Putne isprave dubrovačkih Jevreja

Abstract

U Historijskom arhivu Dubrovnika postoji posebna serija (86-ta) koja nosi naslov Fedi ed Attestati. Ona je uvedena 1624. i vođena je gotovo do kraja Republike. U ovu seriju su ušli različiti akti u kojima se konstatuju činjenice pravno relevantne na osnovu ispitivanja sprovedenog putem neke vrste vanparničnog postupka. Tu nalazimo: dokazivanje srodstva, poslovne nesposobnosti, status lica, brodova, umrlice, potvrde o boravištu i t.sl. Za arhivskog radnika očevidno je da su u ovu seriju ušli neki akti koji su dotada ulazili u druge serije (npr. u Intentiones cancellariae i dr.). Nema sumnje da je dubrovačka kancelarija tokom vremena htela da izvrši specijalizaciju u svome radu pa je tako došio i do uvođenja ove serije kao posebne (upor. i seriju Diversa de Foris uvedenu 1593. prema Diversa Cancellariae).

As a merchant State (more precisely “city-State”) the Republic of Dubrovnik allowed at all times its citizens (cives) and inhabitants (habitatores) the freedom of movement and travelling abroad. In the Archives series “Fedi ed attestati" from 1624 on, in addition to other acts, we find also the passports. They served both as passports and as identity documents. In the passports, the Chancellery emphasizes, as a rule, whether its bearer (titular) is a citizen or a foreigner (we find the passports of this second kind only exceptionally). The Jews (ital. Ebreo, Serb. Žudio, Zudioka, Zuđeli, and Zudjeli) were treated as foreigners in the beginning, but later, undoubtedly from the fourth decade of the XVIIIth century and probably even earlier, as citizens. The passports which they were given were made out, like for the rest of citizens, in Italian for the Mediterranean countries and ports, and in (Serbian (lingua serviana = lingua slava - lingua ilirica - these are the synonyms used in the practice of the Chancellery of Dubrovnik) for Turkey. Thanks to documents that have been preserved, we can draw the conclusion that the Jews had become citizens with a special estate status in Dubrovnik earlier than in some Western countries as, for instance, in France and in Germany. The author gives a juridical analysis of the passport both of these in Italian and of those in Serbian, dwelling a little more circumstantially upon the particular estate status of the Jews of Dubrovnik; he comes to the conclusion that their situation was more favorable than in France and in Germany, but less favorable than in Turkey (where they were, as subjects, on the same footing with the Christians and the rayahs in general, including also the Moslem rayahs).