1 Šime Ljubić, ed., “Spomenici o Šćepanu Malom,” Glasnik Srpskog učenog društva, drugi odeljak, Book II (1870), p. 16, dispatch of September 29, 1767, by P. Cigogna, Venetian Provveditor Extraordinary in Cáttaro; also p. 22, dispatch of October 20, 1767, by A. Renier, Venetian Provveditor General of Dalmatia and Albania.

2 Milutinović, Sima (Sarajlija), Istorija Černe-Gore od iskona do noviega vremena (Belgrade, 1835), p. 109.Google Scholar

3 Marko Dragović, ed., “Spomenici o Šćepanu Malom iz moskovskog glavnoga arhiva Ministarstva Inostranijeh Djela,” Spomenik, Srpska Kraljevska Akademija, XXII (1893), 29, report of August 5, 1768, by the Russian Embassy in Vienna, based on testimony given by a Montenegrin cleric, Archimandrite Avakum Milaković.

4 This portrait of Peter III aroused such curiosity that the Venetian Provveditor Extraordinary of Cáttaro, Zusto, had it removed “in order to deprive the credulous populace of still another source of temptation.” See Ljubić, op. cit., p. 102, for Zusto's dispatch of January 20, 1769.

5 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 23 Google Scholar, dispatch of October 20, 1767, by A. Renier, Venetian Provveditor General of Dalmatia and Albania.

6 Ibid.,p. 16, dispatch of September 29, 1767, by P. Cigogna, Venetian Provveditor Extraordinary in Cáttaro. The choice of the name “Stephen the Small” is still a mystery. D. Mordovcev does not solve the riddle by pointing out—in his article “Novyja dannyja o černogorskom lžepetrie III (Samozvanec Stepan Malyj),” Den', No. 33 (May 26, 1862), pp. 3-5—that Stephanos means “crown” in Greek. This linguistic connection would have been lost on even the clergy of eighteenth-century Montenegro, whose training—if any—was in Church Slavonic, let alone on a populace ignorant of any letters. N. V. Vsevoložskij comes closer to the mark when he recalls, in an otherwise completely erroneous footnote in Mordovcev's article, that “Stephen” was a common imperial name in medieval Serbia. Nearly every medieval Serbian monarch, notably Tsar Stephen Dusan the Mighty, bore a double name—that of Stephen plus his given name. Whether Stephen the Small was consciously following this example, or whether “Stephen” was indeed his own Christian name, cannot be ascertained. As for the designation “the Small,” this was probably another attempt by Stephen to reinforce the impression that he was really the one whom the Montenegrins would consider the greatest on earth—the ruler of Russia.

7 Makušev, Vikentij N., “Samozvanec Stepan Malyj,” Russkij vestnik, LXXXII (August, 1869), 575;Google Scholar also Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 25 Google Scholar, dispatch of October 20, 1767, by A. Renier, Venetian Provveditor General of Dalmatia and Albania; also Dragović, , op. cit., p. 30 Google Scholar, report of August 5, 1768, of the Russian Embassy in Vienna, based on testimony given by Archimandrite Avakum Milaković.

8 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 26 Google Scholar; also Makusev, , op. cit., p. 576.Google Scholar

9 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 31.Google Scholar

10 Makusev, , op. cit., p. 585 Google Scholar, based on a report of November 3, 1767, by a local Venetian official, Bubic, from Budva.

11 Ljubić, , op. cit., pp. 70–80 Google Scholar, dispatch of February 14, 1768, by A. Renier; also Makušev, op. cit., pp. 596-97.

12 Mićun M. Pavićević, “Lažni car šćepan Mali u svjetlosti istorije i narodne tradicije,” V jesnik Etnograftkog Muzeja u Zagrebu, IV (1938), 72-73.

13 Rovinskij, P., Černogorija v eja prošlom i nastojaščem (St. Petersburg, 1888), I, 544-45.Google Scholar

14 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 30 Google Scholar, dispatch of October 20, 1767, by A. Renier, Venetian Provveditor General of Dalmatia and Albania. One of the results of the Cetinje Assembly of October 17, which met in answer to Stephen's summons, was the election of the murdered Governor's brother, Joko Stanov Radonjic, to the Governorship after—thanks to Stephen's ban on feuds—the candidate publicly forgave and embraced his brother's enemies.

15 Catherine's charter of July 5, 1766, to the Montenegrins is cited in full by Milorad Medaković, Povjestica Crne Gore od najstarijeg vremena do 1830 (Zemun, 1850), pp. 55-57.

16 Dragović, , op. cit., p. 28 Google Scholar, report of August 5, 1768, by the Russian Embassy in Vienna, based on testimony by Archimandrite Avakum Milaković. Alexander Andrić points out in his Geschichte des Fürstenthums Montenegro von der ältesten Zeit bis zum Jahre 1852 (Vienna, 1853), p. 45, that actually two Russian officers were sent to Montenegro at the time: Mikhail Tarasov and Ivan Kozlovskij. There is nothing to indicate with which of these Stephen may have come into contact.

17 Dolgorukov, Prince P. V., Skazanija o rodě knjazej Dolgorukovykh (St. Petersburg, 1840)Google Scholar, see section entitled “Otryvki iz zapisok knjazja Jurija Vladimiroviča Dolgorukova,” p. 302. Prince Jurij V. Dolgorukij erroneously gives Hegumen (Prior) Teodosije the loftier title of Archimandrite (Abbot).

18 Jovanovic, Jagos, Stvarmije crnogorske države i razvoj crnogorske nacionalnosti: Istorija Crne Gore od početka VIII vijeka do 1918 godine (Cetinje, 1948), pp. 129-30.Google Scholar

19 Popular tradition in Montenegro portrayed Teodosije as opposing Stephen in order to keep the reins of administration in his own hands. See S. Ljubiša, “Šćepan Mali; kako narod o njemu povijeda,” Dubrovnik (Split, 1868), pp. 131, 135, and 139-45.

20 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 23 Google Scholar, dispatch of October 20, 1767, by A. Renier, Venetian Provveditor General of Dalmatia and Albania.

21 For Patriarch Brkić's relations with Stephen, see especially Ljubomir Durković-Jakšić, “Odredjivanje medjucrkvenog položaja crnogorskoj mitropoliji,” Istoriski zapisi (Journal of the Historical Institute of the Montenegrin People's Republic), Year VI, Book IX, No. I (1953), especially pp. 62-66.

22 Ljubić, , op. cit., pp. 7–8 Google Scholar; also see especially Venetian reports for August, 1768, on pp. 89 ff. For accounts of the Turkish campaign of 1768 in Montenegro, see Gopcevic, Spiridion, Montenegro und die Montenegriner (Leipzig, 1877), pp. 16 ff.Google Scholar; Andrić, , op. cit., pp. 48 ff.Google Scholar; Milaković, D., Istorija Crne Gore (Zadar, 1856), pp. 153 ff.Google Scholar; Medaković, op. cit., pp. 59 ff.Google Scholar For a popular Montenegrin account of this war—in epic verse—see Milutinović, op. cit., pp. 96-100.

23 Dragović, , op. cit., p. 7 Google Scholar, report of December 10, 1767, by Resident Obreskov and Chargéd'affaires Levašov.

24 Ibid., pp. 5-6, Metropolitan Sava's letter of October 12, 1767 (O. S.), to Obreskov.

25 Obreskov's letter is cited in full by Makušev, , op. cit., p. 596 Google Scholar. See also Ljubić, , op. cit., pp. 76–77 Google Scholar, for an Italian translation, and pp. 77-78 for the Russian original, badly copied by some scribe. Compare with the Serbian translation by Dragović, , op. cit., p. 6 Google Scholar, which was made from a copy of Obreskov's letter in the files of the Russian Embassy in Vienna.

26 Dragović, , op. cit., p. 7 Google Scholar, from a copy of Obreskov's dispatch of December 10, 1767 (O.S.).

27 The copy of Metropolitan Sava's letter to Obreskov in the Moscow archives bears a mysterious postscript in monkish Slaveno-Serbian which states, “And he summoned unto him the archbishop who rules over this land and saith unto us: now ye cannot understand, but rather send unto the great Empire which is in the East news of me, and do not call me other than Stephen the Small, who is good unto the good, for I ask no more than God hath given unto me, and now that ye may know well, thus saith the Lord of Sabaoth that I do… ” The rest is gibberish. This note was perhaps dictated by Stephen himself, as it bears his bizarre style, and may indicate that Stephen knew of Sava's letter. See Dragović, , op. cit., p. 6.Google Scholar

28 Archimandrite Grigorije Drekalović was sent on December 2; Archimandrite Avakum Milaković was sent on December 22; an unnamed monk was sent on January 14; and the brother of a Montenegrin chieftain was sent some time later. See Dragović, , op. cit., p. 10 Google Scholar, Russian translation of a letter in Serbian written by Archimandrite Drekalovic from Zemun on February 25, 1768 (O. S.), and received by Prince D. Golicyn in Vienna on March 26, 1768 (O. S.). The unnamed monk was probably Sofronije Pljevković, who actually reached Russia some considerable time later by way of Austria; see Soloviëv, S. M., Istorija Rossii s drevnejšikh vremen, 2nd ed. (St. Petersburg, n.d.), VI, Book 28, 589.Google Scholar

29 For the letters of the two emissaries, see Dragović, , op. cit., especially pp. 8–10.Google Scholar

30 Ibid., p. 8, report of February 20, 1768 (O. S.), by Prince D. Golicyn, Russian Ambassador in Vienna, to Prince A. M. Golicyn in St. Petersburg. Count Panin immediately brought the report to the attention of Catherine II; see “Političeskaja perepiska Imperatricy Ekateriny II, čast’ pjataja, 1768-1769 g.,” Sbornik Russkago Istoričeskago Obščestv, LXXXVII (1893), 49, document no. 1645.

31 “Političeskaja perepiska … ,” pp. 49-51, document no. 1646.

32 Ibid., pp. 52-54, document no. 1648; see also pp. 51-52, document no. 1647, for instructions sent to Prince D. Golicyn in Vienna concerning Merk's mission.

33 Ibid., pp. 54-56, document no. 1649, dated March 14, 1768 (O.S.)

34 Dragović, , op. cit., pp. 17–18 Google Scholar, Merk's letter of April 2, 1768 (O.S.), to Prince D. Golicyn, Russian Ambassador in Vienna.

35 Ibid., pp. 18-19, Merk's report of April 12, 1768 (O.S.), to the Collegium for Foreign Affairs in St. Petersburg. See also Ljubić, op. cit., for a dispatch of April 22, 1768, in which the Venetian Government instructs Antonio Renier, Provveditor General of Dalmatia and Albania, not to have any dealings with Merk.

36 Dragović, , op. cit., pp. 32–33 Google Scholar, Merk's report of August 9, 1768 (O.S.), from Vienna, received by the Collegium for Foreign Affairs in St. Petersburg on August 27, 1768 (O.S.).

37 Ibid., Catherine's marginal note in her own handwriting.

38 Ibid., p. 36, Prince D. Golicyn's letter of August 20, 1768 (O.S.), from Vienna to Prince A. Golicyn in St. Petersburg.

39 Ibid., p. 31, Avakum's report of August 5, 1768 (O.S.) in Vienna.

40 Ibid., pp. 36-37, Prince D. Golicyn's letter of August 20, 1768 (O.S.), in Vienna to Prince A. Golicyn in St. Petersburg.

41 Marquis Maruzzi (Panos Maroutsis) was a wealthy Greek banker and merchant whose family had come from Yannina to Venice early in the eighteenth century. He was appointed political Agent for Russia to all the Courts of Italy. His zeal in the Russian service earned him the Order of St. Anne and the title of Marquis. For his close connection with the Orlovs and the Morean Campaign, see especially Panteles M. Kontogiánnes, Oi Ellēnes katà tàn prōton epi Aikaterínēs B’ Rossotourkikàn pólemon 1768-1774 (Athens, 1903), pp. 82-89.

42 Dragović, , op. cit., p. 39 Google Scholar, Archimandrite Avakum's report to the Russian Collegium for Foreign Affairs, written between August 14 and September 13, 1772 (O.S.).

43 Soloviëv, , op. cit., pp. 582-83Google Scholar; also Tarle, E. V., Česmenskij boj i pervaja russkaja ekspedicija v arkhipelag 1769-1774 (Moscow-Leningrad, 1945), p. 18.Google Scholar

44 For a copy of Catherine's “Manifesto to the Slavonic Peoples of the Balkan Peninsula” of January 19, 1769 (O.S.), see “Političeskaja perepiska Imperatricy Ekateriny II, čast’ pjataja, 1768-1769 g.,” Sbornik Russkago Istoričeskago Obščestv., LXXXVII (1893), 322-25, document no. 1800. For her manifesto of January 29, 1769 (O.S.), addressed to “The Right Reverend Metropolitans, Archbishops, Bishops, and all other spiritual authorities [etc.],” see Milutinovič, op. ctt., pp. 159-64.

45 Tarle, , op. cit., p. 18.Google Scholar

46 Kontogiánnēs, , op. cit., p. 97.Google Scholar

47 Soloviëv, , op. cit., p. 583.Google Scholar Soloviëv writes the names of these two Serbs in their Russian form: Ezdemirovič and Belič. The former had come to Russia as the leader of a group of Serbian immigrants. The latter, Soloviëv reports without citing a source, had appeared in St. Petersburg as an envoy of Stephen the Small to plead for Russia's help against the Turks.

48 For a lively eyewitness account of this expedition, see An Authentic Narrative of the Russian Expedition against the Turks by Sea and Land (London, 1772), which—according to the title page—was “Compiled from several Authentic Journals, by an Officer on board the Russian Fleet.” Page 16 contains a list and description of the fleet.

49 “Reskripty i pis'ma Imperatricy Ekateriny II na imja grafa Aleksěja Grigorěviča Orlova-Česmenskago,” Sbornik Russkago Istoričeskago Obščestv., I (1867), 21.

50 Semevskij, M. I., ed., “Zapiski Knjazja Jurija Vladimiroviča Dolgorukova, 1740-1830,” Russkaja starin., LXIII (1889), 491.Google Scholar Dolgorukij claims that Orlov refused to accept command of the regiment without him.

51 Ibid., p. 492.

52 An Authentic Narrative, pp. 13-14.

53 In his memoirs, Dolgorukij claimed that Orlov's younger brother, Theodore, wished to head the mission to Montenegro. “An egoist and extraordinarily vain,” Dolgorukij wrote about Theodore (though the description might well have fit its author), “he had read much of Greek and Roman history, and wished to be the equal of great men, but unfortunately did not have the capacity for this, and his frivolous life prevented him from gaining distinction…” Dolgorukij recalled how one morning—he does not give the date—Count Alexis Orlov told him, “You know that my brother has no capabilities, and besides, is hated by everyone. Therefore, to avoid any unpleasant consequences, you take on the expedition by yourself.” Whether exact or not, the story, as told by Dolgorukij, reveals his own self-esteem. See “Zapiski …,” Russkaja starina, LXIII (1889), 492-93.

54 For references to Dolgorukij's personnel, see “Reskripty i pis'ma … ,” Sborrtik Russkago Istoričeskago Obščestv., I (1867), 32, footnote; also “Zapiski … ,” Russkaja starin, LXIII (1889), 493; Dolgorukov, P. V., op. cit., p. 303 Google Scholar; and Peter Bartenev, ed., “Žurnal'naja zapiska proisšestviam vo vremja ekspedicii ego sijatel'stva Knjaz’ Jurija Volodimiroviča Dolgorukova, ot armii general-majora i leib-gvardii Preobraž enskago polku majora, v Černuju Goru, dlja, učinenija ottuda v Albanii i Bosnie neprijatelju diverzii 1769-i god.,” Russkij arkhi, IV (1886), 389.

55 It was probably Milovskoj who kept the mission journal, cited here as “Žurnal' naja zapiska….”

56 Count Voinović later returned to Russia and rose in its service until he became a vice-admiral and Commander of the Caspian fleet. See Dolgorukov, , op. cit., p. 303.Google Scholar

57 “Žurnal' naja zapiska … ,” pp. 389-91.

58 Ibid., p. 392.

59 See Antoljak, Stjepan, ed., Nekoliko dokumenata o misiji kneza Dolgorukovog u Crnoj Qori 1769 (Cetinje, 1949)Google Scholar, documents nos. 1-10, pp. 7-17, reports ranging from August 11 through August 14, 1769.

60 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 112 Google Scholar, dispatch of August 16, 1769.

61 Ibid., p. 114, order of August 22, 1769.

62 Antoljak, , op. cit., p. 13 Google Scholar, document no. 8, dated August 14, 1769. This Venetian report estimated that the Russians brought about one hundred barrels of powder and the equivalent of one hundred horse loads of lead.

63 “Žurnal' naja zapiska … ,” pp. 392-93.

64 Ibid., p. 393.

65 Antoljak, , op. cit., pp. 20 ff.Google Scholar See especially documents nos. 13, 14, 16, 19, 21-24, and 28-31, which consist largely of various reports written between August 16 and August 25, 1769, and sent to P. Cigogna, Venetian Provveditor Extraordinary in Cáttaro.

66 Ibid., pp. 17-18, document no. 11. The original document bears no exact date, merely “August, day of —, 1769.” Antoljak assigns to this proclamation the date favored by Š. Ljubić—August 14, the day on which the troubles in Spič broke out. However, since the document itself states that it was given in Cetinje,” and since it is known from the journal of Dolgorukij's mission that he did not reach Cetinje until midnight of August 15, it may be that the proclamation was not issued before August 16, 1769.

67 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 112 Google Scholar, dispatch of August 21, 1769, by P. Cigogna, Venetian Provveditor Extraordinary in Cáttaro.

68 Ibid., pp. 112-13, dispatch of August 21, 1769, by P. Cigogna.

69 “Žurnal'naja zapiska …,” pp. 394-96.

70 Ibid., pp. 396-97.

71 Dr. Pero Šoć, a Montenegrin scholar and author of the best bibliography of Montenegrin history—Ogled bibliografije o Crnoj Gori na stranim jezichna (Belgrade, 1948)—told the present writer in Belgrade in July, 1954, that, in his opinion, Stephen was telling the truth when he said that his real name was Rajčević. Šoć has investigated the geneology of the Rajćević family of Dalmatia, and has discovered that they were originally Montenegrins who had descended into Dalmatia—according to a tradition in their family—in the early seventeenth century. Šoć believes that it was this tradition which led Stephen to seek his fortune in Montenegro.

72 “Žurnal'naja zapiska … ,” p. 397. For another account of Dolgorukij's interrogation of Stephen, see Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 113 Google Scholar, dispatch of August 21, 1769, by P. Cigogna. Dolgorukij's own account of this meeting with Stephen, which appears in Dolgorukov, , op. cit., pp. 306-7Google Scholar, differs in certain details from both the Russian journal of the mission and contemporary Venetian reports. For example, Dolgorukij writes that he confronted Stephen outside the monastery gate, and that he forced Stephen to admit publicly that he had never been to Russia and that he did not speak a word of Russian. According to Dolgorukij's account, too, it was Count Voinovic who urged the Montenegrins to lynch Stephen, and that it was Dolgorukij himself who calmed the angry mob and insisted that he alone was judge in the matter. Oddly enough, this entire episode is missing from the later “complete” version of Dolgorukij's memoirs as edited by M. I. Semevskij and printed in the Russkaja starin., LXIII (1889), 481-517.

73 “Žurnal'naja zapiska … ,” p. 398, entry for August 10, 1769 (O.S.).

74 Ibid.

75 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 119 Google Scholar, dispatch of September 1, 1769, by D. Condulmer, Provveditor General of Dalmatia and Albania.

76 Antoljak, , op. cit., pp. 41–42 Google Scholar, document no. 33, Prince Dolgorukij's letter of August 27, 1769 (in Italian), received by Pasquale Cigogna on August 29, 1769.

77 Ibid., p. 73, document no. 58, P. Cigogna's letter of October 5, 1769, to Prince Dolgorukij.

78 See Antoljak, op. cit., especially documents nos. 39, 44, 45, 47-49, 53, 55, and 60 for reports by various Venetian officials and spies.

79 See “Žurnal'naja zapiska … ,” pp. 398 ff., entries for August 12, 13, 20, 22, 24, 27; and September 2, 4, 16, 17, and 25 (O.S.).

80 Ibid., p. 403, entry for August 25, 1769 (O.S.), regarding a complaint by Captain Bjeladinović against Montenegrins who raided Serbian villages in Hercegovi; also pp. 417-18, entry for September 29, 1769 (O.S.) regarding a similar raid.

81 Ibid., pp. 408-10, entries for September 9-11, 1769 (O.S.).

82 Ibid., p. 405, entry for August 30, 1769 (O.S.).

83 Ibid., p. 408, entry for September 9, 1769.

84 Ibid., pp. 405-6, entry for August 30, 1769 (O.S.).

85 Dolgorukov, , op. cit., p. 309.Google Scholar

86 Ibid.; also “Žurnal'naja zapiska … ,” p. 416, entry for September 24, 1769 (O.S.), and p. 421, entry for October I, 1769 (O.S.).

87 “Žurna'naja zapiska …, pp. 412-13, entry for September 18, 1769 (O.S.).

88 Ibid., pp. 422-23, entry for October 1, 1769 (O.S.), and p. 423, entry for October 5, 1769 (O.S.).

89 Ibid., p. 424, entry for October 7, 1769 (O.S.).

90 Ibid., pp. 424-25, entry for October 9, 1769 (O.S.).

91 Ibid., p. 426, entry for October 13, 1769 (O.S.).

92 Ibid., pp. 427-28, entry for October 13, 1769 (O.S.); also Semevskij, op. cit., P.495.

93 “Žurnal'naja zapiska … ,” pp. 427-28, entry for October 13, 1769 (O.S.).

94 Ibid., p. 428, entry for October 13, 1769 (O.S.).

95 Ibid.

96 Semevskij, , op. cit., p. 495.Google Scholar

97 “Žurnal'naja zapiska … ,” p. 429, entry for October 14, 1769 (O.S.); also Semevskii, , op. cit., p. 495.Google Scholar

98 On July 28, 1778 (O.S.), a delegation of Montenegrin leaders wrote a petition to Catherine II in which they thus described Prince Dolgorukij's departure: “Our long awaited joy and hope suddenly vanished and turned into our unexpected sadness, for at the end of over a two months’ stay in Montenegro, for some reason unknown to us, and to our great surprise and anguish, he retired from us [retirovalsja, and upon his arrival in Pisa, we discovered, the same Prince Dolgorukij slandered us before General Count Orlov, saying that the Montenegrins were traitors and had wished to surrender him to the Turks—an unheard of deed in our fatherland, and one worthy not of Christians, but only of barbarians. We could never have expected that he, a prince, could so discredit us and portray us falsely in return for all the possible honors and courtesies which our people showed him.” See “Pros'ba Černogorcev k imperatricě Ekaterině II” in the “Istoričeskija svěděnija o snošeniakh Rossii s Černogorěju,” Russkij arkhiv, II (1876), 258.

99 “Reskripty i pis'ma Imperatricy Ekateriny II na imja grafa Aleksěja Grigorěviča Orlova-Česmenskago,” Sbornik Russkago Istoričeskago Obšcěstv., I (1867), 32-33, letter of January 8, 1770 (O.S.), from St. Petersburg by Catherine II to Count Alexis G. Orlov in Pisa.

100 Marquis Maruzzi had occasion to submit a formal note to the Venetian Senate on January 19, 1770, protesting against the refusal of the Venetian Provveditor in Cattaro, Condulmer, to allow a Russian courier to proceed to Montenegro. The courier was sent again, secretly. Condulmer discovered what happened only after it was too late. He wrote to the Doge on April II , 1770: “This officer was sent to Montenegro with the aim of discovering whether it was really loyal to Russia, to renew ties with the Orthodox inhabitants of Albania and other Turkish provinces, and to prepare a planned local uprising.” See Makusev, , op. cit., LXXXIII, 28–29.Google Scholar

101 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 125 Google Scholar, dispatch of February 17, 1770, by Domenico Condulmer, Venetian Provveditor General in Cattaro.

102 Ibid., p. 125, dispatches of June 6 and June 28, 1770, by D. Condulmer, Venetian Provveditor General of Dalmatia and Albania. It is more than likely that the Bijelić mentioned here is the same who was sent by Catherine, along with Colonel Jezdimirović, to Montenegro early in 1769. See footnote 47 of the present work.

103 Ibid., p. 128, dispatch written between August 25 and October 25, 1770, by P. Cigogn a, Venetian Provveditor Extraordinary in Cáttaro; also p. 129, dispatch of October 1, 1770, by D. Condulmer; and p. 130, dispatch of July 16, 1771, by Gaetano Molin, Venetian Provveditor Extraordinary in Cáttaro.

104 Ibid., p. 132, dispatch of August 19, 1771, by Gaetano Molin.

105 Ibid., p. 135, dispatch of October 14, 1771, by D. Condulmer; see also p. 136, dispatch of November 24, 1771, by Jacopo da Riva, Venetian Provvedkor General of Dalmatia and Albania.

106 Ibid., pp. 136-38, dispatch of November 15, 1772, by Jacopo da Riva.

107 Jovanović, , op. cit., pp. 149-50.Google Scholar

108 Ljubić, , op. cit., p. 12.Google Scholar

109 Spiridion Gopčević, Oberalbanien und seine Liga (Leipzig, 1881), pp. 528-29.

110 Ljubić , op. cit., see various Venetian reports on pp. 145-51.