Page:EB1911 - Volume 07.djvu/798

Rh deprived of its independence by Napoleon in 1807, Ragusa in 1808. In 1809 the French troops were withdrawn, but in the same year Dalmatia was restored to France and united to the Illyrian kingdom by the treaty of Vienna. A British naval force under Captain Hoste, after a successful engagement with a small French squadron off Lissa, occupied the islands of Curzola, Lesina and Lagosta from 1812 to 1815, and established a considerable overland trade through Dalmatia, Austria and Germany. The allied British and Austrian forces drove out the last French garrison in 1814, and in 1815 Dalmatia was finally incorporated in the Austro-Hungarian empire, with which its history has since been identified. Its subsequent tranquillity has only been disturbed by the ineffectual risings of 1869 and 1881–1882, which took place near (q.v.). For an account of the development of Croatian nationalism among the Dalmatians, during the 19th and 20th centuries, see.

—A minute and accurate account of Dalmatian history, art (especially architecture), antiquities and topography, is given by T. G. Jackson, in Dalmatia, the Quarnero and Istria (Oxford, 1887), (3 vols. illustrated). E. A. Freeman, Subject and Neighbour Lands of Venice (London, 1881), and G. Modrich, La Dalmazia (Turin, 1892), describe the chief towns, their history and antiquities. Much miscellaneous information is contained in the following mainly topographical works:—P. Bauron, Les Rives illyriennes (Paris, 1888); Sir A. A. Paton, Highlands and Islands of the Adriatic (London, 1849); Sir J. G. Wilkinson, Dalmatia and Montenegro (London, 1840); A. Fortis, Travels into Dalmatia (London, 1778); and the periodicals, Rivista Dalmatica (Zara, 1899, &c.), and Annuario Dalmatico (Zara, 1884, &c.). The best maps are those of the Austrian General Staff and Vincenzo de Haardt’s Zemljovid Kraljevine Dalmacije (Zara, 1892). See also for trade, the Annual British Consular Reports; for sport, “Snaffle,” In the Land of the Bora (London, 1897); for Roman and pre-Roman antiquities, R. Munro, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Dalmatia (Edinburgh, 1904). Besides the works mentioned above, and those by Farlatus, Makushev, Miklosich, Theiner, Shafarik, Orbini and du Cange, which are quoted under , the chief authority for Dalmatian history is G. Lucio (Lucius of Traù), De regno Dalmatiae et Croatiae, a gentis origine ad annum 1480 (Amsterdam, 1666). To this edition are appended the works of the Presbyter Diocleas, Thomas of Spalato and other native chroniclers from the 12th century onwards. An Italian translation, omitting the appendix, was published at Trieste in 1892, entitled Storia del Regno di Dalmatia e di Croazia, and edited by Luigi Cesare. Lucio’s work is singularly trustworthy and scientific. See also P. Pisani, La Dalmatie de 1797 à 1815 (Paris, 1893).

DALMATIC (Lat. dalmatica, tunica dalmatica), a liturgical vestment of the Western Church, proper to deacons, as the tunicle (tunicella) is to subdeacons. Dalmatic and tunicle are now, however, practically identical in shape and size; though, strictly, the latter should be somewhat smaller and with narrower arms. In most countries, e.g. England, France, Spain and Germany, dalmatic and tunicle are now no longer tunics, but scapular-like cloaks, with an opening for the head to pass through and square lappets falling from the shoulder over the upper part of the arm; in Italy, on the other hand, though open up the side, they still have regular sleeves and are essentially tunics. The most characteristic ornament of the dalmatic and tunicle is the vertical stripes running from the shoulder to the lower hem, these being connected by a cross-band, the position of which differs in various countries (see figs. 3, 4). Less essential are the orphreys on the hem of the arms and the fringes along the slits at the sides and the lower hem. The tassels hanging from either shoulder at the back (see fig. 6), formerly very much favoured, have now largely gone out of use.

The dalmatica, which originated—as its name implies—in Dalmatia, came into fashion in the Roman world in the 2nd century It was a loose tunic with very wide sleeves, and was worn over the tunica alba by the better class of citizens (see. fig. 2). According to the Liber pontificalis (ed. Duchesne, l. 171) the dalmatic was first introduced as a vestment in public worship by Pope Silvester I. (314–335), who ordered it to be worn by the deacons; but Braun (Liturg. Gewandung, p. 250) thinks that it was probably in use by the popes themselves so early as the 3rd century, since St Cyprian (d. 258) is mentioned as wearing it when he went to his death. If this be so, it was probably given to the Roman deacons to distinguish them from the other clergy and to mark their special relations to the pope. However this may be, the dalmatic remained for centuries the vestment distinctive of the pope and his deacons, and—according at least to the view held at Rome—could be worn by other clergy only by special concession of the pope. Thus Pope Symmachus (498–514) granted the right to wear it to the deacons of Bishop Caesarius of Arles; and so late as 757 Pope Stephen II. gave permission to Fulrad, abbot of St Denis, to be assisted by six deacons at mass, and these are empowered to wear “the robe of honour of the dalmatic.” How far, however, this rule was strictly observed, and what was the relation of the Roman dalmatic to the diaconal alba and subdiaconal tunica, which were in liturgical use in Gaul and Spain so early as the 6th century, are moot points (see Braun, p. 252). The dalmatic was in general use at the beginning of the 9th century, partly as a result of the Carolingian reforms, which established the Roman model in western Europe; but it continued to be granted by the popes to distinguished ecclesiastics not otherwise entitled to wear it, e.g. to abbots or to the cardinal priests of important cathedrals. So far as the records show, Pope John XIII. (965–972) was the first to bestow the right to wear the dalmatic on an abbot, and Pope Benedict VII. the first to grant it to a cardinal priest of a foreign cathedral (975). The present rule was firmly established by the 11th century. According to the actual use of the Roman Catholic Church dalmatic and tunicle are worn by deacon and subdeacon when assisting at High Mass, and at solemn processions and benedictions. They are, however, traditionally vestments symbolical of joy (the bishop in placing the dalmatic on the newly ordained deacon says:—“May the Lord clothe thee in the tunic of joy and the garment of rejoicing”), and they are therefore not worn during seasons of fasting and penitence or functions connected with these, the folded chasuble (paenula plicata) being substituted (see ). Dalmatic and tunicle are never worn by priests, as priests, but both are worn by bishops under the chasuble (never under the cope) and also by those prelates, not being bishops, to whom the pope has conceded the right to wear the episcopal vestments.

In England at the Reformation the dalmatic ultimately shared the fate of the chasuble and other mass vestments. It was, however, certainly one of the “ornaments of the minister” in the second year of Edward VI., the rubric in the office for Holy Communion directing the priest’s “helpers” to wear “albes with tunacles.” In many Anglican churches it has therefore been restored, as a result of the ritual revival of the 19th century, it being claimed that its use is obligatory under the “ornaments rubric” of the Book of Common Prayer (see ).

In the Eastern churches the only vestment that has any true analogy with the dalmatic or liturgical upper tunic is the sakkos, the tunic worn by deacons and subdeacons over their everyday clothes being the equivalent of the Western (q.v.). The sakkos, which, as a liturgical vestment, first appears in the 12th century as peculiar to patriarchs, is now a scapular-like robe very similar to the modern dalmatic (see fig. 5). Its origin is almost certainly the richly embroidered dalmatic that formed part of the consular insignia, which under the name of sakkos became a robe of state special to the emperors. It is clear, then, that this vestment can only have been assumed with the emperor’s permission; and Braun suggests (p. 305) that its use was granted to the patriarchs, after the completion of the schism of East and West, in order “in some sort to give them the character, in outward appearance as well, of popes of the East.” Its use is confined to the Greek rite. In the Greek and Greek-Melchite 