Caroso (Tribune)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Caroso , also Caroxo Mascolin in late medieval sources , was a Venetian tribune who elevated himself to doge in 832 . He ruled the Venice lagoon for only three months, according to other sources for six months. Serious conflicts between the leading cities of the lagoon as well as the effects of the Carolingians and the Byzantine emperors have led to brutal power struggles there for decades. However, the large-scale political dispute changed from the dispute between the Frankish Empire and Byzantium ( two emperor problem ) to new external threats. Slavic pirates, called Narentans , increasingly appeared in the upper Adriatic , who were already able to capture entire fleets; in southern Italy the Venetians were supposed to fight the Saracens for the first time , who had begun to conquer Sicily in 827 . Caroso, who probably came from a tribune family and appears as a witness in the will of Doge Iustinianus Particiacus as early as 829, was overthrown but not killed. Instead, since he was a Byzantine tribune, he was blinded and driven out. The interest group standing behind him was interpreted in extremely different ways in the course of historiographical development. The Venetian, state-controlled historiography did not give Caroso the rank of doge, but interpreted him as a mere usurper who stands in a long series of upheavals.

Origin and family

At the time of the Serrata , more than half a millennium after the "tyrant" and "usurper" Caroso, the Caroso belonged to the ruling families. The Cronaca Giustinian found in the middle of the 14th century that the family went back to tribunes from Aquileia , which had played a central role in the settlement of Rialto . The doge and historian Andrea Dandolo writes in his chronicle that a tribune called Caroso initiated a conspiracy to overthrow the Doge Giovanni Particiaco in 832. The oldest springs from around 1000 already name the family as one of the most powerful in the lagoon. Marino Sanudo assigned them to build the Church of San Servolo. In the middle of the 12th century, Sicara Caroso was an abbess of San Zaccaria . Throughout the 13th century, the family sat on all of the city's major councils, such as the Grand Council. It was spread over several contrade , namely that of San Vidal near the Ponte dell'Accademia in the Sestiere San Marco , and in San Canzian in Cannaregio . In the 13th century, members of the Caroso elected the Doge and appointed senators who were still called Pregadi at the beginning of the 13th century . But after 1386 the family disappears from the documents. Marino Sanudo states that the family died out in 1387.

Life and domination

Caroso's brief reign is part of a series of political upheavals associated with the unfortunate work of Doge Iohannes Particiacus . He had prevailed against his brother Justinianus , but the former Doge Obelerius , exiled to Constantinople , whom their father Agnellus Particiacus had driven out around 810, managed to escape from exile and embark on the northern Adriatic . He soon seized the island of Vigilata off Istria and found further allies in his hometown Malamocco , which after his fall had lost the rank of capital of the lagoon. The Doge Iohannes Particiacus, who resided in the new capital Rialto , reacted immediately to the attempted coup, devastating Malamocco and the island of Vigilata. He had Obelerius beheaded and exhibited his head to the Venetians.

Hardly was this revolt suppressed when the uprising of the Byzantine tribune Caroso forced the Doge to flee to the Frankish court, where he was received with goodwill by Emperor Lothar . Caroso declared himself a doge. But only a few months later he was captured in the Doge's Palace by the supporters of Particiaco, who knew how to get the many dissatisfied with the rule of the usurper to their side . He was blinded and driven out of Venice. A death sentence is said to have prevented his status as a tribune.

It is not known whether this was the last time the tribunate expressed the contrast between an official and an inheritance view of the title, or whether Caroso was only an exponent of the pro-Byzantine versus the pro-Frankish families. His father was a Bonicio Tribuno, according to Muratori , which suggests the hereditary nature of the title. It may also be a power struggle between the families of Rialto and those of Malamocco.

First, until the return of the Doge, Bishop Ursus (Orso), perhaps a member of the Particiaco, led the city regiment together with two tribunes. The doge did not return for about a year. For his part, he no longer ruled because he was overthrown in 836.

reception

For Venice at the time of Doge Andrea Dandolo , the interpretation that was attached to Caroso's brief reign was of a certain symbolic importance in several respects. The focus of the political leadership bodies, long established in the middle of the 14th century, which have steered historiography especially since Andrea Dandolo, focused on the development of the constitution (in this case the question of Doge rule, tyranny and resistance to it) and the internal conflicts between the possessores (represented in the family name), i.e. the increasingly self-contained group of the haves, who at the same time occupied political power, but also the shifts in power within the lagoon (the increasing importance of Rialto, the dwindling of Malamocco and Eraclea ), the Adriatic and in the Eastern Mediterranean as well as in Italy. The focus was always on the questions of sovereignty between the overpowering empires, of law from its own roots, and thus of the derivation and legitimation of their territorial claims. Similar to the short-lived dynasty of the Galbaii, attempts were made to reduce the uncertainty of the situation to deficiencies in the balance of power, and hence in the constitution. This had not yet allowed the power of the Doge and his descendants to be integrated in such a way that the formation of a dynasty was no longer possible. With Caroso it became clear again that a failure of the institutions and attitudes of the decision-makers had to lead to the resurgence of the usual violence within the city, ultimately even to the brutal regime of a usurper whose doge rule was never recognized and not even in the doge lists was conducted.

The oldest vernacular chronicle, the Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo from the late 14th century, depicts the events on a very personal level that has long been customary at this time, which once again gave the Doges greater individual power. The presentation is extremely succinct: “Caroxo Mascolin” “vene poi furtevellemente cum consentimento de molti e fu alevado Duxe in Rivoalto.” The chronicler does not explain what the mentioned illegality of the elevation to the Doge consisted of. Because of his tyranny, a “grande assemblamento” agreed to overthrow him. And so he was seized by force "et cavoli gli ochi dela testa fuora et poi caciò quello de Venesia." After the laconic description of the fall, the blinding and finally the expulsion, the author of the chronicle adds only one name as a mastermind: " Et questo principalmente fu facto per un Domenego Orciniacho. "

Quite different to Pietro Marcello . Although the Doge John managed to conclude a treaty with the Narentans, pirates who made the northern Adriatic unsafe, they robbed a fleet returning from Apulia . Under the leadership of a certain Carosio (“di un certo Carosio”) some nobles conspired against the Doge. The doge had to flee, and Carosio “usurpo il Prencipato” (p. 21). Against Carosio, who had usurped the Dogat, some “gentil'huomini” under the leadership of Basilio Transimondo, Giovanni Mauritio and Domenico Ortiano - the latter had already mentioned the Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo - as well as 30 other nobles rose up who no longer wanted to endure tyranny (“non potendo comportare la tirannide di Carosio”), who attacked him, tore his eyes out (“gli trassero gli occhi”) and sent Caroso into exile. Many confidants were also killed. John the Doge was recalled from the Frankish Empire when Basilio Transimondo, Giovanni Mauritio and “Orso Vescovo di Castello” ruled the 'Republic'. A quarrel with the Mastalitia family led to treason and attack in the church of San Pietro, the doge's insignia of power was stolen, and his beard and hair were shaved. He spent the rest of his life in the monk's habit in Grado .

Notwithstanding turn reports the Chronicle of Gian Giacomo Caroldo , completed 1532. Caroldo says "Ioannes Badoaro" have begun to reign in "DCCCXXIX". An initial success, the peace agreement with the Narentans, did not last long. Peoples who used to be called "Schiavi", today "Schiavoni" ("populi chiamati Schiavi, hora volgarmente Schiavoni") lived as idol worshipers and went back to the Goths ("Idolatri, havendo origine da Gothi"). They lived as pirates so that peace with them could not be permanent. - Then Caroldo describes the sequence of overturns under "Ioannes". During this time, Obelerio, from whom the Dogat and the fatherland had been taken ("fu privato del Ducato et della Patria"), returned to Venice. The Doge gave orders to attack, but the Malamocco people, from whom Obelerio was descended, as Caroldo points out, supported Obelerio. This soon fell into the captivity of John (p. 57). He was “decapitato et il corpo suo sospeso alla ripa di San Giorgio”, so Obelerio was beheaded and his body was hung on the Riva di San Giorgio. - The Emperor wanted to show his inclination to the Doge, who had supported him against the Saracens of Sicily, and sent him the “Cadrega di San Pietro”, which was housed in San Pietro di Castello . According to Caroldo, in “Anthiochia” Peter and his successors sat on it (“San Pietro Apostolo et successori”). Then he comes to speak of the second rebellion, because at that time the doge was driven out by "Caroso Tribuno", a "huomo scelestissimo" by a conspiracy. He fled and tried to get support from Lothar's son Karl. Meanwhile, Caroso became a doge. This again displeased "Basilio Transmondo, Ioanni Mauritio, Dominico Orcianico" and others, a total of 30 men. They left Venice and went to “San Martin di Strà”, where many men joined them. Under "Dominico Orcianico, venuti a Rialto, assalirono il Palazzo et fecero prigione Caroso", they went to Rialto, attacked the Doge's Palace and captured Caroso. His eyesight was taken from him and he was expelled from Venice ("al quale cavorno gl'occhi, cacciandolo di Venetia") after having been a doge for six months (p. 57). His “complici”, namely “Diodato Gruro, Marino Patricio, Dominico Monetario et Tribuno Gradense” were hewn to pieces. Until the Doge's return, the Venetians wanted “Orso Vescovo Olivense” to rule the Ducat, together with “Basilio Transmondo et Ioanni Marcurio”. To everyone's satisfaction, the doge was reinstated in office. The conspiracies did not end there, however, because in his 10th year of rule there was a (renewed) conspiracy among the "Mastalici". When the Doge left the church of San Pietro di Castello, he was captured, his beard was cut off and a tonsure was forced on him (“con li capelli come cherico”, “with the hair like a cleric”), then he was sent to Grado, where he "finalmente" passed away.

For the Frankfurt lawyer Heinrich Kellner , who made the Venetian chronicle known in the German-speaking world, where he largely followed Marcello, in his Chronica published in 1574 that is Warhaffte actual and short description, everyone moved to Venice lived around 828 with the "Narentines" Peace was made that "made the sea there troubled". But this peace was broken by the Narentans, who "caught" and killed Venetian merchants who were on their way back from Apulia. Shortly afterwards "several nobles / which head was one / called Carosius / swore against the heart." The Doge fled, and said Carosius took his place. But against his "tyranny" "several of the nobles and princes opposed themselves in / including the most prestigious / Basilius Trasimundus / Joann Mauritius / and Dominicus Ortianus / and with thirty of the princes still in place". They imprisoned Carosius, "stabbed his eyes" and chased him away. In addition, the author states that there were many “if they kept it up with him / were killed.” After “Orsus / Bischoff zu Castello / Basilius Trasimundus / and Johann Mauritius ruled the community”, John returned from “France”. But now the Doge got into hostility with the "Mastalitiis (which were a very noble family in Venice)". They attacked him in San Pietro, "named the ducal trinkets and jewelry / cut off his hair and beard" and banished him to Grado in the eighth year of his reign, and "there he put on a Münchskap / and the rest of his time ends Life there. "

In the translation of the Historia Veneta by Alessandro Maria Vianoli , which appeared in Nuremberg in 1686 under the title Der Venetianischen Herthaben Leben / Government, und Die Aussterben / Von dem Ersten Paulutio Anafesto an / bis on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , these are also mentioned Narentans listed who robbed an Apulian fleet, but these were severely punished, according to Vianoli. But "uproar and rioting of a number of distinguished noblemen / who confessed to him after their life / whose head and originator was named Carosius", shook the "whole state". The “prince” saw himself “compelled” to “flee after France / and to leave the duchy to Carosio”. Among the three “noblest and noblemen” already listed by Marcello, there was again an uprising against Carosio, so that these three men and thirty others who “cannot endure his tyranny / have accidentally attacked / caught / gouged his eyes out / and finally / with many other his ringleaders / even driven into misery ”(p. 97). John was "called to come back to Venice again", but he brought "from a foreign country also foreign customs and traditions" with him, "which were not right for him" and which the Venetians were "completely repugnant to". A point of view that has not yet appeared in historiography. Eventually hostility to the "Mastolitiis", the noblest and most powerful family in town, led to his overthrow, including the loss of regalia and hair, then a monk's robe and imprisonment in Grado.

In 1687 Jacob von Sandrart wrote in his work Kurtze and an increased description of the origin / recording / territories / and government of the world-famous republic of Venice also, albeit very laconically, about “Johannes”, who “made against him by one of the most distinguished from Venice Verratsherey ”was overthrown under Caroso. Even if Caroso was overthrown again and Johannes was called back, "he was called by the noblest family in Venice / the Mastalici / attacked in a church and pushed into a monastery / in which he also shortly afterwards dismissed with Todt."

According to Johann Friedrich LeBret , who from 1769 onwards described the history of Venice in his four-volume State History of the Republic of Venice , John “at the beginning of the same was fortunate that an envoy from the Narentan Slavs came to him, who professed the Christian religion in Venice, and was baptized ”(p. 142). According to him, the Greek naval power was "in extreme decline". The Franconian Empire was also in the fight against Normans and Saracens, just as the latter fought Byzantium. The 810 expelled Obelerius also tried to regain power. But the Venetians under John completely destroyed Malamocco. "The Venetian people have at all times allowed themselves to be rushed by cruel and ill-considered conclusions," comments LeBret, after the head of Obelerius was impaled in front of Malamocco, not on the border with the Frankish Empire. In contrast to Obelerius' attempt to regain power, LeBret regards the aristocratic revolt against Johannes under Caroso as an attempt to wrest the "Badoer" - the Particiaco - the inheritance of the Doge's office. After him, "Carosus" was a tribune, a son of Bonicus. If one follows LeBret, however, Carosus soon trod "the rights of the entire nation of the nobility and the people under their feet". “As little as the noble houses could bear that the dignity of the duke should become hereditary, just as little could they admit that they and the people were deprived of the right to vote, whereby they believed that they were still receiving a prince with a certain respect for them can. ”(p. 163). Carosus was overthrown at LeBret because he disregarded the popular assembly. Johannes did return, but: "His wounded disposition made him sullen, and the insults inflicted had embittered him." Ultimately, he failed because of the nobility. "Since the Doge wanted to enforce the matter by force, the opposing party got the upper hand." So the doge was banished to Grado, where he soon died of "frustration". (P. 164).

In his work Cronologica storia dei vescovi Olivolensi , published in 1828, Alessandro Orsoni names the usurper "Carlo Carausio, o Caroso" and considers him a son of Bonoso, tribune from Aquileia. This therefore allied with a noble "Vittorio" in 835 in a conspiracy. With him Caroso was elected Doge by the popular assembly.

Bust of Samuele Romanin in the Panteon Veneto of the Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti , marble, a work by Augusto Benvenuti , created in 1896

Samuele Romanin granted "Giovanni" two pages in the first volume of his ten-volume opus' Storia documentata di Venezia in 1853 , adhering to the now firmly established number of 120 Doges - ignoring a number of fellow Doges and not including those today accepted first doge. When the Saracens attacked Sicily in 827, the new emperor sought the naval help of the Venetians ("rinforzandola ancora di navi veneziane da lui domandate in questa occasione" (p. 166)). Romanin notes that the Byzantine sources are silent only out of arrogance ("orgoglio") about the two subsequent naval operations of Venice, which were unsuccessful. When Obelerio tried to regain power, Romanin also believes, John wanted to set a 'terrible example' in Malamocco. He had the head of Obelerio impaled in Campalto near Mestre, on the territory of Emperor Lothar. According to Romanin, the inhabitants of the burned cities, especially Malamocco, were looking for revenge, and therefore Caroso was able to prevail. Against Caroso, after barely six months, his enemies gathered in Campalto, with the author adding Domenico Orcianico as the fourth to the known three leaders (in a footnote he only cites the chronicle of Andrea Dandolo as evidence). Caroso's main allies, namely "Domenico Monetario, Tritolo di Grado, Marino Patrizio e Diodato Gruro", were put down ("trucidato"). The Doge John returned solemnly at San Demetrio.

August Friedrich Gfrörer († 1861), in his history of Venice from its founding until 1084 , published eleven years after his death, interprets the fact that Doge's sons have stayed in Constantinople since 810 as evidence of an otherwise unknown treaty, according to which these sons acted as hostages . Accordingly, the honors, such as the titles that the emperors awarded these hostages, only kept appearances. The emperors had used the time "to get them used to Greek court air or to instill in them the Byzantine official spirit." Accordingly, in Gfrörer's eyes, the raising of the younger son to be a fellow doge was a breach of that "secret treaty of 809". According to Gfrörer, the father Agnello Particiaco only gave in because "Justinian had the entire power of the Eastern Empire to hold back" (p. 144). John had to "wander to the port city of Zara, which has been subject to Greek sovereignty since 810". In doing so, Gfrörer believes that Johannes, as Johannes Diaconus writes, first fled to the Slavs - according to Gfrörer, he was able to negotiate with the Frankish emperor from there, because the Slavs formally recognized the Frankish sovereignty - and only then to the Frankish court while Andrea Dandolo lets him flee straight to court. However, Gfrörer doubts that the man who had fled met with Emperor Ludwig the Pious , because he was only in Italy in 817. After being handed over to Agnellus and Justinianus, John was again sent to Constantinople as a hostage . Gfrörer argues that the father was ousted from power by his older son Justinianus. His proof is the founding deed of San Zaccaria , in which only Justinianus appears as doge, but not Agnellus. As he can see from the document, the foundation was also initiated by the Byzantine emperor. The ban on trading with the Muslims of Syria and Egypt also came from the emperor and was only taken over by the doges. It fits in Gfrörer's picture that “Angelo II” had to pay homage to the new emperor after the murder of Emperor Leo, and that he went to Constantinople - where he later died. According to Gfrörer: "Dandolo shares such facts which, in a way that does not grossly offend the sense of honor, show Veneto's dependence on Byzantium, and only clumsily keeps silent" (p. 149). For Gfrörer, not only was the dispute between the patriarchs a constant means of the Franks to rule into the lagoon, but also the uprising of the tribunes and of Monetarius, the “mint master”, was initiated by the Franks. This is indicated by the refuge of the mint master who also went to the Frankenhof. The same applies to the fact that the Istrian bishoprics were withdrawn from the Patriarch of Grado and Aquileia was added, and also the Synod of Mantua, which the pro-Frankish Pope Eugene II convened in July 827. There Grado was again degraded to the suffragan bishopric of Aquileias, which could have offered the Franks far-reaching opportunities to intervene in the lagunar situation. Finally, according to Gfrörer, the younger brother returned from the Byzantine capital on the orders of the emperor, who at the same time demanded naval aid against the Saracens. The apparently independent policy of Justinianus was therefore met with distrust in Constantinople, so that Justinianus had to accept the return of his brother, whom he did not even consider in his will, under pressure from the emperor. Andrea Dandolo suggests this, according to Gfrörer, only as far as possible, but "Anyone who has a real job to lead Clio's pen does not write for fools, but for those who know how to read necessary cases between the lines." P. 171). Regarding the Narentans, Gfrörer quotes Andrea Dandolo's chronicle: “The Narenta slaves sent a messenger to Dogen Johannes, asked for peace, and received it, but they did not keep it for long. However, the messenger ... was baptized at the Doge's request. Those Slavs, namely, who were descended from the Goths, clung to pagan gods and were pirating ”(p. 173). When Emperor Michael died in 829, Obelerius settled on Veglia; when John pulled against him, Malamocco rose at his back, from where Obelerio had come. John had the rebellious city destroyed and then stormed Veglia. He had the captured Obelerio executed. Since Obelerius did not strike until after the death of the emperor, Gfrörer assumes that he did not act on imperial orders. Had he succeeded in the blow, he would have “renewed the old relations with the Franks”. Gfrörer also places Caroso in this complicated process, which is controlled by the great empires. The author suspects that the Doge's subsequent rapprochement with the Franks caused the Byzantine party under Caroso to revolt. He deduces this from the positive reception the refugee found among the Franks. Other refugees gathered in Mestre “(ie on Franconian territory)” to overthrow Caroso, which they also succeeded in doing. Three years later, in 836, John was overthrown and banished in the familiar manner.

Pietro Pinton translated and annotated Gfrörer's work in the Archivio Veneto in annual volumes XII to XVI. Pinton's own account, which did not appear until 1883, came to completely different, less speculative results than Gfrörer. In connection with Obelerio's attempt to regain power, Caroso's overthrow and, in turn, his overthrow, Pinton believes more in internal conflicts, while Gfrörer at least suggests the usual external influences (p. 62 f.).

In 1861 Francesco Zanotto said cautiously in his Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia : “As some say,” the fleet against the Saracens was led by John, who had already been released from exile in Constantinople. Some claimed, according to Zanotto, that Justinianus only felt guilty on his deathbed and that he called his brother back. But the author doubts this, because given the length of the journey from Constantinople to Venice, John had no prospect of arriving in time for his brother's death. After Zanotto, Johannes first turned to the Narentans. "Perhaps with the support of his brother Valentino," Obelerio tried to overthrow. However, he succumbed and was executed. According to the author, his head was displayed first in Malamocco, then in Mestre - with which he equally accepted the contradicting statements of the sources and simply stored them one after the other. Zanotto also carefully differentiates between the asylum that John found after Caroso's expulsion from the information given by Dandolo, where he went to the court of Emperor Ludwig, and the information provided by the " Sagornina ", where he fled to the "young King Karl". The meeting place of the more than 30 men who rose up against Caroso and also came to Mestre, according to Zanotto, was the church of S. Martino di Stra or Strata. But even after the Doge's joyful reception in the city, which had in the meantime formed its own government, the Narentans caused new tumults by capturing a fleet from Benevento. The people's assembly, called “assemblea nazionale” by Zanotto, decided to strip him of his hair and beard and to ban him as a monk to Grado, even though he had saved this people eight years earlier.

In 1867, Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna, in the first volume of his Storia dei Dogi di Venezia, speculates about a different sequence of events. He leaves it open whether Johannes fled to Ludwig or Karl, but with him the rebels first chose Caroso, after fleeing, who in turn fell after six months. The Narentans with their raids, plus the repeated internal unrest and revolts, finally caused the people to banish John.

Heinrich Kretschmayr believed that the attempt by John, "Agnellus' second son, to secure co-dogat during the absence of his older brother Justinian in 814/15, was frustrated by Byzantine influence." He therefore believes that the overthrow of John, the son of a Dog, who later fled and was ultimately exiled to Constantinople, makes it clear that this overthrow of Byzantium had its origin. On the other hand, in the opposite direction, the older brother Justinianus was not only endowed with the honorary title Hypathos , but his son was even made a co-doge. In addition, Justinianus called himself "Imperialis hypatus et humilis dux Venetiae". Kretschmayr sees the naval operations in southern Italy and Sicily as an “army duty” for Venice, but this is expressly not verifiable for the eastern Mediterranean. Kretschmayr even claims that "the fleet was defeated". The head of Obelerius was only impaled on the Franconian border near San Martino, no longer in Malamocco. According to the author, the suppression of Caroso by a “party of order” was also controlled from Constantinople: “The party of order, supported without a doubt from Byzantium, was the stronger; the usurper was attacked, blinded and banished in his palace a few months later. ”“ Integraliter ”, John returned on the initiative of Bishop Orso of Olivolo. “The intact maintenance of Greek rule is clearly expressed in this report.” Finally, the Doge had to give way to the third uprising when the Mastalici overthrew him in 836. In Kretschmayr's eyes, the recurring uprising arose not only from personal but also from “political, anti-Greek tendencies” (p. 62).

swell

  • La cronaca veneziana del diacono Giovanni , in: Giovanni Monticolo (ed.): Cronache veneziane antichissime (= Fonti per la storia d'Italia [Medio Evo], IX), Rome 1890, pp. 59–171, here: p. 111 ( Digitized version ).
  • Luigi Andrea Berto (Ed.): Giovanni Diacono, Istoria Veneticorum (= Fonti per la Storia dell'Italia medievale. Storici italiani dal Cinquecento al Millecinquecento ad uso delle scuole, 2), Zanichelli, Bologna 1999 [ page 120 ] (based on Berto text Edition in Archivio della Latinita Italiana del Medioevo (ALIM) of the University of Siena).
  • Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chron. Altinate et Chron. Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. XLII, 136 f. ( Digitized version )
  • Roberto Cessi (ed.): Documenti relativi alla storia di Venezia anteriori al Mille , Padua 1942, vol. I, n. 53, pp. 93-99, here: p. 99 (personal signature in the will). ( Digitized version )
  • Ester Pastorello (Ed.): Andrea Dandolo, Chronica per extensum descripta aa. 460-1280 dC (= Rerum Italicarum Scriptores XII, 1), Nicola Zanichelli, Bologna 1938, p. 149. ( digitized , p. 148 f.)

literature

Remarks

  1. ^ Stanley Chojnacki : La formazione dello stato patrizio - Diritto, finanze, economia , chap. VIII: La formazione della nobiltà dopo la Serrata , in: Storia di Venezia (1997).
  2. ↑ Lodovico Antonio Muratori : Annali d'Italia dal principio dell'era volgare sino all'anno 1750 , Vol. XI, Florence 1827, p. 307.
  3. ^ Roberto Pesce (Ed.): Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo. Origini - 1362 , Centro di Studi Medievali e Rinascimentali "Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna", Venice 2010, p. 34 f.
  4. ↑ Pietro Marcello: Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia in the translation by Lodovico Domenichi, Marcolini, 1558, p. 20 f. ( Digitized version ).
  5. ↑ Șerban V. Marin (Ed.): Gian Giacomo Caroldo. Istorii Veneţiene , Vol. I: De la originile Cetăţii la moartea dogelui Giacopo Tiepolo (1249) , Arhivele Naţionale ale României, Bucharest 2008, pp. 56-58 ( online ).
  6. ↑ Heinrich Kellner : Chronica that is Warhaffte actual and short description, all life in Venice , Frankfurt 1574, p. 8r – 8v ( digitized, p. 8r ).
  7. ↑ Alessandro Maria Vianoli : Der Venetianischen Hertsehen Leben / Government, and Die Die / Von dem First Paulutio Anafesto an / bit on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , Nuremberg 1686, pp. 94-98, translation ( digitized ).
  8. ↑ Jacob von Sandrart : Kurtze and increased description of the origin / recording / areas / and government of the world famous Republick Venice , Nuremberg 1687, p. 19 ( digitized, p. 19 ).
  9. ↑ Johann Friedrich LeBret : State history of the Republic of Venice, from its origin to our times, in which the text of the abbot L'Augier is the basis, but its errors are corrected, the incidents are presented in a certain and from real sources, and after a Ordered the correct time order, at the same time adding new additions to the spirit of the Venetian laws and secular and ecclesiastical affairs, to the internal state constitution, its systematic changes and the development of the aristocratic government from one century to another , 4 vols., Johann Friedrich Hartknoch , Riga and Leipzig 1769–1777, Vol. 1, Leipzig and Riga 1769 ( digitized version ).
  10. ↑ Alessandro Orsoni: Cronologica storia dei vescovi Olivolensi, detti dappoi Castellani, e successivi patriarchi di Venezia, corredata di annotazioni illustranti l'ecclesiastico-civile Veneta storia , Gaspari S. Felice, Venice 1828, p. 41.
  11. ^ Samuele Romanin : Storia documentata di Venezia , 10 vol., Pietro Naratovich, Venice 1853–1861 (2nd edition 1912–1921, reprint Venice 1972), vol. 1, Venice 1853, pp. 158–166 in connection with his father , sole governing body on pp. 170–172 ( digitized version ).
  12. ↑ August Friedrich Gfrörer : History of Venice from its foundation to the year 1084. Edited from his estate, supplemented and continued by Dr. JB Weiß , Graz 1872, p. 143 ( digitized version ).
  13. ^ According to the footnote, Gfrörer cites "Muratori XII., 172." Gfrörer feels obliged to correct the assumption of Gothic descent.
  14. ^ Pietro Pinton: La storia di Venezia di AF Gfrörer , in: Archivio Veneto (1883) 23–63 ( digitized version ).
  15. ↑ Francesco Zanotto: Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia , Vol. 4, Venice 1861, pp. 28-30 ( digitized version ).
  16. ^ Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna : Storia dei Dogi di Venezia , Vol. 1, Venice 1867, o. P.
  17. ^ Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , 3 vol., Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, p. 61.
personal data
SURNAME Caroso
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Tribune, Doge of Venice
DATE OF BIRTH 8th century or 9th century
DATE OF DEATH at 829
Place of death Venice