190 benjamin arbel
But the fault also lay on Venice’s shoulders. An enquiry concerning the
staff of the treasuries in Corfu, Zante, and Cephalonia carried out in 1725,
as well as a general survey of all bureaucratic offices in Istria, Dalmatia,
and “the Levant” carried out in 1783, revealed that a great part of these
offices had been granted by special privilege (grazia) or sold (which often
stood for the same thing) and that some local families even dominated
several offices connected to the same sector.244 Venality of bureaucratic
offices had been a widespread phenomenon in the Venetian state since
the 16th century, and its wide diffusion in the stato da mar was not an
exceptional phenomenon. Offices were offered for sale during periods of
crisis, such as the war of the League of Cambrai and the war of Crete.245
Yet the distance of the overseas territories, the scarce presence of Venetian
officials and magistrates, and sometimes their own involvement in local
misbehavior must have increased the negative impact of this phenom-
enon in these provinces.
The closing of the urban councils to newcomers, which, like in the ter-
raferma, characterized many communal councils in the stato da mar—
in Istria, Dalmatia, Albania, and the Ionian Islands—created social and
political pressure from individuals and groups that were left outside the
privileged circle but had the capabilities and motivations to participate
in the local political scene. In a few cases, the mechanism of grazie could
be used as a means to join these councils. Thus, after 1611, the procedure
of grazia remained the only way of joining the urban council of Corfu for
candidates who were able to prove that their ancestors had been mem-
bers of the council for three generations.246 Yet Venice could not use such
a pressure valve everywhere or at any moment. Consequently, it occasion-
ally had to deal with severe conflicts, some of them rather violent, result-
ing from unsatisfied ambitions.
The so-called popolani of the Dalmatian towns, who in 1510–12 rose
against the local noblemen’s exclusive hold of the urban councils, were
prosperous merchants and relatively affluent artisans. In most cases they
were economically stronger than the noblemen who refused to let them
share their privileges.247 Nevertheless, though not ignoring these realities
244 Ibid., pp. 93–95.
245 See Roland Mousnier, “Le trafic des offices à Venise,” Nouvelle revue historique
de droit français et étranger ser. IV, 30 (1952), 552–65; Zannini, “Problemi di contabilità
pubblica,” p. 94.
246 Ventura, Nobiltà e popolo, pp. 162–63; Karapidakis, Civis fidelis, pp. 114–15.
247 Ventura, Nobiltà e popolo, pp. 215–16.