed, and included the fugitives in the amnesty, on condition that they returned within eight days. The nobles signed the oath, and on September 15 an assembly of the people elected a deputation to go to Zara and swear fealty in the name of all. Milutinović then addressed a very severe admonition to the nobles, and all of that order who occupied judicial positions were dismissed.[543]

The Ragusan archipelago remained under British protection until July 16, 1815. On August 3, 1816, Dalmatia and Ragusa received a definite organisation by Imperial rescript, and Baron Tomasić was appointed Statthalter or Military and Civil Governor, and Milutinović departed from Ragusa. The Emperor assumed the title of Duke of Ragusa, which his successors still bear.

Thus ends, after more than twelve hundred years, the history of the Republic of Ragusa. Its Government and citizens may have had their defects, but they were full of a real, if somewhat narrow, patriotism. The State conferred a prosperity and happiness on its inhabitants which have fallen to the lot of few peoples during that long and troubled period, while the peculiar, and almost unique, position occupied in European history and polity by the tiny Commonwealth may perhaps justify the appearance of this volume.

[Illustration: DALMATIA, BOSNIA & HERZEGOVINA]

LIST OF BOOKS ON THE HISTORY AND TOPOGRAPHY OF RAGUSA

BIBLIOGRAPHY

COLLECTIONS OF DOCUMENTS

G. Valentinelli, Bibliografia della Dalmazia e del Montenegro, Zagabria (Agram), 1855-56.

Monumenta Ragusina, edit. Rački and Gelcich, in the “Monumenta Spectantia Historiam Slavorum Meridionalium,” published by the South-Slavonic Academy of Agram, vol. x. &c., 1879 &c.

Diplomatarium relationum Reipublicæ Ragusinæ cum Regno Hungariæ, edit. Gelcich and Thálloczy, published by the Magyar Tudományos Akadémia, Budapest, 1887.

F. Miklosich, Monumenta Serbica, Wien, 1858.

Orsat Medo-Počič (Count Pozza), Spomenici Srpski, u Beogradu (Belgrad), 1858.

Tafel und Thomas, Griechische Urkunden, in the Sitzungsberichte der kaiserliche Wiener Akademie der Wissenschaften, philosophisch-historischer Klasse, Wien, 1851.

G. Valentinelli, Esposizione dei Rapporti fra la Repubblica Veneta e gli Slavi Meridionali. Brani tratti dai Diarj di Marin Sanudo, 1863.

A. Theiner, Vetera Monumenta Slavorum Meridionalium Historiam spectantia, Romæ, 1863.

Rački, Dubrovački Spomenici, published by the South-Slavonic Academy in the “Starine” for 1879.

CHRONICLES AND GENERAL HISTORIES OF RAGUSA

Niccolò Ragnina, Annali di Ragusa, and Annali Anonimi di Ragusa, published by the South-Slavonic Academy among the Scriptores.

Giunio Resti, Chronica Ragusina, continued by G. Gondola, published by the South-Slavonic Academy.

Serafino Razzi, La Storia di Raugia, Lucca, 1588.

G. Luccari, Copioso Ristretto degli Annali di Ragusa, 1790.

J. C. von Engel, Geschichte des Freystaates Ragusa, Wien, 1807.

F. M. Appendini, Notizie Istorico-Critiche ... de’ Ragusei, Ragusa, 1803.

Giuseppe Gelcich, Dello Sviluppo Civile di Ragusa, Ragusa, 1884.

HISTORIES OF OTHER COUNTRIES

Cronache Veneziane Antichissime, edit. Monticolo, Roma, 1890.

Andrea Dandolo, Chronicon Venetum, in Muratori’s Rer. Ital. Script., tom. xii.

Constantine Porphyrogenitus, De Administrando Imperio.

E. Gibbon, History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, edit. J. B. Bury, London, 1901.

J. B. Bury, History of the Later Roman Empire, London, 1887.

Romanin, Storia Documentata di Venezia, Venezia, 1853.

Horatio Brown, Venice, London, 1893.

F. C. Hodgson, The Early History of Venice, London, 1901.

Mauro Orbini, Regno degli Slavi, Pesaro, 1601.

G. Lucio, De Regno Dalmatiæ et Croatiæ, Amstelodami, 1666.

Presbyter Diocleas, Regnum Slavorum, published in Lucio’s De Regno Dalmatiæ et Croatiæ, 1666.

Alter und Neuer Staat des Konigreichs Dalmatien, 1718.

P. J. Schafarik (Šafařik), Slawische Alterthümer, Leipzig, 1843-44.

A. Gil’ferding (Hilferding), Geschichte der Serben und Bulgaren, 1856, 1864.

B. Kállay, Geschichte der Serben, Leipzig, 1878.

V. Klaić, Geschichte Bosniens, Leipzig, 1885.

William Miller, The Balkan States, London, 1896.

Sagredo, Memorie Istoriche dei Monarchi Ottomanni, 1697.

Hammer-Purgstall, Histoire de l’Empire Ottoman, traduit par J. F. Hellert, Paris, 1835-42.

Stanley Lane-Poole, The Barbary Corsairs, London, 1890.

[Illustration: DALMATIA]

COMMERCIAL HISTORIES

Heyd, Histoire du Commerce du Lévant au Moyen Âge, Leipzig, 1885.

Carlo Antonio Marin, Storia Civile e Politica del Commercio dei Veneziani, Venezia, 1798.

C. J. Jireček, Die Handelsstrassen und Bergwerke von Serbien und Bosnien während des Mittelalters, Prag, 1879.

SPECIAL HISTORIES

Liber Statutorum Civitatis Rhacusii (MS. in the Franciscan Library at Ragusa).

D. Farlati and J. Coleti, Illyricum Sacrum, Venetiis, 1751-1819.

G. Lucio, Memorie Istoriche di Tragurio, published in his De Regno Dalmatiæ, 1666.

P. Pisani, Num Ragusini ob omni jure Veneto a sæc. x usque ad sæc. xiv immunes fuerint, Paris, 1893.

Gelcich, La Zedda e la Dinastia dei Balšidi, Spalato, 1899.

Gelcich, I Conti di Tuhelj, 1889.

“G. G.,” Turchi e Cristiani, in the “Annuario Dalmatico” for 1884.

“G. G.,” In Tenebris Lux, in the “Annuario Dalmatico” for 1885.

Relatione dell’ Orribile Terremoto seguito nella Città di Ragusa, Venetia, 1667.

Ludovicus Cervarius Tubero, Commentariolus de Temporibus Suis, 1603.

V. Bogišič, article on the Stanico in the “Archiv für Slawische Philologie,” Berlin, vol. ii., 1877.

J. Pisko, Skanderbeg, Wien, 1894.

T. Chersa, Degli Illustri Toscani in Ragusa.

Antonio degl’ Ivellio, Saggio sulla Colonia e il Contadinaggio di Ragusa.

Paolo, Cavaliere de Rešetar, La Zecca della Repubblica di Ragusa, Spalato, 1891.

P. Pisani, La Dalmatie de 1797 à 1815, Paris, 1893.

Tullio Erber, Storia della Dalmazia dal 1797 al 1814, Zara, 1886, &c.

Sir William Hoste, Memoirs and Letters, London, 1833.

Ein Gedenkbuch der Erhebung Ragusas in den Jahren 1813-14, edit. G. Gelcich, in the “Archiv für österreichische Geschichte,” Wien, vol. lxiv., 1882.

Comte Duc de Sorgo, Fragments sur l’Histoire ... de Raguse, Paris, 1839.

ART AND LITERATURE

Philippus de Diversis de Quartigianis, Situs Aedficiorum Ragusii, edit. Brunelli, Zara, 1882.

T. Graham Jackson, Dalmatia, the Quarnero, and Istria, Oxford, 1887.

R. von Eitelberger von Edelberg, Kunstdenkmale Dalmatiens, vol. iv. of his Gesammelte kunsthistorische Schriften, Wien, 1884.

E. Freeman, Sketches from the Subject and Neighbour Lands of Venice, London, 1881.

Gliubich (Ljubić), Dizionario Biografico della Dalmazia.

Galleria di Ragusei Illustri, Ragusa, 1841.

A. N. Puipin und W. Spasowicz, Geschichte der Slavischen Literatur, Leipzig, 1880.

Appendini, Versione Libera dell’ Osmanide.

TOPOGRAPHY AND TRAVEL

B. Ramberti, Libri Tre delle Cose dei Turchi, 1539.

Caterino Zen’s journey to Constantinople, published in Starine x. of the South-Slavonic Academy, 1878.

Nicholas de Nicolay, Les Navigations et Pérégrinations et Voyages faiets en la Turquie, Anvers, 1576.

Des Hayes de Courmenin, Voyage de Lévant, Paris, 1649.

Thomas Watkins, Travels through Swisserland, Italy ... to Constantinnople, London, 1794.

F. C. H. L. Pouqueville, Voyage dans la Grèce, Paris, 1826.

J. D. F. Neigebauer, Die Süd-Slaven und deren Länder, Leipzig, 1851.

F. Petter, Dalmatien.

A. A. Paton, Highlands and Islands of the Adriatic, London, 1849.

Sir John Gardner Wilkinson, Dalmatia and Montenegro, London, 1848.

W. F. Wingfield, A Tour in Dalmatia, Albania, and Montenegro, with a Historical Sketch of the Republic of Ragusa, London, 1859.

Arthur J. Evans, Through Bosnia and the Herzegovina on Foot, ... with an Historical Review of Bosnia, London, 1876.

This list does not claim to be a complete bibliography by any means, nor does it even include all the books, pamphlets, and articles which I have consulted in compiling this volume; but it should be sufficient as a guide for those who wish to go deeper into the subject.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Historical Essays, Third Series, pp. 22, 23.

[2] For traces of the Celtic strain see T. Graham Jackson’s Dalmatia, the Quarnero, and Istria, vol. i. p. 2.

[3] The term Illyria or Illyricum comprises far more than the modern or even Roman Dalmatia, and corresponds roughly to the whole eastern shore of the Adriatic as far as Dyrrhachium, with a hinterland extending to Hungary.

[4] Their name is connected with the town of Dalmium or Deminium, said by some to have been in the interior, by others on the site of the modern Almissa (formerly called Dalmisia).

[5] Called the “Dalmatian Pompeii.”

[6] Quoted in Handelsstrassen und Bergwerke von Serbien und Bosnien während des Mittelalters, by Dr. C. J. Jireček, Prag, 1879, p. 3.

[7] Cap. xxix. to xxxvi.

[8] Jireček, op. cit., p. 4, note.

[9] Jireček, Wlachen und Maurowlachen. They are now called Morlacchi in Northern Dalmatia.

[10] Jireček, Handelsstrassen, pp. 22-25.

[11] Ibid., pp. 25-27.

[12] Jireček, Handelsstrassen, pp. 27-35.

[13] Their municipal statutes, some of which have been published, present many analogies with those of Italy.

[14] This form is preferred by Professor Jireček to Epidaurus.

[15] Ἀφ’ οὗ δὲ ἀπὸ Σαλῶνα μετῴκησαν εἰς Ῥαούσιον, εἰσὶν ἔτη φʹ (500) μέχρι τῆςσήμερον, ἥτις ἰνδικτιῶνος ἑβδόμης ἔτους ͵ϛυνζʹ. (6457 A.M. = 949 A.D.). De Adm. Imp., cap. xxix.

[16] Šafařik, Slawische Alterthümer, ii. 238; J. B. Bury, “History of the Later Roman Empire,” vol. ii. Book IV. Part II. chap. iv.

[17] Constantine Porphyrogenitus says that the Slaves (whom he mixed up with the Avars) had destroyed τὸ κάστρον Πίταυρα, the inhabitants being mostly killed or captured. The survivors fled, and on an inaccessible rock founded the new city of Ῥαούσιον. In a Slavonic document quoted by Jireček (op. cit., p. 9, note 20) there is a native account of the foundation of Ragusa. The ancient Ragusa, it says, stood na Captate (at Cavtat), and possessed the whole župa of Canali; when the city fell and was destroyed, “the lords of Chum and Rascia” occupied this župa, and the inhabitants of the city took refuge on a strong place, where they founded the modern Ragusa. These are other more or less legendary accounts.

[18] Op. cit., p. 10.

[19] A deep inlet surrounded by high mountains at the extreme south of modern Dalmatia.

[20] Gelcich, Dello Sviluppo Civile di Ragusa, p. 6.

[21] The castle and bridge are both indicated in the drawing.

[22] Published by the South-Slavonic Academy of Agram in the same volume as Ragnina’s chronicle. A small part of it is quoted by Gelcich, op. cit.

[23] There is an Albanian tribe of the name of Dukadjin, south of Scutari.

[24] They have not been identified.

[25] In several early accounts it is said that the Saracens helped the Avars to destroy the city by attacking from the sea, but there is no satisfactory evidence on the subject.

[26] Head of a farm; katun in modern Croatian signifies dairy; it is a neo-Latin word.

[27] Venice, whose connection with the Eastern Empire was somewhat similar to that of the Dalmatian cities, now recognised Charlemagne’s supremacy. There was a Byzantine and a Frankish faction. See T. Hodgkin’s “Italy and her Invaders,” viii. p. 231; also H. Brown’s “Venice.”

[28] The passage reads “de ogni Vulasi,” from every Vulasi, but the emendation “de donji Vulasi,” from Lower Vulasi or Wallachia (donji is Slavonic for lower), is suggested.

[29] In Southern Dalmatia the word Morlacco is still a term of contempt.

[30] This etymology is obviously impossible.

[31] The first of these was Otho Ursus or Ottone Orseolo.

[32] Quoted by Gelcich, op. cit., p. 9.

[33] In the Italian city-republics, besides the head of the State, the Council of nobles, and the assembly of the people, there was also a minor or privy council of special advisers. It is very probable that there was something of the kind at Ragusa even at this time, as there was later.

[34] Afterwards the archbishop.

[35] “A wall of rubble and beams.”

[36] Const. Porgh., cap. xxx. According to tradition, Ragusa had been delivered from the Saracens in 783 by Orlando, or Roland the Paladin. The legend probably has its origin in a confusion between Charlemagne’s suzerainty over Dalmatia and the Saracen siege of Ragusa in 847. The so-called statue of Orlando at Ragusa is of the fifteenth century.

[37] Const. Porgh., cap. xxx.

[38] The Naro of the ancients.

[39] Primorije in Slavonic, Παραθαλάσσια.

[40] Gelcich, op. cit., p. 2.

[41] Serafino Razzi, in his Storia di Raugia, gives a long account of this miracle (cap. x.). The Venetian fleet designed to capture Ragusa by treachery, but the plot was revealed to a priest, who thus relates his vision: “I was in the church of St. Stephen about midnight, at prayer, when methinks I saw the whole fane filled with armed men. And in the midst I saw an old man with a long white beard holding a staff in his hand. Having called me aside, he told me that he was San Biagio, and had been sent by Heaven to defend this city. He told me further that the Venetians had come up to the walls to scale them, using the masts of their ships as ladders, but he, with a company of heavenly soldiers, had driven back the enemy; but he desired that in future the Ragusans should defend themselves, and never trust armed neighbours.” Ragnina dates the event 971.

[42] San Bacco had been patron of the Latin settlement on the rocky ridge, while the Slavonic colony had been under the protection of the Eastern Saint Serge. When the two settlements amalgamated, as neither would accept the saint of the other, they compromised by adopting San Biagio.

[43] Cedrenus, vol. i., § 1019, in Migne, vol. 121.

[44] The name Rascia is generally used by old historians as synonymous for Servia, and is derived from the river Raška in Old Servia.

[45] Num Ragusini ab omni jure Veneto a saec. X usque ad saec. XIV immunes fuerunt, thesis by the Abbé Paul Pisani, Paris, 1893, cap. ii.

[46] According to Johannes Diaconus, the expedition started in the seventh year of Orseolo’s reign, which would be the year 998; but Monticolo, who edits that writer in his Cronache Antichissime (p. 156, note 1), observes that Diaconus says that he only heard the news of the victory when the Emperor Otho III. came to Pavia in his third descent into Italy, i.e. July 1000.

[47] The name Beograd or Belgrad, i.e. white city, is a very common one in Slavonic lands.

[48] “Seque suosque Orseolo Venetoque nomini dedunt.” Sabellico, Historia rerum Venetarum, Dec. I. lib. iv. cap. 3.

[49] This pseudonym is an anagram for Sebastianus Slade de Ragusa; Slade is Slavonic for sweets = dolci.

[50] MS. in the Museo Correr at Venice, quoted by Pisani, op. cit., introd. There is a copy at Zara and one at Ragusa.

[51] Regno degli Slavi.

[52] Chronica Ragusina, edit. South-Slav. Acad., p. 272.

[53] Prospetto Cronologico della Dalmazia, p. 112.

[54] This title is now borne by the Emperor of Austria.

[55] Gelcich, op. cit., p. 3.

[56] J. C. von Engel, Geschichte des Freystaates Ragusa, § 6.

[57] Between 1096 and 1105 they had put three hundred ships on the sea (Horatio Brown, Venice, p. 87).

[58] Serafino Razzi, Storia di Raugia.

[59] Romanin, Storia Documentata di Venezia, tom. viii. p. 455, seq.; Farlati-Coleti, Illyricum Sacrum, vi. 60-80.

[60] H. Brown, op. cit., p. 101.

[61] Spalato, however, remained subject to the empire until Manuel’s death in 1180.

[62] In the Archivio Storico Italiano, viii. 154, lib. v.

[63] This stipulation appears in nearly all the subsequent treaties of dedition by which Ragusa surrendered to Venice. By this act the Ragusan Church came under the authority of a Venetian prelate.

[64] By Romania, mediæval historians mean the Eastern Empire.

[65] Liber Pactorum, ii. p. 117, v.

[66] Op. cit., cap. 30.

[67] Jireček, op. cit., p. 12.

[68] According to Miklosich, the word is of Arabic origin.

[69] Jireček, op. cit.

[70] Probably this is too early.

[71] A braccio is about an ell.

[72] Jireček, ibid.

[73] The name is sometimes spelt Radosav.

[74] Prijeki means “beyond” in Serb, and the church was so called because it was beyond the channel.

[75] The figures given by Engel (§ 19)—20,000 horse and 30,000 foot—are probably exaggerated.

[76] The Three Martyrs of Cattaro were saints murdered by the heathen, or, as some assert, by heretics.

[77] The treaty is published in the Monum. spect. Historiam Slav. Merid., Agram, vol. i. Document xvii.

[78] See ante.

[79] Ibid., xxvi.

[80] Ibid., xxvii.

[81] Ibid., xxviii.

[82] Ibid., xxix.

[83] Quoted by Romanin, op. cit., loc. cit.

[84] A further corroboration, if any were needed, of the surrender is found in the treaty of friendship between Stephen, Grand Župan, and Giovanni Dandolo, Count of Ragusa (Mon. Sl. Mer., vol. i. doc. xxxix.). No date is given, but it must be previous to 1222, as in that year Stephen received the title of King from Pope Honorius III., whence his designation of Prvovencani, or First Crowned.

[85] On the sea coast of Montenegro, near the Lake of Scutari.

[86] Dated “Ides of January, Indict. I.” (1078).

[87] It will be noticed that Ragusa is alluded to first as a bishopric and then as an archbishopric in the same document.

[88] Gelcich, op. cit., p. 10.

[89] A heresy described in a later chapter.

[90] Engel, § 20.

[91] Gelcich, Delle Istituzioni Marittime e Secritarie delle Republica di Ragusa, Trieste, 1892, p. 3.

[92] Marcius noster Constantinopolitanus, Vicecomes, Mon. Sl. Mer. I., doc. xiv.

[93] Ibid., xxi.

[94] Ibid., xxii.

[95] Gelcich, op. cit., pp. 13, 14.

[96] Peline is Slavonic for sage.

[97] Now included in the Turkish vilayets of Kossovo and Scutari.

[98] William of Tyre speaks of the “Rex Sclavorum” residing at Scutari at the time when the Crusaders were in Dalmatia. This is the Župan Vlkan (1089-1105).

[99] In the plain of Kossovo, near Mitrovica (Mitrovitza).

[100] This etymology is somewhat doubtful. Duša also means the soul.

[101] B. Kállay, Geschichte der Serben; William Miller, The Balkans; F. Kanitz, Serbien.

[102] See ante.

[103] Klaić, Geschichte Bosniens.

[104] Klaić, op. cit., cap. vi.

[105] A treaty between Ragusa and Taddeo, Count of Montefeltro and Podestà of Ravenna and Cervia, 1216-1238 (Mon. spect. Hist. Slav. Mer., vol. i. doc. 49, pp. 35, 36; also in other documents of that collection between 1204 and 1226).

[106] Resti, who erroneously records the date as 1202.

[107] Mon. Slav. Mer., vol. i. p. 40.

[108] Pisani, op. cit., vii.

[109] Op. cit., p. 29.

[110] Venice had received the same prohibition from the Pope.

[111] That it was not absolutely free is proved by the Doge Jacopo Ziepolo’s Promissiom, dated March 6, 1229, which says: “And we are to receive the tributes of Cherso and Ossero, as well as of the country of Arbe and Ragusa” (Cod. Marc. DLI., class viii. Ital., quoted by Romanin).

[112] Binzola Bodazza is always alluded to in this connection as one person, but in other documents, especially in the Reformationes, we find the names Binzola and Bodazza as those of two separate noble families.

[113] This stipulation is repeated in various subsequent documents, but it was not always observed.

[114] Sometimes written miari.

[115] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 75.

[116] We have often quoted this chronicle of “Esadastes,” not because of the value of its arguments, but as characteristic of Ragusan individuality, and of the way in which the Ragusans made every effort to prove and to secure their own independence. They regarded themselves not only as independent of Venice, but as distinct from the rest of Dalmatia, and they were always afraid that the great Republic might one day claim their alligiance. Hence their efforts to prove that that allegiance had never really existed, or at least that it had had no practical effect.

[117] Liber Reform, ii. 322; Liber Statutorum, i. 1, 2; Gelcich, op. cit., pp. 30, 31.

[118] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 78. This Koloman was evidently the son of Andrew, King of Hungary, by whom he had been appointed Duke (or Count) of Croatia and Dalmatia (1226-1241), Klaić, p. 92.

[119] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 79.

[120] Ibid., i. 80.

[121] Klaić, p. 101.

[122] Doubtless he had been appointed during the last secession of 1235.

[123] Engel, § 25.

[124] Mentioned by Caroldus and in the Liber Pactorum. The name sounds Ragusan.

[125] Resti, ad ann. 1252. Ragusan writers frequently complain that the Venetians did not protect the city effectually against the Slaves, but it is difficult to see what they could have done against an almost inland state.

[126] This institution is described on pp. 76-78.

[127] In the various histories of Servia (e.g. B. Kállay’s Geschichte der Serben, p. 51) no mention is made of this coalition, and in fact the reign of Stephen Uroš, save for the Mongolian inroads, is described as peaceful. On the other hand, the treaty between Radoslav and Ragusa expressly mentions the alliance with Bulgaria against Servia. Probably the Mongol invasion of 1255 induced him to make peace with his neighbours.

[128] Miklosich, Monumenta Serbica, pp. 60 and 69; translated in Klaić, op. cit., pp. 137, 138.

[129] Uroš was deposed by his son in 1272.

[130] For the position and importance of these envoys see Chap. III.

[131] The chapters relating to the stanicum (stanak in Slavonic) are 19, 20, 49-57. The matter is ably dealt with in an article by Professor V. Bogišić in the Archiv für Slawische Philologie, Berlin, vol ii., 1877, pp. 570-593.

[132] In the Liber Reformationum it is mentioned at rare intervals.

[133] The commonest are: Bassegli, Bobali, Bodazza, Bona, Bonda, Bubagna, Caboga, Ghetaldi, Gondola, Gozze, Luccari, Raguina, Resti, Saraca, Sorgo, &c. Only a few, such as Zlatarich, are purely Slavonic. The whole question of the relative proportions of Italians and Slaves in Dalmatia is very obscure. Even to this day, owing to the bitterness of party feeling, it is impossible to obtain reliable statistics.

[134] Save the treaties with the Slavonic states, which are mostly published in the original Servian in Miklosich’s Monumenta Serbica.

[135] The number of members varied at different times.

[136] Gelcich, p. 32.

[137] Luccari.

[138] Lib. Ref., v. p. 307.

[139] The age was afterwards lowered to eighteen years.

[140] This account is based on that given in Luccari, save for such changes as occurred between the Venetian period and the early seventeenth century, when Luccari’s book was published.

[141] Stephen Uroš II. Milutin (1275-1321).

[142] Lebret, Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig, i. 598. Engel, who gives a similar account, attributes the raid to Stephen Kotromanić, Banus of Bosnia, which is clearly a mistake, as Ragusa was at that time on excellent terms with him.

[143] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 204 (1293-1331) and 261 (1294).

[144] Ibid., 237.

[145] Reform., 57.

[146] Salt was a commodity lacking in the interior.

[147] Liber Pactorum, 79.

[148] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 294, 295, 296, 297.

[149] Ibid., 303, 304, 306.

[150] We find a Reformatio of May 1303 which alludes to the Servian war as still continuing, but it was probably only a case of isolated raids and acts of brigandage.

[151] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 327.

[152] Ibid., 254, Misti, 1313-1316.

[153] Ragnina, ad ann. 1316, also Ref.

[154] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 469.

[155] Reigned until 1330.

[156] Gelcich, op. cit., p. 34.

[157] Gelcich, ibid.

[158] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 204, Misti, ad ann. 1320-21.

[159] It may have been the acts of piracy alluded to.

[160] Ex Libr. Consilior, 1325, Aug. 15, and 1326, March 15, Cons. Roy. xl., Gelcich, pp. 34, 35.

[161] Gelcich, Reform.

[162] Engel, § 28.

[163] Vol. i. 589.

[164] Part of Montenegro.

[165] A small island at the Narenta’s mouth.

[166] Ad ann. 1322.

[167] A name usually given to Greek priests in the Middle Ages.

[168] This story is somewhat confused. Ragusan writers declare that the princess in question was deposed, together with her son, by a rebellious noble, Alexander, who made himself Tsar and offered to place Bulgaria under Servian suzerainty if Stephen secured the fugitives for him. But after Velbužd Michael’s widow fled, and his first wife, Anna, Milutin’s daughter, was placed on the throne jointly with her son Šišman II. by the victorious Serbs. Stephen Uroš died immediately after, strangled by his son Stephen Dušan, who held Bulgaria as a vassal state. Then came the rebellion of Alexander, who forced Šišman and his mother to fly from Bulgaria, and induced Dušan to marry his sister. Anna fled to Ragusa, and perhaps this may be the princess to whom the local historians allude. On the other hand, it does not seem likely that Dušan would wish to capture her, his own kinswoman. See Jireček’s Geschichte der Bulgaren, 290-298.

[169] Lib. Ref., iii. 365.

[170] Quoted in Gelcich, Istituzioni Marittime e Sanitarie della Republica di Ragusa, Trieste, p. 37.

[171] Ibid., p. 38.

[172] Annali, ad ann. 1348.

[173] Mon. Slav. Mer., iii. 16.

[174] Ibid., 182, 256, 272.

[175] Ibid., 274.

[176] See also Lib. Reform., 155-157, 162, 163, 169, 248, 249; and Resti, ad ann. 1349-1350.

[177] Horatio Brown, Venice, p. 196.

[178] Ibid., pp. 198-205.

[179] Horatio Brown, Venice, p. 211.

[180] Gelcich, Ragusa, p. 44.

[181] Engel, Appendix viii.

[182] Lib. Ref.; Gelcich, Ragusa, p. 44.

[183] From Astaria, a mediæval Latin word meaning a flat tract of seacoast. In Du Cange “maritima, campus planus mari adjacens.”

[184] Mentioned in 1254.

[185] Gelcich, I Conti di Tuhelj, p. 22.

[186] In 1331 a request was made to the King of Servia “de implorando ab eo castrum de Prisren in custodia, pro securitate mercatorum nostrorum conversantium in Prisren,” but it was refused (Gelcich, I Conti di Tuhelj, p. 23).

[187] Near Petrovoselo.

[188] Jireček, op. cit., pp. 13, 14.

[189] For the Paulicians, see Conybeare’s Key of Truth, and Bury’s edition of Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, vol. vi., Appendix 6, p. 540.

[190] Jireček, Geschichte der Bulgaren, pp. 176 sqq.

[191] Theiner, Mon. Slav. Mer., i. p. 20.

[192] Klaić, op. cit., iii, iv, v, vii, and viii.

[193] Lib. Ref., v., April 14, 1319, p. 139.

[194] Gelcich, Ragusa, p. 21.

[195] Ibid., 17, 18, 23, 25.

[196] Whence the title of the English Duke of Clarence is derived.

[197] The documents on this subject are lost, but the privileges are frequently mentioned by later writers.

[198] Tafel und Thomas, Griechische Urkunde in the Sitzungsberichte der Kais. Wiener Akad. der Wissenschaften, Philos.-histor. Classe, vi. 508-529; Miklosich u. Müller, Acta Græca, iii., 58 sqq., 66-67; Heyd, Histoire du Commerce du Lévant, i. 308 sqq.

[199] Heyd, op. cit., i. 475.

[200] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 40, Heyd, op. cit., i. 308.

[201] Theiner, Mon. Hist. Slav. Mer. illustr., i. 121; Heyd, op. cit., ii. 50.

[202] Caloian or Kalioannes.

[203] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 79.

[204] Ibid., 83.

[205] Ibid., 111, 248, 251.

[206] Ibid., 236.

[207] It still exists in the upper part of the town, but is now used as a depot for military stores.

[208] Gelcich, Istituzioni Marittime e Sanitarie, p. 14.

[209] The word is said to be derived from “a Ragusa,” but it is doubtful.

[210] Lib. Stat., vi. cap. 21 and 22.

[211] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 78.

[212] Lib. Ref., i. 1325, July 18, p. 176.

[213] A complaint was made to King Robert of Naples because of the acts of piracy committed by the people of Manfredonia, Lib. Ref., i., 1325, Oct. 17, p. 184.

[214] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 204, Misti, 1326-27.

[215] Istituzioni Marittime e Sanitarie, p. 16.

[216] The custom was an Italian one, and the word ceppo is still used for Christmas box, or even for Christmas itself.

[217] Gelcich, op. cit., p. 17.

[218] Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 204, Misti, 1329.

[219] Mjatović, Studies in the History of Servian Trade in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries, Glasnik, vol. 33, 37, 38; Jireček, op. cit.

[220] Jireček, op. cit.

[221] There are hardly any distinctive traces now of the Vlachs in Dalmatia, save in the name Morlacchi, given to the Slaves generally by the Italians of the coast towns. In Macedonia, however, the Kutzo-Vlachs are numerous, and preserve both their language, which belongs to the Neo-Latin group, and their nomadic habits. There they still ply the trade of cattle-drovers or that of wandering merchants. See Jireček, op. cit., p. 60; also his Wlachen und Maurowlachen, passim; and Turkey in Europe, by “Odysseus.”

[222] Afterwards called Carina = custom house.

[223] Geçcha or Geçecha in the Ragusan documents, mentioned as early as 1275.

[224] Now called Plevlje (Turkish, Tašlydža) in the Sandžak of Novibazar. This stream, which flows through the town, is still called the Breznica, and a neighbouring monastery Vrhobreznica = high Breznica.

[225] In the sixteenth century castle and monastery were still in good repair, and the latter was inhabited by fifty monks, and contained the body of St. Saba, the patron saint of the Southern Slaves (see Zen’s Diary in Starine x. of South-Slav. Acad.). The body was removed and burnt by the Turks in 1595, and the building fell into ruins by the end of the eighteenth century. Priepolje is now the southernmost point garrisoned by Austria in the Sandžak of Novibazar.

[226] Mentioned by the Lib. Ref. in 1322.

[227] For this route see Benedetto Ramberti, Libri. Tre delle cosi dei Turchi, lib. i.

[228] There is still a village of that name.

[229] Mostar did not exist in the Middle Ages. The ruins of Blagaj still form an imposing mass.

[230] The seat of feudal family of the Pavlovići in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.

[231] Srebro = silver in Servian.

[232] Slav. S. Dimitri, Dimitrovica, or Mitrovica.

[233] Jireček, op. cit., pp. 75-82.

[234] Zenta or Zedda was the name of a district comprising Montenegro and that part of Albania between the lake of Scutari and the Adriatic coast as for as Durazzo. The anonymous writer in Matković (Starine x., 1878, of the South-Slavonic Academy) describes the Via de Zenta.

[235] Op. cit., p. 63.

[236] Ulcinium, Dulcinium; in Slavonic, Olgun; in Albanian, Ulkin.

[237] On the site of San Sergio is the village of Obotti, which has of late acquired some prominence since an Italian steamship company has established a service up the Bojana for developing Italian trade. An Austrian company has imitated its example, and it seems as if there was a chance of reviving the old trade routes once more although of course they can never regain their old importance so long as the Turks continue to misgovern the land.

[238] 1290. Jireček, op. cit., p. 65.

[239] Lissos, Alexium, in Slavonic and Albanian Lješ.

[240] Jireček, pp. 66-7; this is now the Mirdit country.

[241] The name Πριξδριάνα is first mentioned as a Bulgarian bishopric in 1026.

[242] Jireček, p. 68. The Beglerbeg of Rumelia was the commander-in-chief of the Turkish armies in Europe.

[243] The Servian king imitated the Venetian ducats, but with a considerable amount of base metal, whence Dante’s allusion to the punishment awaiting “quel di Rascia, che mal aggiustò il conio di Vinegia,” Paradiso, xix. 140-141.

[244] Ragusan consul at Brskovo mentioned in 1280. Its importance ceased with the Turkish conquest.

[245] Jireček, p. 71, Bolizza.

[246] Critobulus, ii. 7, 8, in Fragm. Hist. Græca, v. 109.

[247] First mentioned in 1349.

[248] First mentioned in 1376.

[249] Mentioned in 1412.

[250] Mentioned in 1346.

[251] Mentioned in 1350.

[252] Jireček, op. cit., 41-58. A very elaborate and interesting account of the Bosnian and Servian mines is given in this work.

[253] This division is reflected in the prefixes Gornji and Donji (upper and lower), which are frequently found attached to the names of Bosnian and Servian towns.

[254] According to Farlati, it is owing to the Ragusans that some traces of Latin Christianity survived in these lands of schism and heresy.

[255] Purgari is evidently derived from the German word Bürger, but the etymology of Vaoturchi is unknown (Jireček).

[256] Lib. Ref., March 8, 1332, p. 341.

[257] Miklosich, Monumenta Serbica, Codice Geno (Ragusa); Jireček, op. cit., p. 60.

[258] Jireček, op. cit., 60; Nicolas de Nicolay, Navigations et peregrinations orientales, Lyon, 1568.

[259] In Servia, Byzantine influence was stronger and Italian-Dalmatian influence weaker than in Bosnia, as is attested by the few surviving churches of the pre-Turkish period. But in both countries contact with the Adriatic towns was closer than with the Eastern Empire.

[260] Gelcich, Ragusa, p. 32.

[261] So called because its bell was tolled to announce an execution of a criminal, a proclamation of exile, or the approach of a hostile fleet (Gelcich, op. cit., p. 278).

[262] In 1346 forty additional sentries were added and distributed among the posts, and an extra body of archers was enrolled (Lib. Ref., i., March 24, p. 229). Of course when military expeditions were organised a much larger levy was made both in the city and in the territory.

[263] T. G. Jackson, Dalmatia, the Quarnero, and Istria, ii. p. 372.

[264] Jackson, ibid.

[265] R. Eitelberger von Edelberg, Die Mittelalterlichen Kunstdenkmale Dalmatiens, in his Gesammelte Kunsthistorische Werke, iv. pp. 343, 344.

[266] Gelcich, Ragusa, 17, 23.

[267] Eitelberger, op. cit., p. 334.

[268] Jackson, ibid.

[269] The word sponza was also applied to open loggie, built on the borders of the Republic as resting-places for the caravans. One of these existed at S. Michele della Cresta (1356), and another by the Canale di Narenta (Gelcich, p. 73).

[270] De Diversis says it was enlarged in 1312.

[271] Op. cit., ii. 360.

[272] Gelcich, p. 19.

[273] Ibid., p. 20.

[274] Horatio Brown’s Venice, p. 212.

[275] Gelcich, La Zedda, Preface.

[276] Note to Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, vol. vi. p. 500.

[277] The “Machova” of the Ragusan documents.

[278] Klaić, p. 197.

[279] Knez means lord or count.

[280] The decadence of Servia can be traced in the titles of its rulers. Uroš IV. was the last Tsar, Vukašin was only Kral or king, and his son was Marko Kraljević, “the King’s son.”

[281] Du Cange, Farlati, Lenormant, and Rovinski take the first view, Gelcich (La Zedda, p. 28) and Šafažik the second.

[282] It is sometimes called Zenta or Zeta.

[283] This form of succession was a very usual one in the Serb lands.

[284] Gelcich, La Zedda, p. 13; Jireček, Handelsstrassen, p. 36 sqq.

[285] These were allowed to lapse in favour of Vojslav Voinović.

[286] Miklosich, Monumenta Serbica, p. 176.

[287] Gelcich, La Zedda, p. 14; also his Memoire storiche sulle Bocche di Cattaro.

[288] Gibbon’s Decline and Fall, Bury’s edition, vol. vii. pp. 29-31.

[289] The ancient Tainaros, now called Cirmen.

[290] Klaić, p. 199; Gelcich, La Zedda, p. 80.

[291] After the year 1358 the Reformationes allude to the Rector, and no longer to the Rectores.

[292] I.e. when his own acts or the election of one of his relatives was under discussion.

[293] Ref., ii., January 1359.

[294] Diplom. Ragus., 1359, 4, 5, 8; 1360, 12; 1361, 20.

[295] Ref., 1360, Feb.

[296] Ref Cons. Maj., 1361, July 1.

[297] Ref., 1361, July.

[298] The Slaves used Ragusa as their banking centre.

[299] Jireček, p. 36.

[300] Gelcich, Balša, genealog. table.

[301] Monumenta Histor.-Jurid. Slav. Mer., i., Agram, 1882.

[302] Mon. Rag., iii.

[303] Ref., ii. pp. 276-280; Lett. e Comm. di Lev. 1350-80, Aug. 31, 1359; Gelcich, Balša, pp. 33-37; Ref., iii. 91, 98, 99; iv. 24, 117, 133-4, 139, 140.

[304] Now Mičsić, in Montenegro. See Miklosich, Mon. Serb., p. 169.

[305] Gelcich, Balša, p. 38.

[306] Gelcich, Balša, p. 53.

[307] Diplom. Rag., 42.

[308] Klaić, p. 200; Jireček, pp. 36-37.

[309] Klaić, p. 200.

[310] Gelcich, Ragusa, p. 44.

[311] Ref., iv., Oct 14, 1378.

[312] Diplom. Rag., March 13, 1379, No. 62.

[313] Ref., 1379, June 20 and June 26.

[314] Engel, § 32.

[315] Razzi, lib. i. cap. xxi.

[316] Miklosich, Mon. Serb., 184-5.

[317] Miklosich, Mon. Serb., 188.

[318] Klaić, p. 206.

[319] Charter dated December 2, 1382, in Miklosich, 201-202.

[320] Kukuljevic-Sakcinski, Jura Regni Croatin, i. 150-151; Klaić, 209.

[321] Mon. Slav., iv. 187-8, 194-5, 200-203.

[322] July 20, 1385, Klaić, 211.

[323] Klaić, 226.

[324] Kossovo or Kosovo Polje.

[325] Gelcich, Balša, 140.

[326] The mountainous region behind Cattaro.

[327] Lettere di Levante, 1403-1410, fol. 78; Gelcich, Balša, 162.

[328] Ref., in Dipl. Rag., Sept. 17, 1390, and Jan. 26, 1391.

[329] Gelcich, Balša, 161-3.

[330] Mon. Slav., iv. 295, Oct 7, 1392.

[331] Ref., 1395-7, fol. 75, 78; Gelcich, Balša, 174.

[332] Gelcich, Balša, p. 175.

[333] Gelcich, Balša, 183.

[334] I.e. “the Duchy,” from Herzeg or Herzog.

[335] Ref., in Dipl. Rag., March 20, 1392.

[336] Hitherto it had only struck copper coins, using foreign silver and gold. Gold coins were never struck at Ragusa.

[337] Gelcich, Balša, 200-201.

[338] Gelcich, Balša, 205-306.

[339] Klaić, 274.

[340] Klaić, 278-9; he deduces this from the letter of the Ragusans to Hrvoje, April 8, 1400, in which they state that Ostoja had protested against their detention of the Turkish envoy. See also Pučić, Spomenici, i. 28, and Lucio, De Regno Dalm. et Croat., p. 258.

[341] A few years before, in 1391, they had received part of Canali, with Dolnja Gora and Soko, from the Paulovići, so that now the territory of the Republic extended from the Narenta to the Bocche di Cattaro.

[342] Diplom. Ragus., 91-102.

[343] Diplom. Rag., 95, Nov. 16, 1403.

[344] Fejér, Cod. Dipl., x. 4, p. 388.

[345] Pučić, Spom., i. xv; Klaić, 280-290.

[346] The Djed or chief priest of the Bogomil community was also present at this Parliament.

[347] Pučić, i. 56 and 61.

[348] Rački, Pokret, Rad. iv., Jugosl. Akad., 85; Klaić, 297.

[349] Ref. 1407-1411, fol. 245.

[350] Gelcich, Balša, 271.

[351] Gelcich, Balša, 294.

[352] Dipl. Ragus., July 21, 1409.

[353] Hrvoje’s shiftiness had at last made him fall into disgrace.

[354] Resti, ad ann., 1413.

[355] Gelcich, Balša, 302; Dipl. Rag., v. 21, 1414.

[356] Gelcich, Istituzioni Sanitarie et Marittime, p. 36.

[357] See the Bull of 1373, in Theiner Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 398.

[358] Gelcich, Ragusa, p. 52.

[359] De Diversis.

[360] See ante, pp. 195-7.

[361] Gelcich, 46-47.

[362] Matteo Saverio Zamagna, quoted in Gelcich, p. 51.

[363] The Ragusan small braccio or lakat mali = 51 centimetres, Gelcich, 49-50.

[364] Klaić 337-40.

[365] Dipl. Rag., 202, June 8, 1426.

[366] Ibid., 206, July 31, 1427.

[367] Dec 31, 1427, in Miklosich, 336-50.

[368] Resti; Dipl. Rag., 215.

[369] Dipl. Rag., 212, April 30, 1430.

[370] Ibid., 216, June 18, 1430.

[371] Dipl. Rag., 220.

[372] An account of them occupies the whole of the tenth book of Resti.

[373] Matković, Rad., 235-36; Klaić, 351-52.

[374] Dipl. Rag., 228, 230, 236-38, 240.

[375] Jireček, Handelstrassen, 39 and 40.

[376] Klaić, 352-53.

[377] “Omnes de progenie ipsius domini Sandali appellata Cosaze,” Glasnik, xiii. 159.

[378] Herzeg or Herzog, because he received Imperial investiture, hence the name Herzegovina.

[379] Resti, 1435.

[380] Jireček, 85.

[381] Miklosich, Mon. Serb., 409-11; Klaić, 335-36.

[382] It is reported by the author of the Anonymous Chronicle that when the Sultan tried to induce the Ragusans by threats and bribes to give up George, they replied: “We should rather give up our city, our wives, and our children than George or his family, for we have nothing but our good faith; and we should do the same with you if you came here under our safe-conduct.”

[383] Resti, 1440 and 1441.

[384] Resti, ad ann., 1441-1443.

[385] Dipl. Rag., 244, 245.

[386] Philippi Callimachi, De Rebus Vladislai, lib, i., in Schwandtner’s Scriptores Rer. Hung., i. 457; Klaić, 357.

[387] Dipl. Rag., 266.

[388] Ibid., 268, 270.

[389] Hammer-Purgstall, 453.

[390] Dipl. Rag., 284, Aug. 13, 1450.

[391] Klaić, 380-81.

[392] Ibid., 382.

[393] Miklosich, Mon. Serb., 441; according to Resti he had had a quarrel with the city in 1449 concerning the castle of Soko, which he had tried to capture by treachery.

[394] Miklosich, 444-47; Klaić, 385.

[395] Klaić, 386.

[396] Dipl. Rag., 274.

[397] Ibid., 292.

[398] Miklosich, 457-60; Klaić, 390.

[399] In 1456 Mohammed II. addressed a letter to “the Sandjak Beg of the Duchy and to the Kadi of Novi and Hotač” (Miklosich, 465-69).

[400] Appudini, i. 204; Engel, § 639; Luccari, 170.

[401] Prof. Bury in the Cambridge Modern History, i. p. 68.

[402] “Caput illius patriæ et ob mineras belli nervus.”

[403] Dipl. Rag., 347.

[404] Dipl. Rag., 353.

[405] John Sabota’s letter, quoted by Klaić, 398.

[406] Theiner, Mon. Hung., ii. 291-92, 297.

[407] Klaić, 401.

[408] Klaić, 419.

[409] Miklosich, 485-91.

[410] May 6, 1463, Rački in Starine vi. of the South Slav. Acad., 1 sqq.

[411] Ibid.

[412] Rački, ibid.

[413] Klaić, 433 sqq.

[414] Rački, ibid.; Dipl. Rag., April 30, 1463.

[415] Engel, § 40. According to the legend, while Mohammed was riding towards Ragusa with hostile intentions he was stopped by the appearance of a venerable old man, and his horse refused to go forward; the Sultan was frightened by the omen and abandoned the enterprise. The city’s saviour was, of course, San Biagio.

[416] The name is a Turkish form of Alexander, with the designation beg added.

[417] Razzi, lib. ii. cap. v.

[418] Dipl. Rag., Ref., Dec 2, 7, and 28, 1465; Jan. 3, 1466.

[419] Dipl. Rag., Ref., Feb. 5, 1466, to Sept. 16, 1470.

[420] Počić, Spomenici Srpski, ii. 130, Dec. 9, 1466.

[421] Resti, 1470-1471.

[422] Engel, § 40.

[423] Hammer-Purgstall, iii. 191.

[424] Hammer-Purgstall, iv. 4.

[425] Engel, § 40.

[426] Engel, ibid.

[427] Dipl. Rag., 412.

[428] An exiled prince of the Imperial family, and a pretender to the throne. He was a notable figure at the court of Pope Alexander VI.

[429] Valentinelli, extracts from Marin Sanudo, p. 31, April 10, 1499.

[430] Engel, § 41.

[431] Razzi.

[432] Engel, § 42.

[433] Razzi, ad ann., 1526.

[434] Dipl. Rag., 441.

[435] Engel, § 43.

[436] Valentinelli’s extracts from Sanudo, i. 297.

[437] Theiner, Mon. Slav. Mer., i. 805.

[438] Ragnina.

[439] Tafel und Thomas, Kais. Wiener Akad. der Wissensch.; Heyd, Histoire du Commerce du Lévant, ii. 292 sqq.; Makushev, Mon. Hist. Slav. Mer., p. 111.

[440] I have spelt the names as they are in that book, inserting the modern spelling in brackets.

[441] Jireček, op. cit., p. 61.

[442] This is the celebrated Sutjeska gorge.

[443] At present they are nearly all Muhamedans, having abjured Christianity, together with most of the inhabitants of Albania and many of those of Bosnia and other Balkan lands, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

[444] In the Balkans there are many shrines worshipped by Christians and Turks alike, especially in Albania.

[445] The present capital of Bulgaria.

[446] Makushev, op. cit., 345.

[447] Ibid., 440.

[448] G. Müller, Documenti sulle Relazioni delle Città Toscane coll’ Oriente, p. 227.

[449] Makushev, p. 477.

[450] I. von Düringsfeld, Aus Dalmatien.

[451] Gelcich, I Conti di Tuhelj, 68-70.

[452] Ref., Cons. Rog., Oct. 23, Nov. 22, and Dec. 2, 1468.

[453] Gelcich, Ragusa, 70.

[454] This is the case at Ragusa to this day. In other Dalmatian towns, where the men are bilingual, the women often speak only Italian.

[455] This characteristic is alluded to by Pouqueville (Voyage de la Grèce), who wrote 250 years later (see infra, chap. xii.).

[456] This last statement is probably an instance of the wish being father to the thought, for there is no doubt that in the sixteenth century Ragusa was a first-class fortress, almost impregnable for those times. But Rambuti, being a Venetian, hoped to see the city one day fall under the power of the Lion of St. Mark.

[457] I., 1884, pp. 131 sqq.

[458] The Archbishopric of Ragusa was usually conferred on an Italian by the Pope, while the canons of the Cathedral were Ragusan nobles.

[459] France was at this time (1538) allied to the Turks.

[460] Razzi, Engel.

[461] Razzi, lib. ii. cap. xiv.

[462] Razzi, lib. ii. cap. xv.

[463] The Barbary Corsairs, p. 105.

[464] According to Engel (§ 45), out of 13 Ragusan vessels 7 were lost, and at Isola di Mezzo alone there were 300 widows.

[465] Razzi, ii. xvii.

[466] Horatio Brown, Venice, p. 364.

[467] Lorenzo Miniati was then Tuscan consul at Ragusa, and was entrusted with the duty of informing his Government of all the rumours as to the movements of the Turks which he might hear; Makushev, op. cit., p. 495.

[468] Ibid., 501, 1566.

[469] Engel, § 45.

[470] Razzi, iii. xx.

[471] Min. Cons., June 5, 1570; Polizze Off. 5 Ragioni, Feb. 30, 1570.

[472] Gelcich, pp. 84 and 87.

[473] The Benedictine monastery, which still exists, is built on an island in a salt lake, or rather inlet, communicating with the open sea by a narrow channel.

[474] Romanin, Storia Documentata di Venezia, vol. viii., Appendix.

[475] Relatione dell’ Orribile Terremoto seguito nella Città di Ragusa, & altre della Dalmatia & Albania, Venice, 1667.

[476] Gelcich, 97.

[477] Rog., 1667, June 23, and Div. 1711, f. 58, dd. Feb. 3.

[478] Quoted by Gelcich, 98.

[479] The population of the island before the earthquake is said to have been 14,000, but this is probably an exaggerated estimate. It now barely supports 500.

[480] Gelcich, 98.

[481] Among the killed was George Crook, the Dutch ambassador to the Porte, and his family and four servants, who had arrived at Ragusa four days before the earthquake on their way to Constantinople; the rest of his suite, including Jakob Vandam, Dutch consul at Smyrna, were saved. Vandam wrote an account of this calamity in his Old and New State of Dalmatia.

[482] T. G. Jackson, Dalmatia, vol. ii. pp. 387-88.

[483] It consisted of five galleons and seven carracks, with a total burden of 7200 carra.

[484] Fra Benedetto Orsini (Miniati), quoted in Gelcich’s I Conti de Tuhelj, p. 87.

[485] Small barques.

[486] Gelcich, ibid.

[487] Ragusan Archives, 1600—lxix. 2119, in Gelcich, Tuhelj, 104.

[488] Gelcich, Tuhelj, 128.

[489] Farlati-Coleti, Illyricum Sacrum, iv.; Engel, § 49.

[490] Engel, § 59.

[491] A. A. Paton, Highlands and Islands of the Adriatic, vol. ii. p. 130 sqq.

[492] Article ix. and xi. of the Turco-Venetian Treaty; see Rycaut’s continuation of Knolles’s Turkish History.

[493] Paul Pisani, La Dalmatie de 1797 à 1815, Paris, 1893.

[494] Oct. 20, 1724, in Farlati, p. 272.

[495] Engel, § 53.

[496] Why they should have called themselves by the names of those two famous universities is not clear.

[497] Engel, § 55.

[498] Pouqueville, Voyage de la Grèce, vol. i.; Engel, § 56.

[499] Pouqueville, ibid.

[500] Quoted by Pouqueville.

[501] Also the fact that France had destroyed the liberties of the Republic would tend to make Frenchmen of the time dwell on its defects, just as they did in the case of the Venetian Republic.

[502] T. Watkins, Travels through Swisserland ... to Constantinople, vol. ii. Letter xlii. p. 331 sqq.

[503] T. Watkins, Travels through Swisserland ... to Constantinople Letter xliii. p. 344.

[504] Gelcich, p. 42.

[505] Ibid.

[506] Reform., ii., Oct. 3, 1349.

[507] De Diversis, ed. Brunelli, p. 39.

[508] Curzola has always been famous for its building stone, which is almost a marble, and acquires a rich yellow patina with age.

[509] Ragusavecchia.

[510] De Diversis, as quoted by Graham Jackson, who had seen the MS. in the Franciscan library at Ragusa, containing passages not in Brunelli.

[511] Jackson, ii. 332, note.

[512] Jackson, ii. 336.

[513] Anonymous account of Ragusa, quoted by Gelcich, p. 76.

[514] T. G. Jackson, ii. p. 380.

[515] Ibid.

[516] De Diversis, ed. Brunelli, p. 42.

[517] Gelcich, p. 80.

[518] T. G. Jackson, ii. 394.

[519] Ibid., ii. 295.

[520] Those of Stagno Grande have for the most part been pulled down.

[521] Eitelberger von Edelberg, op. cit., iv. 357.

[522] In the Herzegovina.

[523] Op. cit., iv. 317.

[524] For a more detailed description, see Graham Jackson, vol ii. p. 354.

[525] Ibid., ii. p. 356.

[526] Puipin und Spasowicz, Geschichte der Slawischen Literatur, vol. ii. p. 224.

[527] Puipin und Spasowicz, ibid.

[528] This, as well as the Slavonic works of other Ragusans, is published at Agram in the collection called Stari Pisci Hrvatski (Old Croatian writers).

[529] In this, as in other works by Ragusans, no animus against the Turk is displayed. He was regarded by the Ragusans as a law of nature rather than as an enemy, and a wholesome fear made them careful to avoid doing or even saying anything to offend him.

[530] Published at Venice in 1599.

[531] Venice, 1547, 1550.

[532] Ibid., 1550.

[533] Several editions of the Osman have been published, and Appendini translated it into Italian.

[534] Also spelt Boscovich.

[535] Pisani, La Dalmatie de 1797 à 1815, pp. 33 sqq.

[536] Ibid., pp. 125-126.

[537] R. P. Pregadi, July; Pisani, ibid.

[538] Pisani, ibid., pp. 135-136.

[539] Pisani, passim.

[540] Timoni’s despatches to the Austrian Chancery, quoted by Pisani, ibid., pp. 299-300.

[541] I.e. “beg” and “request,” rather than “must” and “shall.”

[542] Pisani, pp. 457-58.

[543] Pisani, passim.

INDEX

Adrianople, 170, 271

Adriatic, navigation in, 54; pirates in, 190

Advocatus Comunis, 85

Æsculapius capital, 341-4

Albania, 59-60, 166; under Servian rule, 137; Venetians in, 163; Turks in, 259

Alexius Comnenus, Emperor of the East, 35-6

Altomanović, Nicholas, 165, 167, 175-6

Antium, Cape, battle of, 180

Antivari, 136-8, 140; church of, 73; trade with, 73

Apulia, 118, 246-7; pirates of, 123

Archbishops of Ragusa, Venetian, 39

Aristocracy, 298, 317, 333-7, 411-16

Arrengerius, Archbishop of Ragusa, 73

Art at Ragusa, 149 sq., 339 sq.

Austria, Ragusan tribute to, 327

Austrian wars with Turkey, 321-4; schemes on Ragusa, 383

Austrians in Dalmatia, 382 sq., 403 sq.; occupy Ragusa, 411

Avars destroy Salona and Epidaurum, 16

Balša, George, 177, 179; Balša III., 202-4, 210; Constantine Balša, 190

Barbarossa, Haireddin, 8, 281-4

Barbary corsairs, 281, 283; States, 324

Basil II., Emperor of the East, 61

Bayazet I., 187, 191; II., 255, 258

Bela II., King of Hungary, 37; IV., 110

Belgrad, 136, 225, 237, 261, 266, 324

Benedict XII., Pope, 113

Benessa, Piro, 63-4

Bergato, 107, 130; battle of, 394-5

Bobali, Michele, 47, 63; Vito, 63

Bobovac, 102, 200, 201, 241

Bodazza, Lorenzo and Simone, 195

Bodino, legend of, 46-7, 61

Bogomilism, 53, 108, 111, 168, 223, 230

Bojana, river, 116, 118, 137

Bona, Giovanni, 373; Marquis, 404, 407; Niccolò, 319, 320; Serafino, 245

Bosdari, Mayor of Ragusa, 415; Michele, 301

Boskovic, Ruggiero, 329, 381

Bosnia, 59, 60, 102-3, 167-8, 193, 219-223, 227-8, 238-43, 248, 251-2, 261-2

Bosnia, bishopric of, 110; envoys to, 320; Pashas of, 281, 296

Bosnian colony near Ragusa, 18, 19

Branivoj, 95-8

Bratutti, Niccolò, 373

Brazza, 199, 205-9

British fleet, operations of, 401 sq.

Brskovo, 141, 143

Bruère, French Consul, 387-8, 399

Bucchia brothers, 97; Giorgio, 319-21

Budua, 176-7

Caboga, Biagio, 301; Count Biagio Bernard, 392, 399, 400, 404; Marino, 319-21

Calvino, Crisostomo, Archbishop of Ragusa, 292-3

Canalesi, 404, 407

Canali, 12, 15, 206; revolt in, 385-6

Candia, war of, 296, 318

Candiano, Pietro I., Doge of Venice, 27; III., Doge of Venice, 27

Castelnuovo, 184, 281-3, 322

Castello of Ragusa, 151, 160, 340-41

Cathedral of Ragusa, 151-3; Treasury, 301-2, 367-8

Cattaro, 59, 91-2, 99, 124, 140, 168, 175, 177, 180, 181, 204, 211; Bocche di, 59, 322; Three Martyrs of, 114

Cernomen, battle of, 170-1

Charles V., 286-8, 307-8

Chioggia war, 180-82

Christian fleet, 228; Leagues, 280, 286; prisoners, 285, 292

Church, Eastern and Western, 222

Citizens, classes of, 335-6

Clissa, 185, 281, 293

Coinage of Ragusa, 145, 192

Constantine Palæologus, Emperor, 264

Constantinople captured by Crusaders, 50; captured by Turks, 235; Ragusans at, 116, 118, 151; routes to, 266 sq.

Constitution of Ragusa, 79, 87-8, 330

Counts of Ragusa, Venetian, 24, 70, 71

Crnoević, Radić, 191

Croatia, 262, 401

Cubranović, Andrija, 375

Čulin, Banus of Bosnia, 53, 61, 110, 111

Curzola, 7, 199, 205-9, 402; battle of, 91

Dabiša, King of Bosnia, 193

D’Ajala, 333, 383, 386, 389-90, 409

Dalmatia, geographical position, 1; conquered by the Romans, 8; by Odovakar, 9; theme of, 9, 10; conquered by Venice, 32-4; Imperial authority revives in, 34; conquered by Hungary, 163 sq.; reconquered by Venice, 211-12; invaded by the Turks, 281-2; the French in, 390 sq.

Dance, church of, 351; paintings in, 361

Dandolo, Enrico, Doge of Venice, 50; Giovanni, Count of Ragusa, 62; Provveditore of Dalmatia, 401

Delgorgue, General, 394-5

Delort, Colonel, 399, 400

Demetrius Palæologus, Despot of the Morea, 265

Dessa, Prince of the Serbs, 37

Diplomacy, Ragusan, 88-9, 288, 291

Dobroslav, Prince of the Serbs, 34

Doclea, 62, 166; archbishopric of, 51

Dominican monastery at Ragusa, 156-7, 304; paintings in, 363-4; at Mezzo, 358

Dominicans at Ragusa, 113; in Bosnia, 112

Držić, Gjore, 373; Marino, 375

Dubrovnik, 18; See also Ragusa

Dulcigno, 136, 138

Durazzo, 7, 10, 118, 163, 166, 248

Dušan, Stephen, Tsar of the Serbs, 60, 96-8

Dutch in the Mediterranean, 314-15

Earthquakes at Ragusa, 260, 298-305

Elizabeth, widow of Louis of Hungary, 167, 183

England, trade with, 264; incident with, 329

English colony at Ragusa, 275

Epidaurum, 7, 15

Eugene IV., Pope, 228; of Savoy, 324

Fano, treaty with, 55

Ferdinand, Emperor of Germany, 293

Ferrara war, 257-8

Florence, connection with, 118, 272-3

Foča, 133, 267

Fonton, Russian consul, 388-93

Forte Molo, 357; San Giovanni, 291; Imperiale, 408, 410

Fortifications of Ragusa, 291

Forty Martyrs, feast of, 215-16

Franciscan monastery at Ragusa, 153-6, 304; at Mezzo, 359; at Stagno, 360

Franciscans at Ragusa, 113

French occupy Ragusa, 392; their rule in Ragusa, 396, 401

French party at Ragusa, 387-8, 398

French Revolutionary wars, 333 sq.

Galliani, Archbishop of Ragusa, 327

Garagnin, G. D., 401

George Branković, Despot of Servia, 226-7

Gervase, Count of Ragusa, 47-8

Ghetaldi, Marino, 380; Rector of Ragusa, 298

Giordani, Onofrio, 341-8, 352-3

Giorgi, Colonel, 408; Damiano, 229; Marsilio, Count of Ragusa, 73; Matteo, 181

Giuda, Damiano, 63-4

Giuppana, 107, 120

Giustiniani, Marco, Count of Ragusa, 70

Gondola, Francesco, 286-8; Francesco Giuseppe, 331; Giacomo, 198; Giovanni, see Gundulić

Gozze, Giovanni, 372-3; Marino, 221, 319-21; Niccolò, 195-6; Raphael, 322

Grado, Patriarchate of, 39, 67

Grand Council, 82, 85

Gravosa, 107, 120, 273, 303, 357-8, 408

Gregory VII., Pope, on Dalmatian Church, 51

Grgurić, 409, 410

Grimani, Patriarch of Venice, 282

Gropa, Lord of Ochrida, 166

Gundulić, Ivan, 376-80

Heraclius, Emperor, 21

Herzegovina, 191, 234-5, 242, 255-6; Sandjakbegs of, 281, 284

Hlum, 12, 61-2, 94-5, 135, 166-7, 174-5

Hoste, Sir William, 402-4, 407-8

Hrvoje, Duke of Spalato, 193, 197-201

Hungary, connection of Dalmatia and Ragusa with, 35, 105, 163, 173, 251-2, 256, 261-2; civil wars in, 183; conquered by Austria, 321-4

Hunyadi, John, 227, 229, 230

Isak Beg, 219, 223-4, 226, 238

Jajce, 240, 242, 261-2

John, Archbishop of Ragusa, 73

John Zapolya, King of Hungary, 262

Kara Mustafa, 318-21

Kiriko, 398, 399

Kljuć, 130, 242

Kosača, Stephen, Duke of St. Sava, 224-5

Kossovo, 139; first battle of, 186; second battle of, 229

Kotromanic, Stephen, Banus of Bosnia, 61

Kreševo, 143; Diet of, 228

Kroia, 230, 246, 248, 254

Lacroma, 54, 286

Ladislas, King of Hungary, 35, 227-9; Posthumus, King of Hungary, 229; Ladislas II., King of Hungary, 258; of Naples, 198

Lagosta, island of, 30, 31, 87, 107, 294

Latin Empire of the East, 50; colonials at Ragusa, 80; poets at Ragusa, 372-3

Laudo Populi, 24-5, 79

Lazar, Knez, 165, 186

Leopold I., Emperor of Austria, 321-3

Lesina, island of, 7, 199, 205-9, 403

Levant, Spanish expedition to, 308-11

Louis, King of Hungary, 103-4, 163, 168

Lowen, Captain, 402, 404, 407

Luccari, Giacomo, 380; Giovanni, 235

Lučić, Hannibal, 373-4

Macedonia, 164, 166, 170

Manuel Comnenus, Emperor, 38-9, 44

Marko Kraljević, 171, 186

Marmont, General, 397 sq.

Mary, daughter of Louis of Hungary, 183

Mary Helena, wife of Step. Tomašević, 243

Matthew Corvinus, King of Hungary, 229, 238, 251, 258

Matthew Ninoslav, Banus of Bosnia, 61

Meleda, island of, 37, 107, 178, 292

Menčetić, Šiško, 373

Mezzo, Isola di, 107, 282, 303, 307, 358-9

Michael Balbus, Emperor, 21; Palæologus, 117; Tsar of the Bulgarians, 73-4, 96, 107; I., Despot of Epirus, 116; II., Despot of Epirus, 116

Michelozzi, Michelozzo, 342-4

Michiel, Tribuno, Arch. of Ragusa, 40, 48

Michiel, Vitale, Doge of Venice, 39, 40

Milutinović, General, 409-16

Mohammed I., Sultan, 209; II., 235-7, 240-43, 248, 255, 289; IV., 320

Molitor, General, 390, 395-6

Montrichard, 408, 410, 411

Morea, 264-5, 322-4

Morlachs, 301, 322

Morosini, Marino, Count of Ragusa, 91; Tommaso, Patriarch of Venice, 50

Murad I., Sultan, 170, 186; II., Sultan, 221, 225-7

Nalješković, Nikola, 375

Naples, relations with, 327, 332

Napoleon Bonaparte, 390 sq.

Narenta, river, 116, 135, 251-2; pirates of, 26-32, 55; Mare di, 94

Nemanja, Stephen, King of the Serbs, 46-7, 59; dynasty, 58

Nikolići, Counts of Hlum, 103

Normans in Dalmatia, 35, 489

Novibazar, 59, 133, 134, 266

Novobrdo, 140, 143, 220, 237

Ochrida, battle of, 247

Ohmučević, Count Ivelja, 308

Ohmučević-Grgurić, Don Pedro d’Ivelja, 307-10; Don Antonio Damiano, 315-316; Don Andrea, 311, 312

Olisti-Diničić-Tasovčić, Don Juan, 310

Olisti-Tasovčić, Don Estevan, 309-10; Don George, 310

Orchan, Emir of the Turks, 170

Orloff, Admiral, 330-31

Orseolo, Pietro, Doge of Venice, 29

Orthodox Christians, 110, 244, 317, 327-8

Ottone, Orseolo, Count of Ragusa, 32, 34

Paccioni, 409-10

Pactbod, General, 401-2

Particiaco I., Giovanni, Doge of Venice, 27

Paul III., Pope, 280-1

Paul Radinović, Lord of Trebinje, 193

Paulimir Belo, King of Rascia, 29

Paulovići, 193; Paul, 210; Radosav, 210

Piracy, 94, 123, 259, 261

Podvisoko, 135

Porta Pile, 57, 354, 408, 411

Porta Ploce, 357, 411

Portugal, expedition to, 308

Pouqueville, 335-6

Pozza-Sorgo, Count, 415

Prazzatto, Michele, 307-8

Prévot, French Consul, 333-5

Priepolje, 133, 134 note, 268

Primorije, 194, 197

Prizren, 108 note, 139, 145

Radoslav, Count of Hlum, 61; Radoslav II., 62, 74

Radinović, Paul, 210

Ragnina, Clemente, 280-1; Francesco, 332; Niccolò, 380

Ragusa, situation, 4, 5; foundation, 16, 17; name, 17-18; early constitution, 22-3; first submission to Venice, 32-4; second submission, 40-44; third submission, 50, 66, 67; church of, 51-3, 108; independent of Venice, 106; territory of, 107; harbour of, 119, 273-4; submission to Hungary, 171 sq.; international position, 172-3; relations with the Turks, 169-70; with Hungary, 212; wealth of, 215, 219, 263, sq.; decline of, 297-8; end of Republic, 414

Ragusan shipping, 2, 53, 68, 306, sq.; colonies, 142-6

Ragusavecchia, 15, 107, 120, 407-8

Rambuti, Benedetto, 266 sq., 276-7

Rector of Ragusa, 82, 170-2

Rector’s Palace, 298, 304, 339-48

Romanesque art, 151 sq.

Rosario, church of, 351-2

Rudnik, 131, 167

Rukavina, General, 383

Russia, 327-8, 330-3, 388-93

Sabbioncello, 93-6, 135

St. Sava, 59, 134-5; Duchy of, 224

Salamanchesi, faction of, 329-30

San Biagio, bas-relief of, 161; church of, 153, 304; feast of, 215; legend of, 28 and note; statuette of, 368-9

S. Giacomo in Peline, church of, 57, 113

S. Luca, church of, 350

S. Niccolò in Prijeki, church of, 57

S. Salvatore, church of, 260, 349

Sant’ Andrea, 107

Sandalj Hranić, Lord of Hlum, 190-93, 203, 209, 210, 219-24

Santa Maria del Biscione, church of, 358

Santa Maria in Casielto, church of, 57

Santissima Annunziata, church of, 350

Sapienza, battle of, 103

Saxons in Bosnia, 142, 144

Scutari, 100, 139, 188, 203, 253-4

Selim the Drunkard, Sultan, 285

Senate, 81-2, 88

Serbs, origin of, 11; civilisation among 147

Sergio, Monte, 18, 19, 57, &c.

Servia, 58, 90-93, 164, 171, 236-8

Servian spoken at Ragusa, 10, 80

Sette Bandiere, 288-9

Shipping, Ragusan, 78, 119-20, 126

Sigismund, King of Hungary, 191-2, 194

Siniavin, Admiral, 390-1, 395

Skanderbeg, 220, 245-8

Slavery at Ragusa abolished, 313-14

Slaves, invasions of, 9; conversion of, 53; renegade, 193

Slavonic States, relations with, 44, 46, 56

Sofia, 140, 266, 270

Sorbonnesi, faction of, 320-30

Sorgo, Count, 397; Stefano, 181

Spain, relations with, 285, 288, 296

Spalato, Archbishopric of, 51, 52

Specchio of nobility, 80, 212

Speranćić, Paul, Banus of Croatia, 239

Srebrnica, 136, 143, 205

Stagno, 93-6, 98-9, 120, 135, 303, 359-60

Stanico, 74, 76-78

Stephen, Despot of Servia, 195, 210; son of Kosača, 352; III., King of Servia, 60; IV., King of Servia, 60; Dušan, see Dušan; Lazarević, Despot of Servia, 223-4; Uroš, see Uroš; Ostoja, King of Bosnia, 193-4, 197-9, 202, 210; Ostogić, 210; Thomas, King of Bosnia, 228, 230, 238-9; Tomašević, King of Bosnia, 239-40; Tvrtko, Banus of Bosnia, 167-8; crowned king, 179, 183-5, 187-8, 209, 219-20

Stoicus, Johannes, 223-3

Suleiman Beg, 254; Suleiman the Magnificent, Sultan, 261-2

Sutorina, 323

Svetimir, King of Bosnia, 45

Thomas Palæologus, Despot of Achaia, 265

Tiepolo, Pietro, Count of Ragusa, 90

Timoni, Austrian Consul, 387, 398

Tomasić, General, 403

Tonisto, Niccolò, Count of Ragusa, 72-3

Topia, Charles, Lord of Albania, 166

Trade of Ragusa, 100, 115 sq., 118, 126, 170, 214, 253, 263, 265-6, 284-5, 207, 328, 338, 386-7; routes, 130 sq.

Trebinjćica, 130

Trebinje, 130, 267, 295

Trgovište, 134

Tribulzio, Archbishop of Ragusa, 279

Tribunia, 36-7, 44

Tribute to the Turks, 219, 236, 253-4, 260, 323-4

Turks, advance of, 169, 170, 191, 205-6, 219, 220, 223, 244-5; Ragusa’s dealings with, 89, 179, 214, 235, 238, 258-9, 265-6, 278-9, 282-3, 398-9, 409, 412

Uljiša, King of Servia, 165, 170

Uroš, Stephen, 59; the Great, 73; II., 92; IV., 93, 96, 164

Uskoks, 293-6

Usküb, 59, 266

Varna, battle of, 228, 229

Venetians, supreme in the Adriatic, 49; reconquer Dalmatia, 211, 212; in Albania, 253-4; relations with Ragusa, 62 sq., 90, 91, 93, 105, 173, 257, 279-280, 282, 286-8, 318, 322-3, 328, 339 sq.; war with Austria, 295-6; fall of the Republic, 382

Vetranić-Cavčić, Nikola, 374-5

Viridis, Liber, 79

Višegrad, Treaty of, 106

Vladislav, son of Kosača, 234, 252

Vlascnica, 136 and note

Vlatko, son of Kosača, 252, 255; Hranić, 186

Vojnović, Vojslav, 165-7, 174-5

Vrhbosna, 225, 266

Vuk Branković, 165, 187

Vukčić, Stephen. See Kosača

William of Sicily, 44, 47

Zamagna, Giacomo, 195; Marino, 261; Niccolò, 195

Zara, 10, 30, 31, 205, 383

Zedda, 136, 165-6, 202, 211

Zellovello, Count of Ragusa, 64-5

Zen, Caterino, 271-2

Zlatarić, Dinko, 376

Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON & CO. Edinburgh & London

End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Republic of Ragusa, by Luigi Villary

*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE REPUBLIC OF RAGUSA ***

***** This file should be named 55332-0.txt or 55332-0.zip ***** This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: http://www.gutenberg.org/5/5/3/3/55332/

Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will be renamed.

Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark license, especially commercial redistribution.

START: FULL LICENSE

THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK

To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work (or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at www.gutenberg.org/license.

Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works

1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property (trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.

1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.

1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the United States and you are located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.

1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United States.

1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:

1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, copied or distributed:

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.

1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.

1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.

1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project Gutenberg-tm License.

1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.

1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.

1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided that

* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."

* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm works.

* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of receipt of the work.

* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.

1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.

1.F.

1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by your equipment.

1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.

1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further opportunities to fix the problem.

1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm

Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.

Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org

Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.

The Foundation's principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact

For additional contact information:

Dr. Gregory B. Newby Chief Executive and Director [email protected]

Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation

Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate

Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works.

Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.

Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: www.gutenberg.org

This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.