Erasmo Castellani Cultural Brokers. the Bolizza Brothers of Kotor and Their Relazione I Was in Zadar, Croatia, for a Couple of W
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Erasmo Castellani Cultural brokers. The Bolizza brothers of Kotor and their Relazione I was in Zadar, Croatia, for a couple of weeks, looking for archival material for my master thesis. The last day of my stay, almost accidentally, while going through the catalog of the Scientific Library, I found something that caught my eyes. Filed under the letter “S” of Giuseppe Scarpi, a man who donated several documents to the library regarding the Venetian Dalmatia, was the record of an intriguing report describing the southernmost Dalmatian stronghold of the Venetian Republic. “Bolizza, Fr. Relazione del Montenero, Scutari, Antivari e Dulcigno”1 detailed the territories around the city of Cattaro, modern day Kotor, on the coasts of Montenegro. The author, Francesco Bolizza, was a familiar name to me: since 1578 his family organized the public correspondence between Venice and Constantinople. Francesco and two of his brothers, Mariano and Antonio, were also often summoned by the rettore – the Venetian Governor of Kotor – to negotiate with Turkish officials and local chieftains. Yet, it was classified as an eighteenth-century manuscript; could it really come from the hand of “that” Francesco Bolizza? If so, what might the Relazione be about? Which kind of information Francesco Bolizza traded in in his role as one of Kotor’s leading figures at the end of the sixteenth century? When it finally arrived on my desk, I started skimming the text. I immediately noted that the author was the Francesco Bolizza that I knew. It was an account 1 “Report of Montenegro, Shkoder, Bar and Ulcinj”. Znanstvena knjižnica Zadar from now ZKZ), inv. 11169, ms. 164. From now: Relazione Zadar. 1 of the surrounding territories of Kotor, in which the author described in details cities, villages, people, and the natural environment of that southern part of the Balkans shared between today’s Montenegro, Albania, Macedonia, Bosnia, Herzegovina and Kosovo. Moreover, the account designated the journey from Kotor to Constantinople made by couriers to deliver public dispatches to the Bailo, the Venetian diplomat who oversaw the affairs between Venice and the Ottoman Empire. Would it shed a light on the postal service, an important, yet little – and poorly – studied part of the Venetian Empire? Dating the manuscript raised additional and even more puzzling problems, however. While not dated, the manuscript mentioned events of the first 15 years of the 1600s, in which Francesco was often involved. Born in 1566, the author he refers to himself as Cavalier, knight of Saint Mark, the most important chivalric order of the Venetian Republic, an order which Francesco joined in 1616. On the last page, however, was written a much later date: April 26th, 1699. Since it is unlikely that Francesco lived over 130 years,2 I assumed that it was a copy of the manuscript, in which the unknown copyist added material that was consistent with the rest of the text: following the format, the 2 We can deduce Francesco’s age collating a few documents: a petition to the Venetian Signory submitted in 1620, in which he claimed that he received his father’s office when he was only 12. Also, we have to consider two contracts: the first one, dated 1578, in which Giovanni Bolizza, father Francesco, received an office from Venice, and another one, from 1604, in which the office officially passed to Francesco, after his father’s death. Finally, we know that he joined the Knight of Saint Mark in 1616. Being unlikely that Francesco was honored with such title when he was only 24, we have to understand the ambiguous formulation in the petition referring to the first contract that his father signed in 1578, in which he was just mentioned among Giovanni’s children. Hence, Francesco was born probably in 1566. See Archivio di Stato di Venezia (from now: ASV), Dispacci, f. 3, 04/12/1604; ASV, Risposte di fuori, f. 373, 16/09/1620; ASV, Mar, reg. 44 (1578-80), cc. 64v-66v; ASV, Cancelleria inferiore, Cavalieri di San Marco, Privilegi, b. 174. 2 transcriber added a list of newly acquired towns and villages which passed under the Venetian rule at the end of the Morean War, exactly in 1699. What purpose could a seventy-year old report filled with detailed descriptions of military and travel conditions ca. 1616 possibly serve in 1699? This was one of the first questions about the document which was doomed to remain unanswered. Perhaps it was still considered a valuable tool to familiarize with that area, perhaps it was a way of celebrating someone who had been arguably one of the most relevant person of his time in Kotor. Hopefully, a deeper reading of the source would have provide some valuable insights. Being Friday the library closed early. I was able to take several notes, transcribe certain passages, but I did not have the opportunity to take pictures of the manuscript. In the afternoon I had to leave and go back to Venice. It was unfortunate that I did not have much time to analyze the manuscript, but I had enough information to work on. Back in Venice, I discovered that there were multiple copies of the manuscript. One is in the State Archives of Venice,3 and its content is word by word the same of the version I found in Zadar, and differs only in its layout and a few minor misspellings. In the archival inventories it appeared that there was another version of the document, but unfortunately it was lost in 2010, so I did not have the chance to see it. A third version is available in the Marciana library of Venice, and this one has also been published in 1866 by monsieur 3 ASV, Miscellanea codici, Storia veneta, b. 131. From now: Relatione ASV. 3 François Lenormant.4 According to Injac Zamputi,5 the National Library of Albania, in Tirana, has another version exactly alike the Marciana text, and, like the former, it has been published – and translated both in Albanian and in English – in recent years. My efforts to have the reproduction of this manuscript have been vain, as much as having its archival reference, but I have read its (alleged) transcription and all I can say is that it is the carbon copy of the Marciana version. Hence, I will not consider this one in my analysis. The text of the three versions is for the most part identical. The opening of the manuscript summarizes the discussed topics: Provided here is information on: how many parts this duchy [of Shkoder] is divided into, how many and which towns it has…who in particular are the commanders of these villages, what the rites…and how many men in arms can be supplied by them. Provided here, too, is information on the journeys made by the couriers of public dispatches to Constantinople, using the old routes and the new ones…Consideration is also given as to how the State ought to be interested in ensuring that the dispatches are sent by one route or another. Lists are provided with the names of towns visited and stops made by the above mentioned couriers every day on their trips from Kotor to Constantinople. A detailed description is then provided of the harbors, rivers and ports for vessels along the coast from Antivari 4 Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, mss. it. Cl. VI nr. 176; François Lenormant, Turcs et Monténégrins. Paris, Libraire Acadèmique, Didier & Ce, Libraires Editeurs, 1866. From now: Relatione Marciana. 5 Injac Zamputi (ed.): Relacione mbi gjendjen e Shqipërisë veriore dhe të mesme në shekullin XVII. vol. 1, Tirana 1963. 4 (Bar) to Vellona (Vlorë)…Brief information is also provided about…the rebellious highlanders who border on Podgorica and who are under the jurisdiction of the Turks who themselves have moved twice…to put the highlanders down… Finally, a description is provided of the towns of Castelnovo (Hercegnovi) and Risano (Risan) with their villages, which are subject to the Duchy and Sanjak of Hercegovina and are situated at the border, on the coast of the Bay of Kotor.6 From the beginning it was clear the composite nature of the Relazione, which appear to be a collection of accounts taken in different moments, for different purposes and…from different people. In fact, the subjects listed resonated immediately with the dispatches and the reports given at the end of their terms by the rettori of Kotor, the Venetian noblemen who served as representatives of the Most Serene Republic in the Dalmatian city. Slight, but telling differences in the different versions of the manuscript hint at the report’s repeated use and adaptation to different circumstances. As I mentioned before, the Zadar’s version and the one of the State Archives are almost identical, and they are either copies of the same variant, or one has been the model of the other. It is difficult though to identify the “original” one. The Venetian one appears to be written on older paper, of the same kind of that used by the official correspondence of the Venetian government between seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, while the one from Zadar looks like a late eighteenth-early nineteenth century paper. The same thing can be said 6 The English translations of the Relatione Marciana are taken from: Robert Elsie, Early Albania, a Reader of Historical Texts, 11th - 17th Centuries, Wiesbaden, 2003; p. 140. 5 about the handwriting: more compact and frenzied the Venetian, more elegant, light and spacious the one from Zadar. Yet in the former the lists of villages and their data, for example, are not organized in charts as in the latter, and in general the different chapters are not separated from each other.