free download here - Michael Llewellyn-Smith

Venetian Crete
moderation prevailed. Cavalli sent out Greek and Latin priests to
proclaim an amnesty. These mediators remained in Sphakia as
hostages, while the Cretans came before Cavalli. In return for his
promise of amnesty he won their loyalty. Thus the last traces of the
independent state of western Crete disappeared. The Cretans had not
since 67 B.C. so nearly tasted liberty; they were not to do so again until
1821, and then too it was delusive and short-lived.
So Trivan. The story at first seems plausible; it is not more fantastic
than others which are well authenticated. And apart from those like
Zambeliou who accepted it for its dramatic qualities, others as conscientious
as Pashley have not questioned Trivan’s account - partly, I
think, because Trivan so clearly approved of Cavatli’s conduct and
gloated in the downfall of the hubristic Greeks, that he seems to have
no reason for inventing it all. One could understand a patriotic Cretan
chronicler’s motives for embellishing some trivial brush with authority,
to the honour of his dead relatives and compatriots. But Trivan has
no reason to do this. If we look closely at his account, however, we
cannot escape the implausibilities and puzzles which it presents. These
concern the date of the rebellion and the motives of Kandanoleon.
Trivan places the affair in the early years of the sixteenth century.
But there is no reference to it in the reports of Venetian officials of the
time, nor in historians such as Cornaros, nor in the official list of the
Dukes of Candia, which contains a precis of notable events in each
Duke’s tenure of office. Moreover, that Marino Cavalli who in Trivan’s
account suppressed the revolt was Proveditor General in 1570. This is
an established fact. Cavalli marched on Sphakia and reduced the area
to ruins, executing, imprisoning or banishing his captives. The campaign
was in reprisal, for the Sphakians had been descending to the
plains and carrying off the nobles’ sheep. Since western Crete was in
ferment at this time, and Cavalli was called on to restore order, most
authorities have placed Kandanoleon’s revolt in these years: 1570-1.
But it will not do. The total ignorance of the sources for 1570 onwards
rules out this period too. Even though this is an argument from silence,
it is conclusive; for the great merit of the reports submitted by Venetian
Dukes and Proveditores is that they do not omit events of this importance.
The Republic’s controls were too tight for careless reporting to
escape notice.
Did Kandanoleon then never exist? Was Trivan, too, a historical
novelist? The possibility cannot be ruled out. Trivan had no access to
the essential source materials in Venice, and hence was a prey to what
local material he could find. And as those who have had to study the
31