History of seafaring and fishing in Karlobag

The area of what today is Karlobag was inhabited in the first millennium B.C., by Liburnian tribes. The Karlobag area had a favourable geostrategic position: the proximity of the sea meant fishing and overseas trade [1]. The contemporary findings of ancient and prehistoric money suggest that area was economically strong and had developed maritime relations with the surrounding Adriatic regions [1].

Some 200 years B.C., the area of the today’s Karlobag can be found in the ancient Greek geographic documents under the name of Vegium, inhabited by the tribal Bekos community [1]. Moreover, from the writings of Pliny the Elder, we find out that Vegium also had a municipal status, i.e. the Roman civil law. From this period and until the 4^th century, in the Karlobag area (and particularly nearby Cesarica), the overseas trade was very developed, which can be found out from the remnants of the antique money found in this area [2]. The ancient Romans, when coining their money, also coined the names of the areas from which the money originated, so that through these findings we can conclude that Karlobag traded with the sailors and merchants from Rome, Carthage, Sicily, Italy, the colonies of Patricia, Emerita and Lugdunum, Hispania and Africa [2], while money of Byzantine origin suggests that there was trade with the Byzantine Empire as well [3].

With the start of the Middle Ages, Vegium could no longer be found on cartographic representations, and the area of Karlobag appeared under different names. An anonymous person from Ravena names a town on the territory of the today’s Karlobag, Bigi [1], while the Arabic cartographer Muhammad al Idrisi names Karlobag as Maskala [4]. Finally, in the documents of the Slavonian ban Stjepan it is named also as Scrissa [5]. Nevertheless, of all those names, only one survived, and this is Bag, which appears on the maps at the start of the 14^th century [6].

In mid-14^th century, a salt chamber was founded in Karlobag, through which the salt was traded collecting taxes on salt exports [7]. Primarily the Pag salt is being meant here, much appreciated even today and which was exported by the sea from the island of Pag to Karlobag, from where it was further traded through the Velebit trails with the Lika area. In this period, there was significant cattle breeding in Karlobag and Karlobag also had special legal authority by means of which it could use the pastures outside of the legal domain of the Karlobag area [6].

At the beginning of the 15^th century, the wine trade developed, mostly on the Zadar - Karlobag - Velebit route. The merchants used to buy up to 170 hectolitres of wine in Karlobag because they knew that they would be able to sell it successfully in Lika [5]. Moreover, Karlobag had also its own vineyards and in 1432 the people of Karlobag (Bažani) got the benefit of the exemption on paying taxes on vineyards, other agriculture and cattle breeding [6]. Bag had a commercially attractive position, so that the people of Zadar requested from the Venetian authorities the permission for free trade in iron, leather, textile, wooden planks and wax with the inhabitants of Bag [5]. On the territory of Karlobag, it was traded even in ships, which is recorded in the documents on the sale of ships between the inhabitants of Bag and the inhabitants of Šibenik [5].

Bag being so developed as a maritime and commercial centre endangered the commercial success of the Venetian Republic, due to which in 1548 it doubled the taxes on the exports of the Pag salt to Karlobag. This had a negative impact on the trade in the Pag salt but not necessarily to Bag. Dissatisfied with the taxation of the Pag salt, the people of Bag stopped trading primarily with the people of Pag but started importing salt from Istria, which was cheaper [5]. Karlobag also had a developed trade in barrels for vineyard needs [5].

The high taxation of the Venetian exports to Karlobag proved unfavourable both for the Venetians and the people of Bag so that in 1543 an agreement was reached through which the people of Bag could freely trade in cheese, wheat, flour, rams and spruce on the Venetian territory and come to the St. Margareth trade fair on the island of Rab, under the condition that the entry to the Italian province of Marche was banned. Two years later, Venice again approved the exports of salt from Pag to Bag, but under the condition that special taxes be imposed if the salt were to be exported to Senj, which also presented market competition. Such agreements showed favourable, and the trade in Bag increasingly developed, which is visible from the fact that the import and export of the products overseas and through the Velebit trails grew. In only one order from 1457, Venice exported more than 100 barrels of wine and 50 barrels of oil to Bag [5].

Until this time, Bag was ruled by the dukes of Kurjakovići, but in 1480 Bag was conquered by King Matija. Despite the change in the ruler, Bag had confirmed all the previously acquired rights and privileges [6]. However, the maritime trade in Bag was not destined to survive. The start of the 16^th century was marked with the incursion of the Ottoman Empire on the territory of today’s Croatia and in 1525 the Turks reached Bag. They conquered, plundered and partially destroyed Bag and all the citizens who did not manage to escape to Pag by ship on time were either murdered or taken as slaves [5, 6]. Twenty years later, Bag was still destroyed and devastated. The people of Pag no longer had anybody with whom they could trade in much needed wood and, trying to get the wood, they often clandestinely landed in Bag where they were regularly ambushed by the Turks, who took them as slaves or killed them [5].

In 1577, the Senj captaincy renovated Karlobag, which at the time was still mostly in ruins. Many people from Senj started to inhabit Bag [5, 8]. In 1579, the then Duke Karlo ordered that Bag be renovated and Bag was later named Karlobag after him (changed from “Karlov Bag”) [6]. However, this renovation was not meant to be either. On the territory of Karlobag, the Senj uskoks would often hide, who were a thorn in the side of the Venetian Republic, so that in 1592 the Venetian Provveditore Almoro Tiepolo conquered and fully destroyed Karlobag [6].

Despite this, Karlobag did not remain a mere ruin. Karlobag was rebuilt under the rule of Josip Rabatta in 1602, and it then belonged under the administration of the Senj captaincy [6]. New inhabitants swiftly arrived in Karlobag: the Bunjevci started to inhabit the Karlobag territory [9]. Despite this revitalisation of the population, the uskoks were still using Karlobag as their hiding place: in 1614, they came to Karlobag with their prey and the prisoners from two looted ships from the island of Hvar. The soldiers in Karlobag arrested the uskoks but they were eventually not punished [5]. The history decided to repeat itself here so that already the following year Karlobag was again attacked by the Venetian Republic. However, this time, Karlobag was timely informed on the upcoming attack. When the people of Pag, under the Venetian administration and under the leadership of captain Jakov, landed at the Karlobag mainland, there was no resistance from the local inhabitants. What seemed the most easily won battle in history suddenly changed when they entered the area of the military fortress. There they were unexpectedly attacked from all sides, and approximately 100 Pag and Venetian soldiers and their duke Antonio Zorzi were killed [5]. However, this victory was short-lived: next year already, the Venetians came back and occupied Karlobag and devastated it once again [5].

The travel writings from before the 17^th century mostly avoided describing the Karlobag coastline. There were two main reasons for that: the weather conditions were often dangerous for the seafarers and the bura in Bag collapsed a larger number of ships. Moreover, in this area there were many uskoks who attacked and plundered merchant ships. Having this in mind, the sub-Velebit canal started to pose too big a risk for the seamen and they started avoiding it. Only at the start of the 17^th century could the Karlobag area be found in major maritime guides and the condition of its coastline was best described in the Senjski peljar (Sailboat of Senj) from 1639. Numerous ports from the Senj area up to Starigrad are listed with brief descriptions. On the territory of Karlobag, the following ports could be found: Cesarica, Drinovica, Drvarica, Tatinja, Karlobag, Kraljić, Mošćina, Ognjilo, Skočkobila, Sedlenica, Kijac, three ports of Slana draga, Lukovo Šugarje port and Šugarica [4]. The port of Drinovica was recommended for small ships, while other ports could take larger ships as well. The Lukovo Šugarje port could receive even a whole fleet of ships. Only the port on the very territory of the town of Karlobag was useless: it was still in ruins since the Venetian attacks [4].

In the mid-17^th century and until King Ferdinand III, the information came that the Venetians from Ražanac and from Pag traded with Turks on the Karlobag territory. They traded in salt, wine and weapons. Having received this information, King Ferdinand banned the trade of the Venetians with the Turks on the Karlobag territory and ordered that Karlobag be urgently renovated [5]. A new refurbishment of Karlobag started, which was completed in 1672. In the next five years, Karlobag was rapidly inhabited from the surrounding areas. Emigration from the Ražanac area should be mentioned here, led by the Rukavina family who inhabited the area of Vidovac and other villages above the area of the very town of Karlobag [10], and emigrants from Sveti Juraj (Saint George) among which was also the Devčić family who inhabited the coastal areas near Karlobag (the present Devčić Draga), but also Baške Oštarije above Karlobag [11]. In 1684, with the creation of the Holy League, there was no more danger of the Venetian attacks for Karlobag [5], which finally ensured safety from military attacks and enabled revitalisation of shipping and trade in Karlobag. The export of maritime goods to Lika started, in particular through Velebit, which was known as Passo de Licca [12]. The same pass connected also Karlobag with Baške Oštarije, and was used for the transport of logs to the Karlobag port.

At the beginning of the 18^th century, the export of Pag salt to Karlobag was resumed [7]. The Court Chamber ordered the then captain Jacob Friedrich Rambschussl to introduce a trade tax in Karlobag and to designate four soldiers who would take care of the smugglers [5]. This move was a preliminary attempt to control the maritime and cross-Velebit trade on the territory of the town of Karlobag, the trade potential of which started to recover exponentially. In 1712, Karlobag was placed under the military administration of the Karlovac Generalate [5]. Karlobag became an important Austrian port. The Venetian Republic banned the export of salt to Austrian ports but despite this, the Pag salt was nevertheless stored in Karlobag, from where it was transferred to Lika and Krbava [7]. In 1746, a supreme commercial supervision was established in Trieste (Intendenca) and Karlobag fell under its supervision [6]. Several years later, the Karlovac Generalate made the decision to renovate Karlobag and to renovate the roads connecting Karlobag and Lika, which included the reconstruction of the existing land roads and construction of a new seaport [12]. The supervision in Trieste send captain Pittoni to check the social and commercial situation in Karlobag. Pittoni established that the conditions in Karlobag were those of general poverty. In his report, he stated that the maritime trade was significantly slowed down and cited the Capuchin priests who occupied the coast as the cause. He found two good ports in Karlobag, one for large and one for small ships but they were mostly unused due to the Capuchin occupation. He found that the road to Gospić was in a neglected and difficult-to-walk condition and said that Karlobag was paying a part of its surtaxes to Gospić, which he considered catastrophic for the Karlobag trade and economy. The Lika taxation completely extinguished the transportation of the Pag salt to Karlobag. Pittoni also recommended the issuing of supports to young men from Karlobag to enrol in nautical studies in Trieste, in order to strengthen the town shipping [6].

That there was a plunge in the maritime profession is also shown by the reports from 1760 in which indicate that Karlobag had only one ship of medium carrying capacity and 4 ships of small carrying capacity: in total 24 crewmembers [13]. Anyhow, Pittoni’s report had a significant impact on the future changes in the organisation of overseas trade. Already in 1762 the salt from Pag started to be shipped to Karlobag again and for the transportation of salt only there were three larger and two smaller ships allocated [5, 6]. This positive increase was briefly halted the next year due to the closing down of the entire traffic for fear of infection by plague which was present at the time [14], but already the year after that the traffic was reopened as there was overseas trade in grain which was transported to Karlobag by sea, from where it was transferred on land to Karlovac [15]. Moreover, in 1764, the inhabitants of Karlobag had a conflict of interest with the Karlovac Generalate: the Generalate unsuccessfully tried to control the log trade on the Karlobag territory, which was strongly opposed by the citizens [8].

The following year a new salt warehouse was built on the Karlobag coastline, which could hold 18,000 casks of salt [5], and customs duty was charged on wine imports [15]. Alberto Fortis, a priest, in his travelogue from 1773 describes that the trade in Karlobag was based on overseas export of wood, while wine and oil from Dalmatia were imported to Karlobag, as well as grains from Lika [5]. Two years later, the census established that in Karlobag there were 48 sailors, 8 merchants and over 50 craftsmen who could sell their products (tailors, coopers, tobacco processors, etc.) [5].

In 1776, the supervision in Trieste was abolished and Karlobag became a part of the Military Frontier [16]. Emperor Joseph II ordered that Karlobag be ensured the greatest possible freedom of trade and ordered the construction of a new road from Karlobag to Gospić [5]. Karlobag soon got the free port status and became one of the most important commercial routes in the direction of Lika and Bosnia, since it served as the closest port in the Military Frontier [12]. In order for the Karlobag port be worthy of its status, intense cleaning of the port and the surrounding coastline took place under the leadership of the engineer Josip Filip Vukasović [17].

At the beginning of the 19^th century, there are documents on the condition of the ports on the territory of Karlobag and the surroundings. Beneath Cesarica, there was a port which was well defended from winds and the bura, the Tatinja cove is mentioned as a potential refuge for ships against the winds, even though it cannot protect them against bura; in Karlobag there is strong trade in building timber, in Lukovo Šugarje there are two coves where a larger number of ships can fit but the port is not protected against the bura and jugo winds, while the Kijac cove can receive only small boats [18]. The salt trade started to decline, in particular after 1866, when the Viennese Government banned the export of the Pag salt to Karlobag in order to increase the exports of the Piran saltworks, which was more lucrative for them [7].

In 1871, the Military Frontier broke down and Karlobag had the free port town status once again [5, 16]. The trade started to decline but, in Karlobag, there were successful merchants in the Domines, Budak and Grkinić families, who have become the richest families in Karlobag [5]. In 1875, the first steamships from Trieste arrived which were used for postal services. Karlobag fell under the Chamber of Commerce and Trade in Senj [5]. In this period, many children of poor social and economic status left for Bakar where they enrolled in the nautical school [5].

In 1881, the Lika-Krbava County was established with a seat in Gospić, with Karlobag having become its part [19]. The Salt Office in Karlobag merged with the Taxation Office for the sake of easier salt trade taxation [6]. At the end of the 19^th century, the Karlobag merchants became members of the Adriatic Navigating Administration, whose purpose was to promote the personal and commercial ship traffic of the sub-mountain area with the Northern Croatian coast [13]. The export of wood decreased but consumables, cattle for slaughter, wine, oil and toast could be bought in Karlobag [18]. Ultimately, the port was renovated and a mole was built as well as a ship pier [5]. This was the most significant period of shipping in Karlobag, when Karlobag had 60 ships and 123 crewmembers, a number that will soon start to decline [13].

At the very start of the 20^th century, the first committee of the Croatian Steamboat Society in Senj was founded, with the goal to strengthen the steamboat traffic on the sub-Velebit coastline. Karlobag was represented by Karlo and Marica Budak. The number of seafarers in Karlobag increased: from 663 passengers in 1902 up to 1352 passengers in 1905. The merit for this probably goes also to the start of the navigation of the Hrvatska steamboat, sailing on the Karlobag - Senj - Rijeka route every workday except Sundays [20]. There were two steamboat agencies operating in Karlobag: the Ungaro-Croata Steamboat Society and the Croatian Steamboat Society from Senj. They operated on the same routes causing unnecessary congestion in the port, which eventually created dissatisfaction of the inhabitants against the seafaring [20].

WWI paused the maritime traffic in this area but once it ended, there was a revival of the wood market resulting in an increase of almost 100% in the number of ships and carried tonnage compared with the previous 15 years. For the transport of goods, sailboats for open seas navigation were used. Even though the maritime potential was on the rise, the construction of the Gospić railway left a negative impact on the entire overseas traffic of the area [13, 21]. In the 1930s, boys from Karlobag would start the fishing trade as early as five years of age. Their life was often oriented at the sea: they would help unloading cargo from the ships, were included in the local fishing activities together with their fathers and often spent even their free time fishing. The average population mostly used rowing boats for their fishing purposes [22].

After WWII, the maritime industry in Karlobag was on the decline again. Many adolescent boys left Croatia in order to become seafarers [22]. Only around 1965 was the pier destroyed in the war repaired and the ferry port was expanded. The Vanga ferry started to operate in Karlobag [5]. The ferry operated until the start of the Homeland War [5].

The seafaring in Karlobag stopped completely. There were no more large ships and the town turned to tourism as the primary economic resource. What was left over from the seafaring and fishing in Karlobag were several boats used by the local population for private purposes, throwing nets and hoping to catch a fish or two.

There is no more true maritime craft here anymore. However, if the history of Karlobag showed us anything, then it is the fact that each shutdown of the maritime craft in Karlobag was only temporary. The future will tell if the maritime potential will be used again.          

[1] Glavičić, M. (1991). Željeznodobna i antička naselja podno Velebita. (Iron Age and Ancient Settlements beneath Velebit). Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru (Papers of the Faculty of Philosophy in Zadar), 31(18), 97-119.

[2] Dukat, Z., Mirnik, I. and Neralić, J. (1984). Numizmatičke vijesti iz Senja i okolice II (Numismatic News from Senj and the Surroundings II). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 10(1), 41-53.

[3] Jurić, R. and Škoro, I. (2017). Srednjovjekovna arheološka nalazišta u Podgorju (Mediaeval Archaeological Sites). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 44, 129-148.

[4] Kozličić, M., Faričić, J. I Uglešić, S. (2012). Geografska osnova navigacije Velebitskim kanalom prema Senjskom peljaru iz 1639. godine (The Geographic Base of Navigation in the Velebit Canal according to the Senjski peljar from 1639). Geoadria, 17(1), 45-71.

[5] Mažuran, I. (2001). Karlobag 1251 – 2001 Karlobag: Karlobag Municipality.

[6] Herkov, Z. (1976). Statut grada Karlobaga od godine 1757 (The Statute of the Town of Karlobag from 1757). Vjesnik historijskih arhiva u Rijeci i Pazinu (The Herald of Historic Archives in Rijeka and Pazin), 20, 77-105.

[7] Peričić, Š. (2001). Proizvodnja i prodaja paške soli u prošlosti (The Production and Sale of Pag
Salt in the Past). Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru (Papers of the HAZU Institute for Historical Sciences in Zadar), 43, 45-83.

[8] Gruenfelder, A. M. (2002). Senj i Karlobag u doba merkantilističke gospodarske politike (Senj and Karlobag at the Time of the Mercantile Economic Policy). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 29, 125-154.

[9] Černelić, M. I Rajković Iveta, M. (2010). Ogled o primorskim Bunjevcima: Povijesna perspektiva i identifikacijski procesi (Survey of the Coastal Bunjevci: Historic Perspective and Identification Processes). Studia Ethnologica Croatica, 22, 283-316.

[10] Ljubović, E. (2004). Bunjevačka plemićka i časnička obitelj Rukavina (The Bunjevac Noble and Officer’s Rukavina family). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 31, 39-58.

[11] Ljubović, E. (2010). Plemićka obitelj Devčić – Devchich (The Noble Devčić Family – Devchich). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 37, 65-78.

[12] Slukan Altić, M. (2005). Kartografski izvori za rekonstrukciju i praćenje razvoja prometnih komunikacija (The Cartographic Sources for the Reconstruction and Monitoring of the Development of the Traffic Communications). Ekonomska i ekohistorija (Economic and Ecohistory), 1(1), 85-101.

[13] Barbalić, R. F. (1970). Brodarstvo u Senju i Podgorju kroz prošlost (The Shipping in Senj and Podgorje through History). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 4(1), 5-32.

[14] Buczynski, A. (1991). Trgovački pomorski grad Senj i Tršćanska trgovačka intendanca (1752-1775) (The Merchant Sea City of Senj and the Trieste Trade Intendancy). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 18, 205-216.

[15] Balić, J. (2019). Lička krajiška pješačka pukovnija u razdoblju od 1736. do 1809. Godine (The Lika Military Frontier Infantry Regiment in the Period from 1736 to 1809). Doctoral dissertation.

[16] Peremin, M. (1993). Spisi Komercijalne uprave za Senj, Karlobag, Kraljevicu i Bakar s posebnim osvrtom na fond „Commercialia“ (1749-1776) (Documents of the Commercial Administration for Senj, Karlobag, Kraljevica and Bakar with a Special Note on the “Commercialia” Fund (1749-1776). Arhivski vjesnik (The Archive Herald), 36, 207-221.

[17] Beović, B. (2020). Priča o dva grada i dva graditelja (The Story of Two Towns and Two Builders). Hrvatske vode (The Croatian Waters), 28, 247-253.

[18] Kozličić, M., Faričić, J. I Uglešić, S. (2012). Luke i lučice Velebitskog podgorja prema hrvatskoj varijanti Senjskog peljara iz početka XVII. Stoljeća (The Ports and Small Ports of the Velebit Foothills according to the Croatian Variant of the Senjski peljar from the Beginning of the 17^th Century). Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru (Papers of the HAZU Institute for Historical Sciences in Zadar), 54, 69-123.

[19] Gabelica, M. (2018). Pravaštvo u Gospiću od 1880-ih do 1914 (The Party of Rights in Gospić from 1880s to 1914). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 45, 305-344.

[20] Brlić, I. (2017). Podgorska društva: Sastavnice kulturnog i gospodarskog razvoja podvelebitskog kraja (The Podgorje Societies: The Components of the Cultural and Economic Development of the sub-Velebit Area). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 44, 275-290.

[21] Dundović, Č., Dundović, D. I Dundović, K. (2017). Potencijali i perspektive razvitka Velebitskog podgorja (The Potentials and Prospects for the Development of the sub-Velebit Area). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 44, 501-516.

[22] Vene, L. (2008). Djetinjstvo i odrastanje u Podgorju: Služenje i dječji rad (The Childhood and Growing Up in Podgorje: Serving and Child Labour). Senjski zbornik (The Senj Almanac), 35, 257-278.