Dubrovnik Annals 3 (1999) 105 Novak, and the other, chemist Vladimir impressions of this stay in Putne uspomene Prelog. iz Hrvatske, Dalmacije, Albanije, Krfa i Slavica Stojan Italije (Travel accounts from Croatia, Dal- matia, Albania, Corfu and Italy; Zagreb, 1873). The beauty of the city and the promi- nence of its cultural heritage fascinated KukuljeviÊ from the very first moment. With Ivo PeriÊ, DubrovaËke teme XIX. stoljeÊa the utmost scrutiny he visited the city sights (Dubrovnik Themes of the Nineteenth Cen- and crowned his stay in Dubrovnik by root- tury). Mala knjiænica Matice hrvatske, No.V/ ing about the archives pertaining to the 32 of the new series. Zagreb: Matica hrvat- Ragusan Republic period, as well as the ska, 1997, 227 pp. manuscripts in the wealthy monastery librar- ies. He comments on the inadequate research The book under review contains seven conditions and generally poor state of the old of Ivo PeriÊ’s studies that have appeared in Ragusan documents that had been kept at the scholarly journals over the last decade, all District Court and offices, parts of which had of which concern events and personalities already been ruined or removed to Vienna from nineteenth-century Dubrovnik. and Zadar. Despite the unprofessional care of the archives housed at different locations, In the first article, entitled ≈Dubrovnik i KukuljeviÊ was able to provide a systematic DubrovËani u oËima Ivana KukuljeviÊa classification of old Ragusan documents, Sakcinskog« (Dubrovnik and its people in pointing to the value of particular series. Si- the eyes of Ivan KukuljeviÊ Sakcinski), PeriÊ multaneously, he amassed considerable focuses on KukuljeviÊ’s early contacts with sources for his future historiographic work. Ragusans in Vienna, and his role in the pro- While in Dubrovnik, KukuljeviÊ made con- motion of Dubrovnik’s literary heritage as tacts with the writers and intellectuals of the one of the fundamental segments of the revival circle: Mato VodopiÊ, Antun Rocci, Croatian National Revival movement. He Marko MarinoviÊ, Niko Arbanas, Pacifik further explores KukuljeviÊ’s relations with RadeljeviÊ, and others, whose work he was Dubrovnik and their relevance in the con- text of the revival period. As a founder of already acquainted with. The companionship Druπtvo za povjesnicu jugoslavensku (The of the KaznaËiÊ family—father and son— Society for Yugoslav history) in the 1850s he found most pleasing, in line with broth- KukuljeviÊ initiated multiple activities with ers Niko and Medo PuciÊ who assisted him the aim of registering, collecting, and pub- in the sightseeing of Dubrovnik and its sur- lishing the manuscripts and archival docu- roundings. Having established firm intellec- ments. Massive sources and highly uncom- tual ties with Dubrovnik, KukuljeviÊ pro- fortable travel conditions discouraged ceeded to Kotor. KukuljeviÊ’s subsequent KukuljeviÊ from visiting Dubrovnik during correspondence with the Ragusans is volu- his stay in Dalmatia in 1854. However, two minous and diversified, while the publish- years later, in September 1856, KukuljeviÊ ing activity dealing with Dubrovnik’s herit- organized a scientific expedition to the dis- age remains an important and lasting feature tricts of Dubrovnik and Kotor. His visit to of his career. Dubrovnik lasted from 13 October until 4 PeriÊ’s study ≈Uloga Antuna Dropca u November. Sixteen years later, he penned the javnom æivotu Dubrovnika« (The role of 106 Dubrovnik Annals 3 (1999) Antun Drobac in Dubrovnik’s public life) at the organization and expansion of the represents the most judicial appraisal of museum, placing thus his name among the Antun Drobac, pharmacist and naturalist, pioneers of what is now called museology. whose life and career was unjustly disre- The third article is dedicated to by far garded. Having studied pharmacy in Padua, one of the most interesting personalities of Antun Drobac (1810-1882) opened chem- nineteenth-century Dubrovnik, Niko Veliki ists‘ shop in Dubrovnik in 1832. PeriÊ con- PuciÊ (1820-1883), whose intellectual quali- cludes that he was the first to recognize and ties received much credit during his lifetime, describe the insecticide properties of tansy, but who, unlike his brother Medo, left no lit- as well as the promoter of its cultivation. His erary or scientific works. His role in the po- pharmacological skill was further proved by litical and public life of Dubrovnik, however, the preparation of ether, for use as an cannot be overlooked. Born to privilege, anesthetic. It was first used during surgery PuciÊ was educated in Dubrovnik and Ven- by a Dubrovnik doctor, Niko Pinelli, with ice. As he was entrusted with running the the assistance of Drobac in 1847. In addi- family estate, he did not study abroad. Never- tion, Drobac was an outstanding business- theless, he absorbed knowledge with unfail- man and among the first shipowners who ing assiduity all his life. An adherent of the invested in the DubrovaËko pomorsko Revival Movement prior to 1848, PuciÊ en- druπtvo (Dubrovnik maritime company). dorsed the idea of the unification of all Drobac’s business reputation won him con- Croatian lands, and he remained loyal to the siderable prestige in Dubrovnik, and even- National Party to the end of his life. During tually he rose to the position of president of the 1850s, in the period of neo-absolutism, the Chamber of business and commerce. he co-operated with Ivan KukuljeviÊ. In 1850 Political activities of the period were also Niko PuciÊ was already appointed member marked by Drobac’s authoritative personal- of the Druπtvo za povjestnicu jugoslavensku, ity. He was a member of the Narodna straæa but equally dedicated his time to cultural and (National Guard) 1848-49, and from 1861 political work in Zagreb. PuciÊ’s political onwards one of the most distinguished mem- ideas and attitude can be gleaned from his bers of the Narodna stranka (National Party). correspondence with Baldo BogiπiÊ, Franjo After winning the 1869 elections, the latter RaËki, J.J. Strossmayer, and Mihovil had two men in top positions: Rafo PuciÊ as PavlinoviÊ. As an exponent of the National mayor, and Drobac as his deputy. Drobac Party, in 1861 PuciÊ was assigned by the was a passionate collector. His collections Dubrovnik Municipal Council to go to Vi- of ores, minerals, crystals, shells, fish, and enna where he was to advocate for the unifi- stuffed animals grew over the years to the cation of Dalmatia and Croatia, and the use size of a proper museum of natural history. of the vernacular language in public life and He named his collection Kabinet prirodopisa education. His mission ended in failure, for (Cabinet of natural history), and housed it in Austria’s interest in keeping Dalmatia iso- the Dominican monastery, where it was to lated prevailed. Nevertheless, Dalmatia be exhibited before the public. In 1871, the could not be deprived of the right to its own Municipal Council found a new location for regional parliament. Upon his return from the collection within the municipal palace, Vienna, PuciÊ stopped in Zagreb, where he renaming it the Domorodni muzej (Native was introduced to the leading figures of the Museum). Drobac enthusiastically labored National Party, headed by Strossmayer, who Dubrovnik Annals 3 (1999) 107 impressed him profoundly. That same year cal views of the bishop of Dubrovnik, writer PuciÊ was elected to the Croatian Parliament Mato VodopiÊ. The life of this popular cleric as a representative from Kriæevci. After re- represents a pattern of cultural revival ac- tiring from this office, PuciÊ resumed his tivities, which contributed to the shaping of political work in Dubrovnik, where he stood Croatian national identity. In light of politi- up against Italian sympathizers. During the cal and national maturation, PeriÊ traces 1860s, PuciÊ took part in founding Il VodopiÊ from his early school days in Dub- Nazionale journal, and collaborated in both rovnik and seminary in Zadar, to his service Matica dalmatinska and Narodna πtionica in numerous parishes of his diocese. Ideas in Dubrovnik. Due to the pressure of the of the Revival Movement were soon to oc- autonomaπi (adherents of the idea of Dal- cupy him, and he began contributing to Dani- matian autonomy), the 1864 parliament elec- ca and Zora Dalmatinska. He cheered the tions and the 1865 local elections in news of JelaËiÊ being elected ban (vice-roy) Dubrovnik proved disastrous for National of Croatia. His vast literary and intellectual Party. These events caused PuciÊ to indulge interests within Dubrovnik’s revival circle more in cultural activities and editorial work have been described in the works of Ida on the journal Dubrovnik - Zabavnik Düringsfeld and Ivan KukuljeviÊ. The most Narodne πtionice. When the Viennese Court creative phase of VodopiÊ’s cultural and lit- began to show more political tolerance to- erary career began with his service in Gruæ wards the National Party, PuciÊ won the 1867 in 1857. In 1860 he entered political life by elections, and was subsequently appointed joining the National Party, having published vice-president of the Dalmatian Parliament. his most outstanding prose (Marija: povijest As his party was in the minority, he was in konavoska and Tuæna Jele: povijest gruπka) no position to contribute to its political goals, on the pages of the journal Dubrovnik - and soon resigned. He remained an active Zabavnik Narodne πtionice. In his clerical observer of Croatian political life, and fol- and literary work he promoted the goals of lowing the Austro-Hungarian Settlement he the nationalist cause: the unification of presented the Croatian Parliament with an Croatia, Slavonia and Dalmatia, the official interpretation according to which this agree- introduction of the vernacular language, and ment favored the Kingdom of Croatia, the cultural and economic development of Slavonia, and Dalmatia. Austrian policy with the region. Although he did not take active regard to Dalmatia, and its interpretation of part in political struggles, VodopiÊ was a the dual monarchy soon deceived PuciÊ.