O nasljedstvu Balše III. Balšića
Authors: Papović Dragutin 
Published: December 2023

The inheritance of Balša III has been the subject of intense interest by Serbian and Montenegrin historians. Since the latter half of the 19th century, most of the relevant sources from Zeta, Serbia and Venice on Balša III have been published. These sources do not mention that the ruler of Zeta, Balša III, left Zeta in direct inheritance to anyone, not even to his uncle, the despot Stefan Lazarević. However, there is nothing in these sources indicating that Balša did not leave Zeta to the despot. The sources are silent on that matter. Nonetheless, almost all Serbian and Montenegrin historians unambiguously concluded that Balša III named Stefan as his successor and in this manner left the state of Zeta to the despot. This view is unanimous in modern Serbian and Montenegrin historiography. The top expert on this subject and on the medieval state of Zeta in general, historian Ivan Božić also initially asserted quite explicitly that in his last will and testament Balša III had left Zeta to the despot Stefan as an inheritance. However, in one of his later works, Božić stepped back from this claim and instead underscored a dilemma. He wrote that it is not known whether Balša left the state of Zeta to the despot or he had simply entrusted him to end the war against the Venetians in Zeta. In this manner, Božić pointed out that it is necessary to reconsider the prevailing view that Balša III named the despot as his successor. But this had no significant influence on historiography because even afterward Serbian and Montenegrin historians continued to affirm the primary thesis. A historiographic stereotype was thus created. Additionally, certain Serbian historians have tendentiously added a national dimension to this thesis. They claimed that the motive underlying Balša’s alleged atonement and the despot’s assumption of rule over Zeta was to unite the Serbian lands from the Danube to the Adriatic Sea, which has no confirmation in the sources. The sources from Zeta and Serbia say nothing about Balša’s inheritance. Furthermore, sources from the Republic of Venice do not indicate that Balša III had directly named the despot as his successor. On the other hand, based on the relations established between the despot and the Venetians in Zeta in the period 1421-1426, it can be presumed that the despot acted as Balša’s self-proclaimed successor in Zeta. This was possible due to the fact that he was Balša’s uncle, Balša asked for his help and he died in Stefan’s court. It is undeniable that the Venetians took into account his pretensions to Balša’s estates and also acknowledged his right to the Skadar commission and the rights of Balša’s daughters. The despot claimed that Balša’s possessions belonged to him and that the Venetians were primarily protecting the estates and interests they had acquired in Zeta during the reign of the Balšići. The despot backed his pretentions with considerable military force, which the Venetians feared. After the war and a series of peace negotiations, the despot and the Venetians reached an agreement whereby they divided Zeta on the basis of the status from the final years of Balša’s reign. The despot therefore mainly acquired Balša’s territory, taking over that part of Zeta that had been ruled by Balša III. However, most importantly for this topic is that the sources do not allow us to explicitly assert that Balša III. named Stefan as his successor, although the opposite – that Balša III. did not name the despot as his successor – cannot be stated, either. This fall into the realm of unfounded assertions. The sources are silent on the events that occurred just before Balša’s death and do not allow us to make clear conclusion on Balša’s designated successor.