Ludus zardorum: Moral and Legal Frameworks of Gambling along the Adriatic in the Middle Ages

Ludus zardorum:
Moral and Legal Frameworks of Gambling
along the Adriatic in the Middle Ages
Sabine Florence Fabijanec
Entertainment and celebration were woven into the everyday life of
medieval people, starting from multi-day festivities around Christmas and
Camival before Lent to particular municipal holidays around the feast days of
patron saints or marking a historical event or family ceremony. In Dalmatia, for
instance, celebrations covered up to seventy non-working days (including all the
Sundays) in a year, 1 thus the urban population was in general inclined towards
celebrations and leisure? An indicator is that, amongst other things, in the
Dictionmy of Latin Names of Games According to the Italian Statutes the names
of 165 various games are recorded, with 37 versions of the same names and
more general names for recreation, which is altogether more than 200 types of
games, with weapons, bones, bottles, mallets, nuts, hoops and similar objects?
1 Sabine Florence Fabijanec, „Od trznice do Iuke. Trgovacka svakodnevica kasnoga
srednjega vijeka“ (From the market to the port. The everyday life of late medieval merchants),
Kolo 4 (2006): 1 88-228 (especially 188, 207).
2 In the course of the year public festivities were organized in the rhythm of yearly cycles
and cburch celebrations:
• the „cycle of twelve days“ at tbe end of December and beginning of January, in whicb
tbe house was decorated, people dressed up, and festivities took place long into the
night, with drinking, theatre performances, and other activities;
• the “cycle of Camivai-Lent“ at which parades, masquerade feasts, farces, and systematic
drinking took place, and on tbe first Sunday during Lent a night procession witb
torches, including singing, dancing, food, beverages and games;
• the „cycle of the Holy Week“ at whicb, besides cburch ceremonies, on Palm Sunday
minstrels played, alms were given to the poor, and gastronomic specialities were
eaten;
• the „May cycle“ when flowers were picked and people used them to decorate themselves,
especially on May 1 , when young men sought branches in the forest to give to
thc girls.
In the period from Pentecost to Christmas, lay customs inherited from the so-called ‚pagan
tirnes‘ overlapped church ceremonies; amongst the most famous was the feast of St. John
the Baptist (24 June), celebrated by jumping over fires See Jean Verdon, S’amuser au
Moyen Age (Paris: Tallandier, 2003), 27-39.
3 Pietro Sella, „Nomi latini in giuochi negli statuti Italiani (sec. XIII-XVI),“ ALMA, Bulletin
du Cange 5 ( 1930): 199-214. In the beginning of the sixteenth century such a diversity of
3 1
The first mention of chess in the whole of Dalmatia appears in the inventory of
the Zaratin draper Peter, son ofthe late Michael, in 1385.4
Inspired by Roman legislation, medieval theological summae differentiated
three types of games: games of practice or skill, games of pure chance,
and mixed games.5 Among these types, games of chance were especially important,
because, unlike other entertainments, they were subject to legal regulations,
moral considerations, and condemnation.
Ludus zardorum
Ludus is the ancient Latin word for a „game“ or „entertainment“ and
marked any kind of leisure:6 word-games, games with objects, races, hunting,
fencing and others.7 The tenn azar (with a variant zara) possibly comes from azzahr,
from the spoken Arabic for gambling dice, and may have been transmitted
tlu·ough the Spanish tenn azar, being unlucky at gambling. The term may also
havc originated from the tenn zahr, a word from classical Arabic that signifies a
flower, because a flower was depicted on one side of a gambling die.8 The terms
ad azarum and ludum azari are found in the documents of many city communes
from the Late Middle Ages, designating a game with three dice in which one
should guess the combination. Success in this game is detennined by pure
chance.9
Unlike other games that are based on strategy or in which a player proves
his physical or mental skills, the essence of games of chance is their unpredictability.
The main objects used for playing are gambling dice, cards (from the
fourteenth centwy) and small bones. Regarding cards, it is interesting to notice
that in the customs of Ancona from 1 563, six exported or imported boxes of
decks of cards (with mallets for the game) are repmted and that one of the
garnes can also be found in France. In chapter 22 of his Gargantua, Franc;:ois Rabelais lists
2 1 6 garnes, like „au malbeureux,“ „au rnaucontent,“ „a toutes tables,“ „au force,“ „au
pingres,“ „aje te pinse sans rire,“ „a cul salle,“ „au cocu,“ or „a Ia couille de belier.“ See
Frano;:ois Rabelais, La vie tres horrificque du grand Gargantua pere de Pantagruel (Paris:
La Pleiade, 1 955), 64-67.
4 Jakov Stipi􀊻ic, lnventar dobara Mihovi/a suknara pokojnog Petra iz godine 1385 (The
inventory of the draper Michael, son of the late Peter, frorn 1385) (Zadar: Stalna izlozba
crkvene urnjetnosti u Zadru, 2000), 86.
5 Elisabeth Belmas, Jouer autrefois. Essai sur Je Jeu dans Ia France moderne (XVJ‘-XVJ/1′
siecle) (Seyssel: Champ Vallon, 2006), 12.
6 Sometirnes Iudus, adult play under specific rules was differentiated frorn the Greek terrn
paidia, which was interpreted as spontaneous children’s play. See Belrnas, Jouer autrefois,
12.
7 Bemard Lebleu, „Le sport et l’education a travers l’histoire,“ in L ‚Agora, 1 0/4 (2004) : 7-
14.
8 http://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie!hasard (last accessed: Decernber 28, 20 12).
9 M. Williarn Ducket! (ed.), Dictionnaire de Ia conversation et de Ia lecture. lnventaire
raisonne des notions genera/es !es plus indispensables a tous, vol. 1 0 (Paris: Michel Levy
Freres, 1855), 756.
32
reporters is a certain printer named Francesco. 10 This fact alone may point to
further consideration of the printing business, which producing books and other
texmal and/or visual editions, participated in the world of games and gambling.
What was played?
In the Statutes of the East Adriatic communes 1 1 ten types of games are
listed as allowed;, not all games of chance:
I . Alea: 12 a general Latin term that might signify a gambling die, a game
with dice, and a game of chance. 13 Gambling dice were produced from
various materials: bone, wood, and clay for the general population, and
ivoty, gold, silver, stone, and glass for wealthier citizens. The sum of the
numbers on the opposite sides of the dice is always seven, and they
measure 1 cm3 at most.
2. Basseta: 14 a card game. It is possible to connect it with the terms bazeghae
or bazzica found in the 1532 statute of the Italian commune of
Soncino. 15 There is also an Italian sayinf „far una basseta,“ which means
to be unpleasantly surprised or hoaxed. 1
3. Calcillus or calcu/us: 17 a stone used in games of chance. 18
10 Archivio di Stato di Ancona (henceforth: ASAN), no. 1574: I/ quarto da primo marzo 1563
anno a ultimo agosto. Libro del riscontro delli dinari de/ quarto c1giunto alla douana
entrarano in cassa di detta douana per conto della fabbrica del porto tenuto per me Piero
1 1 Pauesi, f. 17, 20, 67v, 83, 95, 95v.
The chronological scope of the statutes goes from the end of the thirteenth century (Korcula,
Dubrovnik and Sibenik), the beginning of the fourteenth century (Skradin, Split and
Trogir), and the end of the fourteenth century (Kotor and Senj) to the beginning of the
fifteenth century (Dvigrad) and sixteenth century (Rijcka). Tt is necessary to take this
chronological scope into consideration in the analysis here becausc it explains the legislative
differences from city to city to a great extent.
12 Statuta civitatis Cathari (henceforth: Statut Kotor) (Venice: ad Rubertum Meiettum, 1 6 1 6).
This is the later transcription of all statutory regulations of Kotor; the first one dates from
1375 (see eh. 5, 349).
13 Felix Gaffiot, Dicrionnaire latinfram;:ais (Paris: Hachette, 1 934), 96.
14 Statur grada Rijeke iz godine 1530 (The statute of the city of Rijeka from 1530)
(henceforth: Statut Rijeka), ed. Zlatko Herkov (Zagreb: Nakladni zavod Hrvatske, 1948),
15 book 3, 298-99 (eh. 50).
Sella, „Nomi latini,“ 200.
16 Dizionario veneziano-ita/iano, ed. Giuseppe Piccio (Venice: Libreria Emiliana Editrice,
1928); http://www.dfstermole.net/piccio/ dicty.php?str=basseta&l=d&ignoreaccents= 1 (last
accessed: December 28, 20 12).
17 Statw i reformacije grada Trogira. Statutum et reformationes civitatis Trag11rii (benceforth:
Srarur Trogir), ed. lvan Strohal, Monumenta historico-juridica Slavorum meridionalium,
vol. 1 0 (Zagreb: JAZU, 1 9 1 5), book 3, 65 (eh. 29).
18
Marko Kostreneie (ed.), Glossarium mediae latinitatis (Zagreb: Izdanj e Nacionalnog
odbora Medunarodne unije ak:ademija u Bruxellesu, 1 939), 160.
3 3
4. Corrigiolae, corezolae, corrizolae: 19 a game which implies skill in fraud
and/or a trick with a hammer, a stick, and a ribbon for a whirligig. The
players guessed whether the ribbon will go in or out.20
5. Ronfa or criche:21 a card game with three figures of the same value called
cricca, like three kings, three dames or three jacks.22
6. Spadella:23 a card game.
7. Tabulae:24 a board game and forerunner of trick-track in which tokens are
moved forward on a four-sided board according to the sum of the dice
thrown.25 The game originated in Persia and dates from the fourth
century. In medieval manuscripts it is often connected with chess and
through time it bears different names („backgammon“ in Anglo-Saxon).26
In the legal codes it is included in the mixed game type, since it partially
depends on calculation and partially on pure luck.27
8. Tassili or taxili, Iudus de dadi:28 a game with dice in general.
9. Triomfa or triomphi:29 a card game with a trump called trionfo, which is
revealed at the beginning ofthe game.30 Like tabulae, this belonged to the
group ofmixed games.3 1
1 0 . Zare („de tre dadi“):32 a game with three dice in which zara is the lowest
score on the dice and designates an ace. Players call out a sum and the
winner was the one who threw the sum he had called 33 and the loser the
one who threw the zara or acc.34 l t was usually played as one player
against two others.35
19 Statut Rijeka, book 3, 298-99 (eh. 50).
20 Sella, „Nomi latini,“ 203.
21 Statut Rijeka, book 3, 298-99 (eh. 50).
22 Sella, „Nomi latini,“ 203.
13 Statut Trogir, book 2, 65 (eh. 29).
24 lbidem.
25 Sella, „Nomi latini,“ 2 1 2 .
26 La regle dujeu ou „comment l’on doitjouer,“ Des tableaux et tabliers (2005) (http://wwwbsg.
un i v-paris I. fr/Expos Virtuelleslexposvirtuellesreservesljeu/tableaux tabliers.btm – last
aeeessed Deeember 28, 20 12).
27 Belmas, Jouer autrefois, 1 3 .
28 Statut Trogir, book 2, 65 (eh. 29).
29 Statut Rijeka, book 3, 298-99 (eh. 50).
30 Sella, „Nomi latini,“ 2 1 3 .
3 1 Belmas, Jouer autrefois, 1 3 .
32 Knjiga statuta, zakona i refonnacija grada Sibenika (The book o f Statutes, laws and
reformations of the city of Sibenik) (heneeforth: Statut Sibenik), ed. Zlatko Herkov
(Sibenik: Muzej grada Sibenika, 1 982), book 6, 180-81 (eh. 24).
33 Tbe fourteenth-eenrury Italian poet Franeeseo di Vannozzo deseribed in a sonnet the shouts
while playing: Deh! Tre, do, ed asso! I va de za! I Chi diavol la sa I Alza e tra I Non te
zettar da marto I L ‚e fatto I una e do e rre I e quest ‚altra per me.
34 Sella, „Nomi latini.“ 2 1 4 .
35 bttp://vivre-au-moyen-age.over-blog.com/2-eategorie-1 0 1 39635.btml (last aeeessed: Deeember
28, 2012).
34
Of all these games, basseta, ronfa, and triomfa were allowed games,
calcillus, spadellae, and tabulae tolerated on certain occasions, and only
corrigiolae and zare de tre dadi were forbidden. Yet, these were only some of
the existing games; East Adriatic city statutes more frequently used general
terms such as taxilli or Iudus zardorum, whilst in the West Adriatic cities the
statutes also listed dice and trick games besides card games.
Where were gambling games played?
Cettain statutcs of the cities on the Croatian coast reveal the location of
the frequent, legal or illegal, gathering of players. In Trogir it was allowed in all
of the city squares.36 In Rijeka every location was banned, and a special fine was
paid if someone hosted players in his home.37 In Korcula it was allowed to play
for money on thc „communal square“ or „near the two city gates,“ but it was to
be in public and not hidden.38 In the same manner, in Senj it was permitted to
play in the square or in the „tavern of the countess.“ 39 In Dvigrad hostels or taverns
are mentioned and also a port in Lim bay.40 Across the sea in Ancona, four
locations were desig.nated as places of so-called baractaria (a public space for
playing): next to the public baths, near the square of St. Nicholas, near the
square for flour, and by the interrona/.41
In fact, besides the tavem as the most suitable place to find a mate to play
with, games could take place anywhere, judging by the correspondence between
two eminent men, Pierantonio Minucci de Sansepolcro Arezzo and Francesco I
Medici, in which the first was surprised that some convicts were gambling in the
public jail of the city and afterwards escaped.42
The question of space can be connected with the type of game that one
wanted to play. After the Black Death, the surviving people strove for different
ways of entertainment, meaning more collective and less adversarial amuse-
36 Statut Trogir, book 2, 65 (eh. 29).
37 Statut Rijcka, book 3, 298 (eh. 50).
38 Koreulanski statut: statut grada i otoka Koreule iz 1214. godine [The statute of Korcula:
lhe statute of tbe eity and island of Korcuca from 1214) (heneeforth: Statut Korcula), ed.
Antun Cvitanic (Zagreb and Korcula: Jugoslavenska akademija znanosti i umjernosti –
Graficki zavod Hrvatske – Pravni fakultet u Zagrebu – Pravni fakultet u Splitu – Skup􀓮tina
opcine Korcula, 1987), Reformaeije, 106 (eh. 62).
39 „Senjski statut iz 1388.“ (The starute ofSenj from 1388) (benceforth: Statut Senj), ed. Lujo
Margetic and Petar Srrcic, Senjski zbornik 12 (1985-1987), 72 (eh. 53).
40 Statut Dvigradske opi:ine. Statuta Communis Duorum Castrorum (heneefonh: Statut
Dvigrad), ed. Jakov Jelincic and Nella Lonza (Pazin and Fanfanar: Drzavni arhiv u Pazinu,
2005), 295 (cb. 178).
41 ASAN, ASC, no. 4, Statuti del/a dogana e patti con diversi nazione, eh. 76: Che Ia baracraria
se possa tenere in quactro lochi d’Ancona, f. 30′.
42 A Ietter of Pierantonio Minueei of Sansepo1ero Francesco I Mediei from 1″ of January
1 5 7 1 , ref. Maneine (prigioniero); http://documents.mediei .org/doeument_details.efm?
entryid= 18707&retumstr=orderby=FolioNum@result_id=2530 (last aeeessed: Deeember
28, 2012).
35
ment. In Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales every pilgrim was invited equally to
participate in telling a tale with the final selection of the best one,43 the same as
in Boccacio’s Decameron, where the players moved further away from the city
to the countryside so that they could spend time telling short tales.44 The authors
of the late medieval fabliaux and other short tales questioned the purpese of
mankind and the role of fortune. One’s life course was not controlled so much
by a certain auctoritas, but was subject to variatio; in medieval exemp/a the
stroke of providence was frequently emphasized.45 However, all those stories
counterbalanced games of chance because „the hazard of gambling is transformed
to the adventure of words.“46 In such a context, novels, for instance,
point out the suitable role of the market, where one might find good friends to
play „with“ people, juxtaposing a tavem as a place where one plays „against“
them.47 Such a state is noticeable in Dubrovnik, where the archival series of the
Liber de Maleficiis contains mentions of a !arge number of nocturnal fights and
physical confrontation in tavems because ofthe stakes invested in gambling.48
In the same spirit of achieving harmony, by the end of the Middle Ages
the so-called ritmomacchia or Iudus philosophorum appeared, a chess-like game
consisting of two opposing armies of 24 pawns with numbers written on them.
43 http://www.canterburytales.org/canterbury_tales.html (last accessed: December 28, 2 0 1 2).
44 Cf. Giovanni Boccaccio, Decameron, translated by J. M. Rigg (London, 1 9 2 1 ) and its online
version which is available at http://www.brown.edu/Departments!Italian_Studies/
dweb/texts/Declndex.php?lang=eng (last accessed: December 28, 2012).
45 The wbole monk’s tale, „De casibus Virorum Tlustrinm“ from the Canterbury Tales is a
series of descriptions of tragedies which fortuna brought to famous individuals afier
ravisbing them witb fortune (http://www.canterburytales.org/canterbury tales.btml – last
accessed: December 28, 2012).
46 In the Decameron Pampinea states: „Here the air is cool and the prospect fair, and here,
observe, are dice and chess. Take, then, your pleasure as you may be severally minded; but,
if you take my advice, you will find pastime for the bot hours before us, not in play, i n
which the loser must needs be vexed, and neither the winner nor the onlooker mucb the
better plcased, but in telling of stories, in which the invention of one may afford solace to
all the company of bis bearers.“ Cf Boccaccio, Decameron (http://www.brown.edu/
Departments/ltal ian _ S tudies/dweb/texts/DecShowText.php?my ID=dO I intro&expand=empt
y&lang=eng (last accessed: December 28, 20 1 2). Tbis is also highlighted in the study of
Nelly Labere (see note 47).
47 Nelly Labere, „Jeu de hasard et jeu d’adresse. Poetique des formes narratives breves
medil􀓯vales,“ in Hasard et Providence .-YJV“-XVf süicles, ed. Marie-Luce Demonet (Tours:
CESR, 2007), 1 – 13 (especially 1-3). The article is also available at bttp://umr6576.
cesr.univ-tours.fr/publications!HasardetProvidencc/fichiers/pdfi’Lavocat.pdf (last accessed:
December 28, 20 1 2).
48 Zdenka Janekovic-Römer, „Post tertiarn campanam – Nocni zivot Dubrovnika u srednjem
vijeku“ (Post tertiam campanam – nightlife in medieval Dubrovnik), Anali Zavoda za
povijesne znanosri HAZU 32 ( 1 994), 7-14 (especially 9).
36
In the „conflict of numbers,“ one evokes the viewpoint of Pythagoras, according
to whom numbers control the world with the goal of achieving harmony.49
It is important to emphasize that games of chance were also played in
monasteries. Ludus c/ericalis or regularis was a game designed in the tenth
century by Bishop Wilbold of Cambray for the clergy. By triple rolling a die a
cleric accidentally comes across one of 56 clerical virtues arranged in a circle
and tries to appropriate them for himself. 50
When were games played?
The statutes of Croatian coastal cities sometimes differentiate the playing
of games of chance by day and by night. If the gambling was punishable, the
fine by night was more than double. 51 Thus, in Skradin, the fine for gambling at
night was 2 pounds.52 In Dubrovnik, the community was actively involved in
playing games of chance post tertiam campanam, meaning around I I p.m. during
the summer and around 1 0 p.m. in the winter.53
The correspondence o f the Medici from the second half of the sixteenth
century mentions gambling, providing further information about when games
were played. In the autumn of 1 553, Duchess Eleanor Medici gambled until
eight in the moming and on the 26 December l570 prisoners in the Florentine
jail played cards until four and five in the morning.54
Jn spite of the encouragement by govemments to gamble only during the
day, in practice it seems that such entertainment took place primarily at night.
That was the time when the players had finished their official daily obligations
and activities and they could feel out of reach of authority.
Who played?
In short, everyone played games of chance. I n Rijeka, the regulations
against gambling applied to both men and women and husbands were to be
convicted for women who were supposed to pay fines.55 In the tavems of
49 hnp://www-bsg.un iv-paris 1.fr/Expos Yirtuelles/exposvirtuellesreserves/jeu/tableauxtabl iers.
htm (last aeeessed: Deecmbcr 28, 2012): 11-1: „La rithmomaehie: Iudus philosophorum“
and 11-2: „Le premier traite en franr;;ais sur Ia rithmomaehic.“
50 lbidem ri-3: „Le Iudus clericalis ou regularis. “
51 Statut Split, book 4 , 672-75 (eh. 85).
52 Statut Skradin, 223 (eh. 125).
53 Cf. Janekovic-Römer, „Post tertiam campanam,“ 7, 9.
54 See Archival series Mediei: Ietter of Giovanni Banista Lecaro to Cristian Pagni, 29th of
October 1 5 53 (hnp://documents.medici. org/docurnent_ detai ls.cfm?entryid􀌼3 3 06&retumstr
􀌽orderby=SendName@result_id􀌾060 – last accessed: Deeember 28, 2012); Jener of Pierantonio
Minucci of Sansepolcro to Francesco I Medici, I“ of January !57 I (see note 42).
55 Statut Rijeka, book 3, 298-99 (eh. 50).
37
Dubrovnik the crowd was colourful and diverse, with many artisans and plenty
ofminor servants and wage eamers,56 amongst whom some certainly gambled.
In the high circles of society, too, individuals, men and women, challenged
fortune by playing games, indicated by many examples of debt and
borrowing.57 Soldiers and students also gave in to games of chance and the latter
complained that they were under too much discipline: Twelfth-century students
in Paris requested vacations for Christmas and Easter so that they could enjoy
themselves.58 Furthermore, dice were famous for being considered suitable for
educating young men who wanted to show their social skills.59 In the end,
despite threats of Suspension, many notices and repeated prohibitions also show
that even cettain members of the clergy were in fatuated with games.
Basically, whilst other forrns of entertaimnent were often distributed
according to class and social affiliation, encouraging the differentiation or the
cohesion of individual entities (the aristocracy, the rural population, knights,
citizens, and others), games of chance entered all of the social, professional and
class layers; but, of course, each individual played in his or her own „world.“
Risks – the legacy of classical procedures
For centuries vivid debates were conducted among theologians and legal
experts over the perrnissibility of gambling because of its connection with
chance, which led to money changing hands and risk. Th.ree different terms and
interpretations of risk existed.
The first terrn that designated risk, sors, came from the Classical tenn for
one tcch.nique of augury. In medieval Christianity, people also used a kind of
divination, the so-called sortes apostolorum, a tech.nique of opening of the
Gospels at random as a means of answering certain questions. The Church
Fathers were doubtful conceming such practices. To some, it represented a
superstitious legacy of the pagans which might Iead to other forms of fortunetelling
or sortilegia – witchcraft. Others, like St. Augustine and the Venerable
56 Gordan Ravancic, Zivot u krcmama srednjovjekovnog Dubrovnika (Life in the taverns of
Medieval Dubrovnik) (Zagreb: Hrvatski institut za povijest, 2001), 85.
57 ln spite of the 1254 order of the king of France, St. Louis in which games of chance were
forbidden, gambling was a valued leisure-time activity, even amongst the high nobility.
When the king had just been freed from captivity in Damietta, his brother, Duke Charles of
Anjou, gambled, in spite of the mourning period because of the death of their brother, Duke
Roben D‘ Artois. When he found out about his brother’s gaming, St. Louis came to see him,
criticised him, and threw the gambling table and dice into the sea. The other brother of
Louis, Alphonse of Poitiers, loved to gamble, generously gave his gain, and paid more than
his debts. See: Verdon, S’amuser, 199.
58 hnp://www.arena-stadium.eu.org/2500-ans-histoire/3-Moyenage/encart-3.html (last accessed:
December 28, 2012).
59 Verdon, S’amuser, 200.
38
Bede, were more moderate, considering that it was thus possible to perceive the
will ofGod in a more understandable way.60
The secend term is periculum, which scholastics considered in the context
of uncertainty in the merchant and Ieasing areas.61 This term is not directly
connected to this research, but it has to be noted that theologians frequently
invoked it when speaking on other doubtful activities.
The third term for risk isfortuna. Chance is most directly connected to the
terrnfortuna, although it was variously interpreted and (un)justly depended on
the context.62 According to some theologians, fortuna could be identified with
the earthly appearance of God’s will, but it could also have economic characteristics.
From the thilteenth to the end of the fourteenth century, for some
theologians and legal scholars it was unnatural for the human mind to leave faith
to resolve issues of property ownership. All that was acquired because of „fortune“
was unreasonable and, therefore, forbidden. Gain from games was
identified with the practice of usury.63 Still in the fifteenth century, the Portuguese
theologian Joäo Sobrinho claimed that every act connected with chance
was a dangeraus symptom of the deviation of idolatry and paganism.64
Briefly, many views and procedures were inherited from thc Roman
world and theologians faced various forms of uncertainty, Fortune, and chance.
Jn the context of this diversity, approaches to the problern of games of chance
took a justifying or condemning stance.
From ambiguity to condemnation
From the perspectives of both civil law and theology, there was no unique
viewpoint about a legal justification of gambling, besides the fact that they all
agreed that it was morally wrong.65 Ten published Statutes of Croatian coastal
cities mention games of chance.
60 Giovanni Ceccarelli, 11 gioco e i/ peccato. Economia e rsi chio nel Tardo Medievo (Bologna:
II Mulino, 2003), 24-26.
61 fbidem, 3 1 -39.
62 Fortuna rules the world, it has four different names: Providentia is the one who sees and
knows everything in advance, and the course of the world has sense in spite of illusion;
Fatum or destiny are the l\tms of the wheel, the only visible appearance of the secretive
and immediate intention of God; Casus is coincidence, the result of an unpredictable
encounter of secondary reasons; Fortuna, as it is called by the people, represents the
impressive sudden rise of the humble and the fall of the mighty (Labere, Jeu de hasard, 2).
63 Late medieval theology constructed the idea of purgatory as a justification to save usurers
from hell. On the close connection of usury and sin, see: Jacques Le Gaff, La bourse et Ia
vie. Economie et religion au Moyen Age (Paris: Hachette, 1986), passim.
64 Ceccarelli, 11 gioco, 39-46.
65 „Now wol I yow deffenden hasardrye I Hasard is verray moader of lesynges, I And of
dedeite and cursed forswerynges, I Blasphemyng of Crist, manslaughtre and wast also, I Of
catel and of tyme, and fonherrno I lt is repreeve and contrarie of honour I For to ben holde a
commune has ardour“ (Chaucer, The Pardoner’s tale: http://www.canterburytales.org/
canterbury_tales.htrnl – last accessed December 28, 2012).
39
Gambling was strictly fo rbidden only in Split, as was any kind of game of
chance, but playing cards, that is, „the usual card games“ was allowed. In
contrast, in Rij eka and its whole district, all games were fo rbidden in genera l:
dice, cards, and corrigiolae. But, the city acknowledged the need to play for
entertaimnent, so three types of games were legal: ronfa and trionfa , while
basseta (played for profit) was only allowed under the condition that a bet did
not exceed 4 shillings and that no player was allowed to exceed the upper daily
Iimit of bets, which was set at 6 pounds in total; the fine was 5 pounds. 66 In
Dvigrad it was apparently also forbidden to play cards and gamble; the innkeepers
and their staff were authorized to keep order in their places and in the
port on Lim bay; thus, they could fine individuals who played these games.67 In
Dubrovnik, gambling and playing cards per se were not forb idden, but if games
of chance included the possibility of giving something in pawn, then the people
were fined who lent money to the players.68 In Skradin, gambling at night was
punis hable, but there was no special regulation of gambling during the day.69 In
Kotor, according to the regulation of 1421, it was forbidden to play „in a cave“
and in secret places and games in which someone lost while others gained,
however, playing games with dice was allowed – alea, as weil as „honest public
games.“70
From the statutory regulations it can be concluded that in most cities,
gambling for profit was limited spatially. Thus, in Trogir, any kind of game with
dice was allowed under the condition that it was played in a town square. In
Korcula it was legal to gamble for money if it was done explicitly in public, on
the communal square near the two city entrances. 7 1 In Senj , it was only possible
to play games of chance near the main square or at the „tavem of the countess;“
and fu rthetmore, players could only drink Malvasia or wine fr om Senj. 72
In the Italian Adriatic commune of Ancona, the city decided on different
spatial solutions, which demonstrate another reason for allowing gambling.
There, as was already stated, it was strictly specified where gambling was legal.
The reason for this lies in the fa ct that the commune collected taxes on the basis
of these gatherings, since the baractaria, that is, the gambling house, was rented
for an annual gabella like any other professional premises. Moreover, every
winner had to pay the commune 12 nick/es on one pound won, or, if one played
with money from the monta, that is, the public credit institution, he had to pay 1
66 Statut Rijeka, book 3, 298-99 (eh. 50).
67 Statut Dvigrad, 231 (eh. 72). 68 Liber statutorum civilatis Ragus ii compositus annos 1272 (henceforth: Statut Dubrovnik),
Monumenta historieo-juridiea Slavorum meridionalium, vol. II (Zagreb: JAZU, 1904),
book 6, 30: De hiis qui inprestant ludentibus (eh. 15).
69 Statut Skradin, 223 (eh. 125).
70 Statut Kotor, 349 (eh. 5).
71 Statut Trogir, book 2, 65 (eh. 29); Statut Korcula, Reformaeije, 106 (eh. 62).
72 Statut Senj, 72 (eh. 53).
40
shilling for each pound. If communal money was at stake, then l shilling and 8
nick/es had to be paid per pound.73
Therefore, it is not impossible that certain cities on the Croatian littoral
also collected taxes on winnings, although it cannot be argued for certain. In the
case of Rijeka, the reason for the later complete ban on gambling probably lay in
a new factor. The Starute of Rijeka was written very late, that is, in 1530. One
may assume that in this ban one can already recognise the influence of Protestantism,
which condemned gambling more severely than did Catholicism.
The system of pwüshment (and exceptions)
The communal statutes had a well developed system of fining the
participants of games of chance depending on the patt of the day, the stake of
one player compared to the other(s), the location of play, and other things. In
Split, the fine was 40 shillings per offence during the day and 100 shillings at
night. The player as well as the owner or renter of the space where the gambling
took place had to pay the fine. To report an offender was encouraged, inasmuch
as the reporter would receive half the fine; in addition, the one who won the
game had to return the amount in full to the one who had lost.74 There was a
similar situation in Trogir, those who played for moncy had to pay a 40 shillingfine
, and one who reported it got half. This commune encouraged reporting because
if one player incriminated his co-players then he did not have to pat a
fine.75 In Senj, the fine for playing outside rhe allowed space was 6 pounds, 7 in
Korcula it was 12 groats. If someone in the commune did not have the means to
pay then he was supposed to be publicly whipped on the square while sitting on
a horse facing its tail.77 In Dubrovnik, one had to pay 2 perpers for playing for
gain, with or without bets. 78 In Kotor, players for chance paid a fine of 5 perpers,
except at Christmas time. For inn-keepers or any other individuals who allowed
gambling in their private space, the prescribed fine was twice as much. 79
Sibenik, a city where gaming was not specifically forbidden, had a
specially developed system of punishment connected with giving pawn for
gambling. Firstly, the player who lost money did not have any legal grounds in
court to ask for its return, but if a player pawned something to another player he
had to return it without payment, while the one who gave the pawn had to pay a
fine of 5 pounds. Further, if someone lost money gambling he had to pay his bet.
If he did not want to pay, then the commune of Sibenik was to sentence him as a
thief who had violently stolen money and punish him with a finc of one nickle
73 ASAN, ASC 4, f. 30-30′.
74 Statut Split, book 4, 672-75 (eh. 85).
75 Statut Trogir, book 2, 65 (eh. 29).
76 Statut Senj, 72 (eh. 53).
77 Statut Korcula, Reformaeija, 66 (eh. 7).
78 Statut Dubrovnik, book 6, I 30 (eh. 15).
79 Statut Kotor, 349 (eh. 5).
41
for every 4 nickles he owed. Moreover, the loser had to pay the sum lost
according to the testimony of two other players.80
There were several exceptions when it was allowed to play for gain, like
in Split at Christmas time or Carnival.81 The most noticeab!e validation of
gambling was to ensure basic human needs. Thus, in Trogir, one who gambled
for food and a roof over his head was allowed to play anywhere in the city
without being fined.82 Even in the rigid city of Rijeka, it was allowed to play for
rebus comestibilibus, which was also interpreted as the need of food, but in that
case a stake should not be I arger than 1 0 shillings per player and one should not
play more than three times per day.83
Hence, in most of the East Adriatic cities, gambling was not strictly
forbidden, yet it was subjected to special and financial controls. Although this
type of entertainment was permitted to some extent, the amounts of money
invested as stakes were often deliberately modest so that sudden impoverishment
of the players was prevented, or, as will be noted below, too much enthusiasm
for the game. In contrast, because of cases of severe life Situations and
to avoid social unrest, individuals were allowed to challenge fortune to win a
temporary place to live and some food to survive. Thus, city authorities were
pragmatic to some extent.
Studying the Croatian Adriatic statutes indicates that every commune had
its own policy on allowing or banning games of chance. In a wider context, the
Croatian towns‘ practices coincided with those of other European places. From
the thirteenth centuty on, hazard became the object of codification, not only
from the theological point of view, but also by secular institutions. From those
times onwards, norms were established to Iimit and control the phenomenon
called „forbidden games.“ Despite the sanctions, certain deviations appeared,
first of all because of identifying specific places as a „space of entertainment“
where gain from gaming was legally approved. Besides spatially, as can be seen
in Split, games of chance were also allowed on certain occasions when the
whole community was engaged, that is, around Christmas and Easter and during
imp01tant social and economic gatherings (city festivities and fairs). As in the
Dalmatian communes, games of chance were allowed in the main squares,
around markets, and in any other place in the heart of the city. In this one can
see the desire of the authorities to control gambling by limiting it to visible
public spaces. Besides such open public spaces, there were also closed specialized
places, that is, public gambling houses, which appeared in Italian
communes, Ancona, for instance, from the second half of the thirteenth century
onwards.84
80 Statut Sibenik, Reformaeije, 269-70 (eh. 1 5 1- 1 52).
81 Statut Split, book 4, 672-75 (eh. 85).
82 Statut Trogir, book 2, 25 (eh. 69).
83 Statut Rijeka, book 3, 298-99 (eh. 50).
84 Ceeearelli, I/ gioco, 1 36-37.
42
Lay and ecclesiastical moral condemnations
In games of chance the participants were actually rivals who disturbed the
balance among believers, which conflicted with the theological view of the
Christian community as unified and ham1onious. The early Church Fathers often
saw gambling as foreign to Christianity and gamblers were put „in the same
basket“ as viewers of theatre plays, that is, as persons dedicated to paganism.
From the Synod of Elvira in 305 the faithful were encouraged to restrain
themselves from playing games of chance; if they did not, they would be
excluded from the community for a year. St. John Chrysostom, the patriarch of
Constantinople from the end of the fourth and the beginning of the fifth century,
even stated: „God did not give gambling, Devil did. The disgusted Iust to gain
fortune with hazardous games destroyed fratemity that should dominate the
Christianity.“ In the ninth century, although some laymen were at peace with the
practice of games of chance, clergymen were clearly instructed that they should
restrain themselves from them und er threat of suspension.85
The problern actually lies in the fact that, from a moral point of view,
there was w1certainty over suspicious ways of making a profit, which might
have been dishonest business conduct. Unlike thievcs, who ran greater risks by
violating the law to make a profit, a gambler’s guilt lay in the fact that he did
something that offended social ties in a desire to profit at the expense of bis
friends. This practice, called Iudus voluptuosus at the Forth Lateran Council,
was the cause of a resolution that it had to be eradicated as pestilence. A Black
Friar from Catalonia, Raimond of Pefiafort, professor of law in Bologna in the
1230s, went one step further and claimed that the game per se was a mortal sin
and that Iudus est contra Deum.86 Besides moral condemnation by many
canonists and theologians, from the lay sphere one can see the negative consequences
ofhazardous games in practice.
Improper ways of making money
The statute of Sibenik gives insight in the possible reasons for banning
gambling, comnen who doctored dice, so-called „false dice.“ There were six
ways to rig dice:
• they were not entirely cubical,
• material was added,
• they were mildly dented,
• they had the same number on two sides,
• they were filled with led or mercury or
85 Jbidem, 48.
86 lbidem, 52, 55, 127.
43
• they were rubbed with a magnet. 87
Jf, as is written in the Sibenik sources, someone conned other players in these
ways, he had to pay a !arge fine of 1 0 pounds, and if he did not have the means
to pay then he went to prison and had to retum the whole amount he had won
through cheating.88 Furthermore, it was common that playing games of chance
went hand in hand with violence and theft of the money from the players‘ table.
In Sibenik, for such actions one had to pay 1 nickle for 4 stolen nickles.89 In
Dubrovnik, stakes and pawn were often the reasons for fighting and physical
violence, since winners would beat Iosers who did not want to continue
gambling, or players who were forbidden to continue would revenge themselves
upon those who had banned their participation in the game.90
Creating a debt
Another apparently negative consequence of gambling was creating debt.
As early as the thirteenth century the French poet Rutebeuf regretted he bad
gambled away his fortune.91 In the Croatian Adriatic cities such a consequence
seems to have been be so clear that it was not emphasised in the statutes. Only in
the statute of Dvigrad do the regulations point this out, when stating that a wife
was not to be held accountable for the debt that her busband accrued while
stealing, robbing or gambling.92
Such misfortune struck even the most prominent men of that time. The
duke of Berry was so enthusiastic about gambling that, in 1 370, lacking
sufficicnt funds, he pawned his richly decorated prayer books and a rosary,
which yielded enough money for him to proceed with gambling.93 Almost two
centuries later, in November 1 546, Louis of Toledo, a Grimaldo, and Duke Cosimo
1 Medici played a game called de tri dadi, on which occasion Grimaldo lost
four hundred escudos, an amount that was later divided between the other two
players.94 Also, Luigi Dovara of Madrid, on I May 1 584, wamed his cor-
87 Verdon, when dcseribing a eraft decier, i.e., dice-maker, explains what they were forbidden
to do (ef. Verdon, S’amuser, 198; bttp:llvivre-au-moyen-age.over-blog.com/2-eategorie-
101 39635.html – last aecessed: December 28, 2012).
88 Statut Sibenik, book 6, 180-81 (eh. 24).
89 Statut Sibenik, Reformaeija, 269-70 (eh. 5 1 -52).
90 Janekovic-Römer, „Per tertiam eampanam,“ 9.
91 Li dei que Ii decier on fair I M’onr de ma robe tot desfaits I Li dei m ‚occient, Ii dei
m ‚agaitent et espientl Li dei m ‚assaillent et desfient I Ce poise moi . . . . Ci encoumence Ii diz
de Ia gresche d ‚Yver (http:llvivre-au-moyen-age.over-blog.com/2-categorie-1 01 39635.
html – last aeeessed: Deeember 28, 20 I 2).
92 Starut Dvigrad, 23 1 (eh. 72).
93 Verdon, S’amuser, I 99.
94 Letter of Cristian Pagni from the village of Poggi a Caiano to Pier Franeeseo Rieeio, 1546
November 6 (http:/ldoeuments.mediei.org/doeument_details.efm?entryid=7662&returnstr
=orderby=yearrnodern,doemonthnum,doeday@result_id=2043 – last aeeessed: December
28, 2012).
44
respondent, Anthony Serguidi of Florence, that their friend, Don Pietro of Toledo,
had lost the enormaus swn of seven thousand escudos in a game of chance,
which he called the maledetto gioco.95
A game of chance as a binding contract
One of the leading debates among the canonists about gambling and
games of chance was the further destiny of the winnings. Brietly, using his gain
tightfully, a Christian could save hirnself Thus, although acquisition through
games of chance was a condemned form of economic activity runong believers,
certain specialists in canon law advocated either returning the winnings to the
loser or, as a Jesser remedy, giving it to charity.96 In any case it was seen as
advisable not to keep gain acquired at games of chance. Certain viewpoints gave
the loser the right to ask for the return of his money before the court. For John
Theutonicus (an expert in canon law in the thirteenth century), in his work De
aleae lusu et aleatoribus, this had to be done wirhin five years, bccause hazard
was not a legal way to acquire gain.97 In such a context, it is notable that the
statute of Split encouraged such income, while there was a completely different
situation in Sibenik, where the loser had to pay his debt.
Exceptions on the condemnation of winnings
Twelfth-century writcrs of glosses, taking some principles from
Justinian‘ s Digesta and Code from 529, found possibilities that in some
contexts, within a family or on the occasion of dining, it was possible to play
games of chance with modest stakes. The connection between such exceptions
and the statutory regulations of certain Croatian coastal cities is evident.98 Tn
such a context gambling was a contract between players in which the stakes
would be used as food consumed by other players. Such regulations also explain
the use ofthe termjestvina (eatables) in thc cities of Rijeka and Trogir.99
From Themas Aquinas to fifteenth-century legal treatises on the topic of games
The topic of games of chance caused many debates and positions which
were often quite harsh and condemning. Tt is impossible to Iist here all the
95 http:/ /docurnents. medici .org/document_ detai ls.cfrn?entryid=42 7 1 &returnstr=orderby=Send
Narne@result_id=2360 (last accessed: Decernber 28, 2012).
96 Ceccarelli, 11 gioco, 65.
97 lbidem, 79-80.
98 It is also evident that the high nobility honoured such a rule, as seen in the fellowship of
counts, knigbts, and ladies described in the tbineenth-century Roman de Ia rase of Jean
Renan. In verses 334-510 it is written tbat after a successful hunt, in tbe evening hours,
three knights garnbled witb tbe „same stake, not stepping over six nickles.“
99 See note 82 and 83.
45
individual ecclesiastical authors and their argumentation which were present
throughout the entire Middle Ages and later. Still, Thomas Aquinas was, eventually,
one of the earliest to introduce elements of judgment which allowed players
redemption under certain conditions. According to him and the later socalled
Aquinas School, immoral and illegal acquisition existed. Under the first
term, they meant the profits of prostitutes and gamblers, and under the second
thieves. In all cases, risk existed so that uncertainty became a mitigating circumstance
in judgement. Hazard in such a context was perceived as a type of
immoral enrichrnent, which, to have the possibility of redemption, had to Iead to
cenain obligations. Conditions under which gambling would be allowed:
• where the urge for Ieisure was deprived of any kind of sinful interest as in
the case of a person who suffered and by gambling could forget his
miseries;
• if the stakes were modest so that too great impulsive zeal for gambling
would be prevented;
• if the access to the game was free and voluntary without the pressure of
other parties.
100
It is also noticeable that the statutory regulations of Croatian coastal cities were
in agreement with the theological preferences on allowing modest stakes. It is
hard to determine how scholastic observations reached the members of the city
council that decided on the city mies, besides the visible and positive influcnce
of Sunday preaching and education ofthe council members.
In the mid-fifteenth century, the theory spread about the possibility of
redemption for players. On the one hand, the procedure of restitutio, that is, repaying
the gain to the loser as a precondition for the absolution of sins, and on
the other hand, largitio, that is, distributing sinfully acquired money as a satisfactory
act which allowed a decrease in earthly penalties and which showed that
the penitent legitimately owned what was given as charity (elemosina). A
similar procedure was also valid for prostitutes. 101
The most elaborate approach to games of chance as a contract betv,reen
two consensting parties and the possibility of redemption was developed by the
Gray Friars.102 Namely, the mendicants, unlike other orders, were present in
public space and a !arge part of the goods they acquired came from charity.
Thus, sinful players were encouraged to give charity as an opportunity to redeem
their sins. Equally, it is also important to see further discussions of
thirteenth- and fourteenth-century scholasticism as an adaption to the general
context of the so-called trade revolution, that is, the sudden increase of monetary
exchange and the appearance of individuality amongst laymen. 103
100 Ceccarelli, II gioco, 93-96. 101
Ceccarelli, !I gioco, 1 3 2 . 102
See the founh chapter of Ceccarelli, 11 gioco, 1 8 1-255: „La scuola francescana I : 11 gioco
d’azzardo e un contratto.“
103 Nurnerous books and articles deal with the rise ofthe business world and merchant elite in
the late medieval period; it is impossible to mention them alt here. Thus, a shon selection
46
Legal treatises and the retum to single-minded condemnation
After a flow of different, sometimes even inconsistent, viewpoints of
churchmen, poets and legislators on the origin, nature, and effects of games,
with the Reformation and Counter Reformation a new wave of works, Observations,
and speeches by moralists, lawyers, clergymen, and laymen assumed the
same homogenaus path, and the viewpoints became more rigid. Thinkers and
legislators of the Renaissance affered a set of mies of behaviour and singlemindedly
noted reasons for gambling not being allowed. Thus, besides the moral
approach to the games from the fourteenth century onwards, the question of the
social usefulness of games came to be considered regularly in various treatises
and statutes. 104
Early legal works dedicated to the question of games appeared in the
fifteenth century. The 1478 Tractatus de Judo by Giovanni Battista Caccialupi (t
1 496) summarized theological, lay, and canonical debates.105 It was followed by
the considerations of Stephen Costi, a professor of canon law from Pavia, who
tried, in his 1478 Tractatus perutilis super ludis licitis & illicitis editus, to
distinguish the legality of games. 106 With the emergence of printed lay manuals
on entettaimnent the debate went on, affering either condenmation or approval
of games of chance. Most of them still warned of thc possibility of fraud, falling
into sin, and loss of money, but also of the loss of honour, and so on. In 1497,
the Ge1man author, Sebastian Brandt, noted in his Stultifera navis that „gaming
hardly goes free of sin; one who plays is not God’s friend: players are all sons of
Satan.“ In the sixteenth century, Calvinist treatises like the 1 579 Une breve
remonstrance sur !es jeux de cartes et de dez of Lambe1t Daneau, condemned
isoffered: Jacques Le Goff, Marchands et banquiers du Moyen Age (Paris: Presse universitairc
de France, 1986); Jean Favier, De l ‚or et des epices. Naissance de l’homme d’affaires
au Moyen Age (Paris: Hachctte, 1987); Yves Renouard, Les hommes d’affaires ita/iens du
Moyen Age (Paris: Diderot editeur, 1998); Remy Volpi, Mille ans de revolutions
economiques. La diffusion du modele italien (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2002); Diana Wood,
Medieval Economic Thought (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002); Peter
Spufford; Power and profit. The merchant in medieval Europe (New Y ork: Thamcs &
Hudson, 2002). On the similar situation conceming tradesmen in Dalmatia see Ignacij
Voje, Poslovna uspe$nost trgovcev v srednjeveskem Dubrovniku (The business success of
mcrchants in medieval Dubrovnik) (Ljubljana: Znanstveni institut Filozofske fakultete,
2003), Sabine Florence Fabijanec, „Drustvena i kultuma uloga zadarskog trgovca u XIV. i
XV. stoljecu“ (The social and cultural role of the Zaratine merchant in the fourteenth and
the fifteenth centuries), Zbornik Odsjeka za povijesne znanosti Zavoda za povijesne i
dntstvene znanosti HAZU 22 (2004): 55-1 19.
104 Belmas, Jouer autrefois, 2 1 -22.
105 Ceccareli, 1/ gioco, 130.
106 The work was originally written in 1478, but the only extant copy dates from the 1 520s;
See http ://www-bsg. un iv-pa ri s I . fr/Expos Virtuelles/exposvirtuellesreserves/j eulhasard.htm
(last accessed: December 28, 2012): „Interdits, normes et reglementation“ I: „Hasard ou
providence?“ I-1: „De Ia liceitc des jeux.“
47
games of chance according to the statemente of St. Ciprian, who thought that
games were „contrmy to God’s word.“107
After the Council of Trent ( 1 545-1 563), most of the synodal statutes
(once again) banished games of chance. Clergy, moralists, and legislators in the
Renaissance kept only those theories from previous times which confirmed their
judgmental attitude, even if they agreed with the notion that gambling per se
would not be damaging if no bets were laid.108 Only rarely did humanists, like
Juan Luis Vives (an educator born in Valencia, schooled at the Sorbonne, later a
lecturer in Flanders), not only accept the human need for entertairunent, but also
discuss what rules should be followed; he formulated six laws to make gambling
acceptable. Among others, Vives admitted the necessity of stakes in a game,
because, without some challenge, the game was without spirit and spark and
men quickly lost interest.109
Thus, the „turning point“ was not one-sided and final; attitudes towards
games of chance still varied. The „merit,“ if that term can be used, of thirteenthcentuty
scholasticism lies in the notion that at least they tried to find mitigating
circumstances for a player’s reality, which had earlier been condemned without
reservation. The beginning of the sixteenth centuty led to a multiplication and
diversification of games of chance, among which the lottery emerged, first in
ltaly and afterwards everywhere in Europe. With that, games of chance were
transfen·ed even more to public space. Thus, they also contributed substantially
to the untidiness and lechery of the time, 1 10 because of which they were strictly
banned from the moral and legislative sphere as in the times of the first Church
Fathers.
Conclusion
Across eleven centuries, from the fifth to the fifteenth century, all the way
to the Renaissance, three major periods marked the development of games of
chance. In the Early Middle Ages, gambling games were perceived as a legacy
from pagan times and the first Church Fathers, in their desire to step forth from
Classical times and impose a new point of view, harshly condemned them.
Later, a sequence of lay and ecclesiastical circumstances resulted in a change of
attitude towards them: the economic flourishing of cities in the thirteenth centuty,
the fmmdation of universities, the rediscovery of Classical authors, the
introduction ofthe concept of Purgatmy, the foundation ofthe mendicant orders,
the codification of law, the appearance of the Black Death, which disturbed
107
108 Jbidern. 109 Belmas, Jouer autrefois, 25, 47.
Quarta Iex, qua sponsione. Nec nu/la sponsione, quod est fatuurn et celerrirne exatiat . . .
(Iohannes Lodovicus Vives, Exercitatio /inguae Latinae sive Colloquia, (1538), Varius
dialogus de urbe Valentia, Ieges Iudi (http://www.stoa.org/hopper/text.jsp?doc=Stoa:text:
2003.02.001 O:colloquium=22 – last accessed December 28, 20 12). 110 Belmas, lauer autrefois, 24.
48
already-established moral principles, and last, the formation of bourgeois society
from the thirteenth century to the fifteenth century. In the Centrat Middle Ages
many scholastics, that is, highly educated thcologians and canonists, intellectually
curious and inclined to a deeper approach to moral principles, showed a more
tolerant attitude towards human sinfulness and found mitigating circumstances
for players of the games of chance with a possibility of rcdemption. In the
sixteenth century, with the Reformation, the viewpoints once again became
stricter and the Counter-Reformation, in a desire to restore the contested Catholic
authority, prosecuted the world of gamblers from the ecclesiastical sphere.
Games of chance were the first to be attacked by the „new“ moral principles.
The analysis of the statutory regulations of the cities of the East Adriatic
Coast, Stretching from the thirteenth to the sixteenth centUty, attests that with the
adoption of legal provisions related to gambling and other games of chance, the
Great Council members were familiar with the current vogue in theological and
moral debates and were adapting to the spirit of time. This explains the diversity
of approaches to gambling from city to city. Still, they had in common a generat
moral condemnation and the desire to control the space and time of gambling. Tn
a broader context, the East Adriatic communal cities reprcsented almost the
same development oflegislation as the West Adriatic Italian ones.
Within the framewerk of Braudei ’s longue duree, medieval gamblers
might be criticized for their passionate gambling, but they could save themselves
by repentance in front of a priest and by giving immorally gained stakes to
charity. In the twenty-first century, in contrast, too great passion has been
transformed into an acknowledged gambling addiction and psychiatrists have
replaced confessors on the path to salvation.
(Translated by Suzana Miljan)
49
AT THEEDGE OFTHE LAW
MEDIUM AEVUM QUOTIDIANUM
SONDERBAND XXVIII
At the Edge of the Law:
Socially Unacceptable and Illegal Behaviour
in the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period
Edited by
Suzana Miljan
and
Gerhard Jaritz
Krems 2012
MIT UNTERSTÜTZUNG
DER ABTEILUNG KULTUR UND WISSENSCHAFT DES AMTES DER
NIEDERÖSTERREICHISCHEN LANDESREGIERUNG
KULTUR 1!\ NIEDERÖSTERREICH ‚W
Copy editor: Judith Rassan
Cover illustration:
Justitia: St Michael and the Virgin Mary
Pembroke College, Cambridge
(Photo: Mirko Sardelic)
Alle Rechte vorbehalten
-ISBN 978-3-901 094-30-X
Herausgeber: Medium Aevum Quotidianum. Gesellschaft zur Erforschung der materiellen
Kultur des Mittelalters, Körnennarkt 13, 3500 Krems, Österreich. Für den Inhalt verantwortlich
zeichnen die Autoren, ohne deren ausdrückliche Zustimmungjeglicher Nachdruck,
auch in Auszügen, nicht gestattet ist.
Druck: KOPJTU Ges. m. b. H., Wiedner Hauptstraße 8-10, 1050 Wien.
Table of Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Damir Km·bic, The Thin Border Between Justice and Revenge,
Order and Disorder: Vraida (Enmity) and Institutional Violence
in Medieval Croatia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Marija Karbic, Women on the Wrong Side ofthe Law.
Some Examples from Medieval Urban Settlements
of the Sava and Drava Interomnium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1
Sabine Florence Fabijanec, Ludus zardorum:
Moral and Legal Frameworks of Gambling
along the Adriatics in the Middle Ages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 I
Gerhard Jaritz, Outer Appearance,
Late Medieval Public Space, and the Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Zoran Ladic, C1iminal Behaviour by Pilgrims
in the Middle Ag es and Early Modern Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Paul Freedman, Atrocities and Executions
of the Peasant Rebe! Leaders
in Late Medieval and Early Modem Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Lovorka Coralic, Unacceptable Social Behaviour or False Accusations:
Croats in the lnvestigations of the Venetian Inquisition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Slaven Bertosa, Robbers, Murderers, and Condemned Men in lstria
(from the Sixteenth to the Eighteenth Century) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
Preface
This publication contains selected papers from a conference held in
Zagreb (Centre for Croatian Studies, University of Zagreb) in 2009, dealing with
the medieval and early modem period, and translated into English for this
purpose. • The main goal was to gather papers on a topic that has not been
researched enough amongst Croatian historians, that is, the socially unacceptable
and illegal behaviour of individuals who were „walking at the edge of the
law.“ The general idea was also to present various research questions at the
intersection of social and legal history, from the problern of feuding in medieval
society to the various types of delinquency by pilgrims. The emphasis was put
on the Croatian territory in the Middle Ages (from Slavonia to lstria and Dalmatia)
and set in a broader (East) Centrat European context. The articles follow
a chronological sequence, starting from the High Middle Ages, with a particular
focus on the late medieval and early modern period.
The first paper is by Damir Karbic, who dcals with the use of violencc as
a means of obtaining justice and re-establishing order, which was one of the
peculiarities of the medieval legal system when compared with Roman law.
After presenting different cases of feuds in Croatian sources, he discusses, how
medieval communal legislation treated feuds as a separate legal institute, using
the example of the city statutes of Split.
Marija Karbic concentrates on the ways in which women from the
medieval urban settlements of the Sava and Drava interamnium came into
conflict with the law by various criminal actions, from insults or brawls to
abo11ion and murder. She connects those problems with the economic situation
of these women, basing the analysis mainly on theft and prostitution cases. The
women were sometimes punished severely, but sometimes pardoned or punished
minimally.
The problern of gambling along the eastem Adriatic coast is the research
subject of Sabine Florence Fabijanec. She analyses the urban statutory regulations
Stretching from the thirteenth to the sixteenth centUJy. She deals with the
adoption of legal provisions against gambling and shows the diversity of approach
to gambling from city to city.
Gerhard Jaritz analyses the interdependence between Jate medieval
material culture, human behaviour, religious discourse, and legal culture using
the example of actions connected with superbio that played a role in public
• The Croation version of the conference proceedings is publisbed as Suzana Miljan (ed.), Na
rubu zakona: dru§tveno i pravno neprihvatljiva pona§anja kroz povijest, Biblioteka Dies
historiae, vol. 3 (Zagrcb: Hrvatski studiji, 2009).
7
urban arguments. The secular authorities emphasized moral, national, and religious
components, highlighting the necessity of averting God’s wrath.
The perception of the behaviour of pilgrims is the topic of Zoran LadiC’s
contribution. He shows, in cantrast to the idealized vision of pilgrimages and
pilgrims, that pilgrimages made by average medieval or early modem believers
were also considered superstition and that the pilgtims often engaged in fights,
robberies, prostitution, and other forrns of delinquent behaviour.
Paul Freedman offers an ariicle on late medieval and early modem public
acts of torture and execution, which were carefully choreographed events whose
solemnity and meticulous preparation made the infliction of mutilation and
death horrifyingly impressive. He also concentrates on the various topoi of peasant
rebellion as described by literate contemporaries, such as rape, murder,
cannibalism, the roasting of victims, and so on.
Lovorka Coralic deals with Croats accused in the records of the Venetian
Inquisition. Four types of accusation can be recognized: conversion to Islam,
Protestantism, the use ofmagic, and conduct considered improper for clergymen
(priests and other mcmbers of religious orders).
The last article is by Slaven Bertosa, dealing with poor social conditions
in Istria in the early modem period that led to hunger, poverty, depopulation,
and generat insecurity, which in rum provoked dangeraus behaviour, robbery,
and murder. Capital crimes were under the jurisdiction of the Potesta and
Captain of Koper or, respcctively, the Captain of Raspor with his seat in Buzet.
The village communities were also starting to organize themselves by introducing
patrols, although in a modest way.
The collection of articles tries to popularise the topics for one plain
purpose, that is, to erase the border between history and legal studies, since until
now one carmot actually speak of „interdisciplinarity,“ but only of looking at
many research problems from various reference points. Hopefully, this volume
will be useful not only for historians dealing with this poorly researched topic of
(Croatian) historiography, but also for a wider public generally interested in the
functioning of the legal and social system in the past.
Finally, my special gratitude goes to Judith Rassou for copy editing the
volume and to Gerhard Jaritz for offering the opportunity to publish it as a
special issue of Medium Aevum Quotidianum, thus promoting this research on
an intemational level.
Suzana Miljan
8