Skip to main content

Ottoman Conquest and Its Impact on Territorial Reduction and Spatial Change of Croatian Territory

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Historical Geography of Croatia

Abstract

In Croatian territory, the Late Middle Ages were characterised by spatial and societal disintegration processes. This mainly coincided with the era of the Ottoman expansion—a new power that straddled three continents at the apex of its power. The general crisis in Europe worked to the advantage of the Ottoman Empire, which was more advanced than Christian European states in almost every respect. The Ottoman expansion would bring about a radical change in the cultural landscape of Croatian territory. On the one hand, the border areas with the Ottoman Empire would be marked by the complete destruction of all elements of the cultural landscape as a result of continual raiding and battle. The most prominent destructive processes would be the agrarian population discharge from the border areas and the disappearance of settlements. The territorial advancement of the Ottoman Empire, generally from the southeast to the northwest, induced great migration waves toward the more secure lands in the northern and western parts of contemporary Croatia and Austria, or even overseas. The borderlands were emptied of most of their population, and came to be occupied only by semi-nomadic Vlach warriors–herders. Areas incorporated into the Ottoman Empire, mostly in the eastern parts of the Pannonian Basin, were included into the Ottoman administrative system of eyalets and sanjaks and developed Oriental-Islamic types of settlements, although their cultural influence would be largely eradicated after the Ottoman retreat in later centuries.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Also Cathars, Albigensians, Bosnian Christians, and Bogomils. These were some of the terms for dualistic denominations which taught that there were two gods: one good and the other evil. This teaching was condemned as heretical at the Third Council of the Lateran (1179).

  2. 2.

    A Turkish term meaning brigand. They were armed rebels who acted in groups to attack and pillage travellers and villages. They are a relic of Medieval brigandry, and during the Ottoman area, they were a paramilitary organisation in the service of a state, i.e. Venice, and directly involved in war operations. In the folk traditions of Southeast Europe, they are celebrated as anti-Ottoman warriors and national heroes.

  3. 3.

    A Croatian term meaning ambusher. They were largely autochthonous inhabitants or refugees from areas conquered by the Ottomans who were organised into paramilitary groups. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, they entered conquered areas and engaged in guerilla warfare against the Ottoman rule. The most well-known Uskoks were from Senj. They combined military actions on both land and from the sea, at first exclusively against the Ottomans, but later also against the Venetians. Their style of warfare was characterised by frequent raiding and pillaging.

  4. 4.

    A Turkish term derived from Arabic (rā‘āyā) meaning subjects or commoners. In Ottoman legal classification in the classical era (fifteenth century to seventeenth century), this was the term for all Ottoman subjects who paid taxes, regardless of religion, i.e. those who were not part of the privileged military class.

  5. 5.

    A Turkish term, derived from Arabic (millah), which means “nation”.

  6. 6.

    (Yeniçeri) Elite Ottoman soldiers. The term is derived from a Greek word meaning “new soldier”.

  7. 7.

    Strong attack. This attack was carried out by Akinjis, who were heralds of invasion, set loose on neighbouring territory to raid and pillage.

  8. 8.

    (Akıncı) Lightly armed irregular Ottoman cavalry.

  9. 9.

    Another kind of Turkish irregular soldier. The term stems from the Greek word for “armed men”. They were members of the Ottoman auxiliary military units in Southeast Europe.

  10. 10.

    Frontier, i.e. border area of the Ottoman Empire. This was not an officially denoted area with a specific purpose (like the Habsburg Military Frontier), rather a general term.

  11. 11.

    The position of grand vizier is a good example. From 1320 to 1922, there were 221 grand viziers, of which 118 were not ethnic Turks: 37 Albanians; 31 Slavs (of Bulgarian, Croatian, Russian, and Serbian descent); 11 Georgians; 10 Greeks; 9 Abazins; 4 Arabs; 4 Circassians; 3 Armenians; 3 Italians; 1 Chechen; and 1 Hungarian. The ethnic origin of four grand viziers remains unclear, and it is only certain that these four weren’t Turks. It is suspected that two of them were either Slavs or Greeks, while the other two were most likely of either Albanian, Greek, or Slavic origin.

  12. 12.

    The term krajina in this case has the contextual meaning of frontier/borderlands. The name is derived from the Habsburg and Venetian military frontiers with the Ottoman Empire, but has since fallen into common use as a name for specific regions in the Dalmatian Hinterland, e.g. Kninska krajina, Drniška krajina, Imotska krajina, or Vrgorska krajina.

  13. 13.

    Up until the sixteenth century, the location of Zagreb on the so-called Senj Route, which led to the northern Adriatic harbour Senj, had been a great boon to the development of the city.

  14. 14.

    After short stints of administration from Travnik and Banja Luka.

  15. 15.

    The role of seat was temporarily filled by Udbina.

  16. 16.

    The southeastern part of the Bay of Kotor and the commune Budva in contemporary Montenegro were also part of Venetian Dalmatia.

  17. 17.

    Venetian cartographic sources also support this, as there is a clear differentiation of the toponyms Lika (Licha) and Krbava (Corbavia).

  18. 18.

    Only 5–10% of land was owned privately.

  19. 19.

    Although Osijek, along with Budapest and Pécs, was among the larger cities (şehir), the settlement of central significance for the area was Požega, as it was the administrative seat of the Sanjak.

  20. 20.

    Small provincial settlement. The original meaning of the word is a small wood fort and guardhouse, built to protect travellers travelling through the Ottoman Empire.

  21. 21.

    Derived from the Arabic word qaşaba. A term used for small- or mid-sized urban settlements in areas under the Ottoman rule. To be considered a kasaba, a settlement had to have a mosque, a weekly trade fair, and be oriented toward trade.

  22. 22.

    Large city.

  23. 23.

    Zadar fell from 8,100 (the number of inhabitants ten years before the War of Cyprus) to 7,161 inhabitants (1575), Šibenik from 8,220 to 5,310, Hvar from 8,000 to around 5,000, and Korčula from 8,000 to 2,087. In the town Krk in 1575, there were 157 residents, 247 on the island Pag, 1,619 on the island Rab, and the islands Cres and Lošinj together had 5,006.

  24. 24.

    The toponim Kaštela comes from the Latin word castellum, which is also the root of the English word “castle”.

  25. 25.

    The primary dialects are named after the most common question word for what: Štokavian (štokavski) uses the pronoun što, Čakavian (čakavski) uses ča, and Kajkavian (kajkavski) kaj. Another common distinction among the dialects is made through the reflex of the long proto-Slavic vowel jat and thus the dialects are divided into Ikavian, Ekavian, and Ijekavian, with the reflects jat being pronounced /i/, /e/, and /ije/ or /je/, respectively. This can be easily shown using the example of the word “milk”, which is mliko in Ikavian, mleko in Ekavian, and mlijeko in Ijekavian.

  26. 26.

    Apart from having the meaning of settlement, the word has its roots in the term for mountain shelters used by herders.

References

  • Ančić M (1987) Gopodarski aspekti stočarstva cetinskog komitata u XIV st. Acta historico-oeconomica Iugoslaviae 14:69–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertoša M (2007) Istarsko rano novovjekovlje: razvojne smjernice od 16. do 18. st. In: Budak N (ed) Dalmacija, Dubrovnik i Istra u ranome novom vijeku. Zagreb, Leykam international, pp 80–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Budak N (2007) Hrvatska i Slavonija u ranome novom vijeku. Leykam international, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Busch-Zantner R (1938) Agrarverfassung, Gessellschaft und Siedlung in Südosteuropa: Unter bes. Berücks. d. Türkenzeit, Harrassowitz, Leipzig

    Google Scholar 

  • Buzov S (2003) Vlaška sela, pašnjaci i čifluci: krajolik osmanlijskog prigraničja u šesnaestom i sedamnaestom stoljeću. In: Cambi N (ed) Triplex Confinium (1500–1800): ekohistorija: zbornik radova, Split – Zagreb, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter FW (1992) Agriculture on Hvar during Venetian occupation: a study in historical geography. Geografski glasnik 54:45–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugački V, Regan K (eds) (2018) Hrvatski povijesni atlas. Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleža, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Foretić D (1980) Povijest Dubrovnika do 1808., drugi dio – od 1526. do 1808. Nakladni zavod Matice hrvatske, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein I (2008) Hrvatska povijest. Europapress holding, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Hütteroth W-D (2006) Ecology of the Ottoman lands. In: Faroqhi SN (ed) The Cambridge history of Turkey, vol 3. The latter Ottoman empire 1603–1839. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 18–43

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Inalcik H (2002) Osmansko Carstvo: klasično doba 1300.–1600. Srednja Europa, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Jelaska J (1985) Splitsko polje za turskih vremena. Logos, Split

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulušić S (2001) Naseljenost i vrednovanje Kornatskih otoka od drevnih vremena do danas (nastavak). Hrvatski geografski glasnik 63:87–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurelac M (2000) Hrvatska i središnja Europa u doba renesanse i reformacije. In: Hercigonja E (ed) Hrvatska i Europa – kultura, znanost i umjetnost: svezak II. Srednji vijek i renesansa (XIII–XVI. stoljeće). Školska knjiga, Zagreb, pp 39–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Laci S (1982) Razvoj naseljenosti Međimurja. Geografski glasnik 44:51–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Lisac J (2003) Hrvatski dijalekti. In: Golub I (ed) Hrvatska i Europa – kultura, znanost i umjetnost: svezak III. Barok i prosvjetiteljstvo (XVII–XVIII. stoljeće). Školska knjiga, Zagreb, pp 451–459

    Google Scholar 

  • Matuz J (1992) Osmansko Carstvo. Školska knjiga, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Mažuran I (1998) Hrvati i Osmansko Carstvo. Golden marketing, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Mažuranić V (1908) Prinosi za hrvatski pravno-povjestni rječnik. JAZU, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Merlić E (2008) Buzeština kroz povijest. Vlastita naklada, Pazin – Buzet

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirdita Z (2004) Vlasi u historiografiji. Hrvatski institut za povijest, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Mirdita Z (2009) Vlasi – starobalkanski narod (od povijesne pojave do danas). Hrvatski institut za povijest, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Moačanin N (1998) Introductory essay on an understanding of the Triplex-frontier area: preliminary turkologic research. In: Roksandić D (ed) Microhistory of the Triplex Confinium: international project conference papers, Budapest, March 1997. Institute on Southeastern Europe—Central European University, Budapest, p 125

    Google Scholar 

  • Moačanin N (2000) Hrvatska i Osmansko Carstvo. In: Hercigonja E (ed) Hrvatska i Europa – kultura, znanost i umjetnost: svezak II. Srednji vijek i renesansa (XIII–XVI. stoljeće). Školska knjiga, Zagreb, pp 63–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Moačanin N (2007) Hrvati pod vlašću Osmanskoga Carstva do razdoblja reformi u Bosni i Hercegovini (1463.–1831.). In: Budak N (ed) Hrvatsko-slavonska Vojna krajina i Hrvati pod vlašću Osmanskoga Carstva u ranome novom vijeku. Zagreb, Leykam international, pp 108–175

    Google Scholar 

  • Muhaj A (2019) The origins of the Rivalry between the Ottomans and Venice in the Adriatic. In: Öcalan HB, Karaaslan YZ (eds) Uluslararası Yıldırım Bayezid Sempozyumu, Bursa, November 2015. Türk Tarih Kurumu, Ankara, p 201

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak G (1961) Povijest Splita: knjiga druga – od 1420. do 1797. god. Matica hrvatska, Split

    Google Scholar 

  • Omašić V (1978) Topografija Kaštelanskog polja. Čakavski sabor, Split

    Google Scholar 

  • Pejnović D (1985) Srednja Lika – socijalnogeografska transformacija, Centar za kulturu – Muzej Like, Gospić

    Google Scholar 

  • Pejnović D (2009) Geografska osnova identiteta Like. In: Holjevac Ž (ed) Identitet Like: korijeni i razvitak. Institut društvenih znanosti Ivo Pilar – Područni centar Gospić, pp 45–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Raukar T (2007) Studije o Dalmaciji u srednjem vijeku: odabrane studije. Književni krug, Split

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan K (ed) (2003) Hrvatski povijesni atlas. Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleža, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1953) Senj: prilog poznavanju položaja i regionalne funkcije. Geografski glasnik 14(15):47–64

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1958) Velebitska primorska padina – prilog poznavanju evolucije krškog pejzaža (nastavak). Geografski glasnik 20:53–110

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1961) Krk: osobine i postanak današnjeg pejzaža. Geografski glasnik 23:67–101

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1972) Primjer geografske analize strukture naseljenosti gorsko-planinskih regija:Ličko goranski prostor. In: Panov M (ed) Zbornik na Jugoslovenskiot simpozium za problemite na selskite naselbi i zemjodelskoto proizvodstvo, Ohrid, May 1972. Sojuz na geografskite instiucii na SFRJ – Geografsko društvo na SR Makedonija, Skopje, p 96

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1975a) Osnove historijsko-geografskog razvoja. In: Cvitanović A (ed) Geografija SR Hrvatske – knjiga V: Sjeverno hrvatsko primorje. Školska knjiga, Zagreb, pp 42–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1975b) Istra: historijsko geografski razvoj. In: Cvitanović A (ed) Geografija SR Hrvatske – knjiga V: Sjeverno hrvatsko primorje. Školska knjiga, Zagreb, pp 184–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1976) Socio-geografski aspekt dinarskog krša, dinarskog kulturnog areala i dinarskog brdsko-planinskog prostora. Geografski glasnik 38(1):253–269

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1979) Slavonska Požega u urbanoj polarizaciji Hrvatske. Geografski glasnik 41(42):71–84

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogić V (1990) Regionalna geografija Jugoslavije, knjiga 1 – prirodna osnova i historijska geografija. Školska knjiga, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Slukan Altić M (2003) Komparativna analiza kulturnog pejsaža ruralnih naselja mletačke i habsburške krajine. In: Cambi N (ed) Triplex Confinium (1500–1800): ekohistorija: zbornik radova, Split – Zagreb, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  • Šabanović H (1959) Bosanski pašaluk: postanak i upravna podjela. Naučno društvo NR Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo

    Google Scholar 

  • Šarić M (2003) Turska osvajanja i eko-sistemske tranzicije u Lici i Krbavi na prijelazu iz kasnog srednjeg vijeka u rani novi vijek (15.–16. st.). In: Cambi N (ed) Triplex Confinium (1500–1800): ekohistorija: zbornik radova, Split – Zagreb, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  • Štefanec N (2012) Grad na prvoj crti obrane. In: Goldstein I, Goldstein S (eds) Povijest grada Zagreba – knjiga 1. Od prethistorije do 1918. Novi liber, Zagreb, pp 108–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Truhelka Ć (1941) Studije o podrijetlu: etnološka razmatranja iz Bosne i Hercegovine. Matica hrvatska, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

  • Vrandečić J (2007) Regio maritima: Dalmacija i Dubrovnik u ranome novom vijeku (1420.–1797.). In: Budak N (ed) Dalmacija, Dubrovnik i Istra u ranome novom vijeku. Zagreb, Leykam international, pp 7–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Vresk M (2002) Razvoj urbanih sistema u svijetu: geografski pregled. Školska knjiga, Zagreb

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Borna Fuerst-Bjeliš .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fuerst-Bjeliš, B., Glamuzina, N. (2021). Ottoman Conquest and Its Impact on Territorial Reduction and Spatial Change of Croatian Territory. In: The Historical Geography of Croatia. Historical Geography and Geosciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68433-4_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68433-4_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-68432-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-68433-4

  • eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics