74
Zeynep
Arslan
Although this inference—which has been supported by many studies up until this
point—might be accepted in regards to Dubrovnik’s trade relations in the first half of the 18
th
century, we wish to offer a different analysis of the events that occurred both inside
Dubrovnik and in its surrounding areas during the second half of the 18
th
century. Dubrovnik
was remarkable in that it was different from most other city-states; as Stuard aptly says, it was
“a state of deference”
(Stuard, 1992). Despite its relative decline in the 17
th
century, the city
was prominent enough to make its mark within the minds of the century’s writers, allowing us
to approach Dubrovnik’s purported periods of decline from numerous perspectives.
One of the two main concerns of this study is Dubrovnik’s economic activity in the
18
th
century. Dubrovnik would become a crucial player in the economic and political
landscape of its surrounding areas, and despite the fact that 18
th
century Dubrovnik was a
period of decline for the city-state according to many scholars, Dubrovnik experienced its
most prosperous era during this time (Carter, 1972). 18
th
century Dubrovnik’s political events
are referred to in the context of Ottoman
involvement and attitudes,
since the Ottoman Empire
had a large impact on the Republic of Dubrovnik’s success. Contrary to popular belief, the
18
th
century was highly significant in regards to Ottoman-Dubrovnik relations; the peak
number of Ragusan ambassadors in Ottoman lands during the 18
th
century (Glavina, 2009)
supports this argument.
Examining the two polities’ 18
th
century relations in detail will not only overcome any
ambiguities and falsehoods surrounding the issue, but also allow us to more accurately assess
the political, economic, and social phenomena in Dubrovnik’s last century. It has also
stimulated my interest that nearly no Turkish historians have produced any studies about 18
th
century relations between the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Dubrovnik. Although this
was initially a problem—given, of course, the lack of resources relevant to the topic—the
issue was solved by retrieving foreign literature and Ottoman archival documents written
about the history of Dubrovnik.
2. Materials and Methods
Since the beginning of the 20
th
century, Dubrovnik has been attracting historians from all over
the world. This is presumably not only because it has managed to preserve its archives so
effectively, but also thanks to the multilingualism of its archival documents. Greek is among
those many languages. These Greek documents came about not only because of a large Greek
settlement that existed near the city-state Epidaurus (present-day Cavtat) until its Slavic
invasion in the 7
th
century (Biegman, 1967), but because Greek was used as a lingua franca in
the Balkans during the 16
th
and 17
th
centuries, particularly by the Orthodox population.
Educated Serbs, for example, wrote in Greek so often that they adapted their own Greek
names for use in correspondence. It even became fashionable to speak and write in Greek,
particularly classical Greek. When the Slavs settled in Dubrovnik
and gradually Slavicized the
town, Slavonic became another commonly encountered language while researching
Dubrovnik’s archives. Documents in Latin are also prevalent; Latin, in Roman times, was the
primary language of trade and administration until Italian replaced it. This replacement
occurred due to the strong Italian influence—primarily Venetian—in the region.
After the 1204 Venetian conquest of the Byzantine territories in Balkans, Dubrovnik
remained under Venetian control for over half a century. Starting from this period, the Italian
documents in the Dubrovnik archives began to grow. Although Italian was widely used, it did
not prevent the progress of Croatian literature (Jelavich, 1983). The number of archived
Ottoman documents is also noteworthy. From the 14
th
century onward, Turkish presence in
75
Eighteenth Century Relations between the Ottoman Empire and
the Republic of Dubrovnik
the Balkans fostered a relationship between the two polities that would last for a long while.
The Ottoman portions of the archive therefore include numerous letters between the Ottoman
lords and princes, treaties between the two sides, trade and travel permits, and charters.
Although all official correspondence had been made in Ottoman Turkish since the time of
Suleiman the Magnificent, Slavic was also used for over a century between the reigns of
Murad II (1446-1451) and Selim I (1512-1520). In the 15
th
century, correspondence between
Ottoman Sultans and Dubrovnik were even written in old Serbian. The charters of 1442 and
1458 were also written in Serbian in Cyrillic letters (Zlatar, 1992).
There is much to decipher from the Ottoman archives that detail Dubrovnik’s issues.
First, we should mention
‘ahd-n mes. An ‘ahd-n me is defined as a “treaty” or “agreement
paper” (Şemseddin Sami, 2010); it is “an official paper signed by two sides which includes
the terms of an agreement” (İnalc k, 1971)
.
In the Ottomans’ case, ‘ahd-n mes are documents
comprising peace treaties or trade concessions granted to foreign states (Kütükoğlu, 1988).
When the Ottomans and the Republic of Dubrovnik began their relations, there emerged a
need to determine the course of their alliance, and ‘ahd-n mes played a decisive role in this
endeavor. They provide scholars with extensive information on social context, enforced rules,
and the progress of relations concerning the Ottoman Empire and Dubrovnik. They cover
political and commercial issues, as well. In general, the political matters are brief and
constitute the first part of the agreement. After stating the annual tribute amount that
Dubrovnik was to pay to the Ottomans, a list of their political rights followed. The sections on
trade, however, are far longer and more comprehensive, most likely because most of
Dubrovnik’s population were traders.
Other documents in the Ottoman archives regarding 18
th
century Ottoman-Dubrovnik
relations that one would expect to be indexed are, unfortunately, not logged. All the
Dubrovnik-related 17
th
century documents were classified under the
Ecnebi Defterleri catalog
(Düvel-i Ecnebiye Defterleri) and mostly logged in the same registers as documents about
Venice. However, these are merely the documents that are accessible by following the guides
in the aforementioned catalogues, meaning it is still entirely possible that uncharted archival
documents could emerge upon further research.
Documents containing a summary in the digital system can easily be searched using
keywords, but if one knows that a specific document exists—whether digitally or on paper—
and still cannot find it, one may have to rely on
Dosya Usulü
1
(a procedure of perusing
physical files in folders that don’t have digital copies). This process allows researchers to
access hard-to-find yet valuable archives. While in the long run all documents in The Prime
Minister’s Ottoman Archives will be digitally organized for researchers’ convenience, some
have yet to be uploaded to an online database; until they are, they will remain on the physical
shelves of the archives. Although using this method may require more work, it is worth doing
if a large amount of material is required.
Researchers seeking particular 18
th
century documents ought to be aware that the
catalogues may not list them as ‘ahd-n mes. Instead, they are combined with Venice’s
registers under the name of
Venedik-Dubrovnik Defteri (Venice-Dubrovnik Register), which
consists of two separate books. The first register is concerned with years 1779 through 1806,
while the second one acts as a completely separate text detailing the events between 1788 and
1806.
While we initially only planned on analyzing Ottoman-Ragusan relations in the
context of 18
th
century trade practices, we decided to examine all aspects of their relations to
review them from both political and military perspectives. For historiographical purposes, we