The fonds contains the decisions of the Rector of the Dubrovnik Republic in the period from the 70s of the 13th century to the beginning of the 14th century, and from the end of the 14th century to the 60s of the 18th century. The reference to the title “Rector” can be traced back to the 12th century. When the Venetian rule in Dubrovnik ended in 1358, the election of the Rector became the jurisdiction of the Major Council. The candidates for the Rector had to be at least 50 years old and members of the Senate. The Rector’s mandate lasted only one month. With the strengthening of the institutions of the Dubrovnik commune, his role was reduced to a predominantly representative role, and there were hardly any decisions he could make independently. His duties were: to represent the Dubrovnik Republic before the Dubrovnik commoners and before the representatives of foreign states, to preside over the Minor Council, the Major Council, and the Senate, to keep and protect the seal of the Republic and the keys to the city gates. Since the Rector had a central position in the judicial council until the middle of the 15th century, the first volume of this fonds contains records related to various criminal and civil proceedings. In later times, the Rector's decisions mainly dealt with taxations (Cro. gabela) paid for wine production in the territory of the Dubrovnik Republic, decisions related to the amount of rent of real estate in the Republic and cases of the defendant's intentional absence from trial (Lat. contumacia).

The fonds contains only limited information on Jews that mainly relates to their renting of business and residential premises. For example, the names of Joseph Azubi, David Coen, the Lumbroso brothers and Samuel Maestro are referenced in the 20s of the 17th century, related to conflicts over the right to run stores in front of the ghetto, on the main street in Dubrovnik, named Placa, while Aron Coen and Samuel Maestro were referenced to in the records of 1631 since they were in conflict with a nobleman who had rented them a house with a garden in the eastern Dubrovnik suburb of Ploče (vol. 12, f. 24). There is also a brief entry about Esther, the widow of Solomon Luzzena, who in 1680 paid the debt of her late husband to Luka Stella (vol. 14, f. 89v).

One part of the fonds is related to the collection of fines for nobles who were unjustifiably absent from the sessions of the councils (vols. 1-3, 5, 14, 14b). Other volumes contain proposals for debates submitted to the Senate by the Minor Council (vols. 4, 7-13; 1591-1592, 1673, 1694-1808). The topics of these debates are mostly related to the internal affairs of the Dubrovnik Republic. If the motion for a debate is crossed out, the date on the margin of this entry indicates when this debate was held in the Senate. Nevertheless, that does not necessarily mean that the debate was de facto recorded in the Senate registers.

There are not many references to Jews in this fonds. Approximately, in one volume of the fonds, there is an average of 2 to 4 entries concerning Jews (e.g., vol. 10, ff. 14v, 29, 42, 75v; vol. 12, ff. 47, 49; vol. 13, pp. 63c). For example, a proposal to discuss the bankruptcy of Solomon Vitali, and his son and brother, was entered on 25/7/1772. The proposal was crossed out and a note on the margin indicates that the debate was to be held in Senate on the same day (vol. 11, f. 47). However, there is no record of that debate in registers of the Senate.

There are no references to Jewish people in the series.

The series consists of transcripts and translations of rulers’ charters and various other documents. These documents are mainly issued by Ottoman sultans. Other documents in the fonds are issued by the rulers of some states such as Spain or Hungary and the Papal States.

The series contains many letters and official documents. Letters to the Republic were written by various Ottoman dignitaries, from the grand vizier to local authorities of the towns and places near the Dubrovnik border. Official documents are orders and charters of sultans, orders of the governors of the Ottoman provinces and various documents of kadis. The documents in the series Acta Turcarum provide an excellent insight into all aspects of relations between the Ottoman Empire and the Republic of Dubrovnik, from interstate to personal. The series contains a small number of documents in other languages: Armenian, Arabic and Judeo-Spanish.

The series also contains a small number of documents in Judeo-Spanish, written in Latin alphabet and Hebrew (vol. E17b, E18a, E18b, D, XXIII). It also contains inventories of main figures of Jewish families and of the houses in which they lived (1756, 1808), as well as an inventory of Jews who immigrated to Dubrovnik in the period from 1730 to 1756. In addition, there are two letters in Italian: a letter written by Abram Bussara, the consul of the Dubrovnik Republic in Algeria (1790), and a letter written by Sabato Valenzin to the Austrian authorities of Dubrovnik district (1873) (vol. D, XXIII).

The subseries consists of four types of sultans’ documents: charters (Tur. ahdname, ahitname), decrees (Tur. ferman), decrees of special importance (Tur. hatt-ı hümayun) and diplomas (Tur. berat), which were issued in the period from the middle of the 15th to the beginning of the 19th century. The documents of this subseries primarily deal with trade, shipping, customs, or the acquisition of cereals from the Ottoman Empire and other food for the needs of the Dubrovnik Republic. Documents also refer to other topics such as: land and sea bandits, espionage of the Dubrovnik Republic for the Ottomans, exchange of prisoners of war in neutral Dubrovnik, monopoly on the sale of Dubrovnik salt to Ottoman subjects, monopoly of neutral Dubrovnik ports for interstate trade, or transport of Ottoman goods and passengers by Dubrovnik ships. A fairly large number of sultans’ receipts for the tribute that the Republic paid to the Empire has also been preserved, as well as other sultans’ decrees according to which sea captains from the Republic were protected from attacks of North African corsairs in the second half of the 18th century.

An analytical inventory was made for this subseries, which indicates that only fifteen documents refer to Jews. In these documents Jews are referred to as: Ottoman customs officers (vol. 5, no. 214; vol. 8, no. 394; vol. 10, no. 459), as both debtors and creditors (vol. 10, no. 484; vol. 45, no. 1586; vol. 46, no. 1629) and as competitors to Dubrovnik merchants (vol. 59, no. 1952). In the first half of the 17th century and in the 20s of the 18th century, Dubrovnik government complained at the Porte about the Jews who damaged the house in Edirne owned by the Republic. When the house burned down, the Jews occupied the land on which it was located. In four of his decrees, the sultan demanded that the Jews should compensate the damage to Ragusans and return the land they had occupied (vol. 16, no. 799; vol. 20, no. 952; vol. 22, no. 1050; vol. 37, no. 1457). The Sultan Selim II asked the authorities of the Republic to organize a safe trip to Venice for the Jew Menachem and his servant (vol. 6, no. 299). Trade rights and prohibitions on trade for Jewish merchants can also be found in some documents of this subseries (vol. 18, no. 886; vol. 47, no. 1648).

The subseries contains orders (Turkish: buyrultu) of the governors of the Bosnian Eyalet and Herzegovinian sancakbeys, which were issued in the period from the middle of the 17th to the beginning of the 19th century. The orders deal with many issues and problems, from politics and trade to robberies, that were happening on the Ottoman-Dubrovnik border.

There is only one buyrultu in which Jews are mentioned. Referring to trade rights from an existing treaty between the Ottomans and the Republic, Dubrovnik authorities complained in 1807 to the governor of the Bosnian Eyalet and the Herzegovinian Sancakbey, Husrev Mehmed Pasha, stating that Jewish merchants in Sarajevo were interfering with the business of Dubrovnik merchants. Pasha issued an order to the kadi of Sarajevo to prevent such actions (no. 321).

The Republic of Dubrovnik bordered the Herzegovinian Sancak along the entire border, and Sancak was a part of the Bosnian Eyalet. Since Herzegovinian sancakbeys and Bosnian beylerbeys were Dubrovnik's closest neighbours, Dubrovnik authorities sought to maintain as close relations as possible with them. Ragusan ambassadors often visited these dignitaries, and abundant correspondence between them has been preserved till today. The letters of Herzegovinian sancakbeys and the Bosnian beylerbeys reveal, among other things, which problems were to be resolved between the Republic and the Ottoman Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries. In addition to problems in the field of trade, customs duties, and food procurement in the Bosnian area for the needs of the Republic, there were other issues that were often referenced to in these documents such as robberies, thefts, injuries and murders, which had been most often committed by Ottoman subjects against peasants living in border villages of the Dubrovnik Republic. Herzegovinian sancakbeys and the Bosnian beylerbeys often addressed the authorities of the Republic with various requests. The data thus show that they would be looking for a physician, construction workers, food for the needs of their courts, or just for help in organizing overseas trips for their people. Most of the documents of this subseries are not dated.

There are not many references to Jews in this subseries, and these can be found in approximately fifteen letters. In most cases, these references concern debts, and, in these letters, Jews appear both as debtors and as creditors. For example, Samuel Ambonetti and Hai Tolentino were debtors of many Ottoman subjects (Beylerbey Mehmed Pasha Kukavica, no. 36, 207, 211, 226; B 11, no. 9, 23. Beylerbey Mehmed Pasha Silahdar, no. 328; CT 2, no. 92 Beylerbey Süleyman Pasha Bostanci, No. 269. Sancakbey Ali Pasha Cengic, B 23, No. 9. Sancakbey Musli Pasha, B 23, No. 34). The remaining letters deal with several trade disputes, as well as the abduction of a servant of a Jew from Sarajevo (Beylerbey Ahmed Pasha Seydi, no. 997. Beylerbey Abu Bekir Pasha, no. 398. Beylerbey Mehmed Pasha Silahdar, no. 238).

Given the fact that the Dubrovnik Republic bordered the Ottoman Empire along its entire border line, it is not surprising that there were many situations, such as robberies, murders, armed and physical conflicts, debts, usurpation of fields and pastures, in which both judicial authorities had to intervene, those of the Republic and those of the Ottoman Empire. For this reason, the State Archives in Dubrovnik is in possession of a large collection of reports, petitions, and investigations of kadis. Most official documents were written by the kadis from Ljubinje and Herceg Novi. The remaining documents were written by other Bosnian Herzegovinian kadis, as well as by the kadis from today’s areas of Montenegro, Serbia, Kosovo, Croatia, Egypt, Turkey, Hungary, Albania, Greece, and Bulgaria. The documents of this subseries cover a long-time span: from the last decades of the 15th century to the beginning of the 19th century. These documents are a first-class archival source for exploring all aspects of everyday life as well as other facts pertaining to the life or coexistence of people in the bordering countries.

Jewish people are mentioned in this subseries in only a small number of documents related to court investigations, for example in a document issued in 1580 by the kadi of Plovdiv on the trade conflict between two people named Vicko and Solomon, and in another document from 1571, issued by the kadi of Herceg Novi, on the murder of Menachem Maraz, who was killed in Dubrovnik by Benvenisti Nasci (vol. 4, no. 474; vol. 11, no. 796).