Fortunatus II.

Fortunatus II. , Also Fortunatus of Grado , more rarely of Trieste (* in Trieste ; † March 12, 825 or 826 in Rome ), was bishop of Treviso from 777 , from 806 to 810 of Pula and from 803/810 to around 820 patriarch from Grado . In the struggle between the Frankish and the Byzantine emperors, he is considered an exponent of the pro-Frankish party. According to Roberto Cessi and Gherardo Ortalli , the elevation to patriarchal was an expression of distrust of the Doges of Venice , with the aim of reversing their pro-Byzantine orientation. Simone Dellagiacoma was considered the greatest of the 60 Patriarchs of Grado who ruled between 725 and 1451. Either because he joined a conspiracy against the Doge of Venice, or because he supported Lyudevit , a possibly early Croatian regional ruler against the Franks, he had to flee to Constantinople . From there he returned around 824/25, but died on the way to Rome or in the city. He was buried there as abbot of Moyenmoutier .

Life

In 777, Fortunatus, who was born in Trieste, was raised to the rank of Bishop of Treviso , which the Franks had recently conquered from the Lombards and made the capital of their margraviate Verona . Fortunatus successfully sought an alliance with the Franks under Charlemagne in the years that followed . As stated in a 12th century note in the oldest list of patriarchs, an elevation to the position of Bishop of Trieste cannot be confirmed.

The Placitum vom Risano, named after a river near Capodistria , with 172 witnesses. It mentions Slavs for the first time in the vicinity of Trieste and collects complaints against increased services, attacks and the like. It was also drawn by Fortunatus, at that time still Bishop of Pula.

After his uncle John , the Patriarch of Grado and Fortunatus' predecessor in office, was murdered in 802 at the instigation of the Venetian Doge John of the same name , Fortunatus succeeded him. He was in 803 by Emperor Karl and Pope Leo III. confirm in his office. He received the pallium on March 23, 803.

First he tried to overthrow the two Doges Johannes and his son Mauritius (II.) In order to take revenge on the murder of his predecessor, but the plan failed and he had to flee to Treviso together with his relative and ally Obelerius in order to keep himself to put there under the protection of the Franks. After the two doges were overthrown in 804 with Franconian support, Fortunatus' confidante Obelerius took over the office of doge. Fortunatus received a diploma at the Frankish court in March 803 , in which he was granted immunity in view of his services, as well as his clerics and followers. In a diploma that may have been issued at the same time, he was also given exemption from taxes on transit in any part of the Reich for four of his ships. He should have quickly become economically independent. In addition, he received the Moyenmoutier Abbey as a benefit . During his absence Grado was captured by the Ducat Venice . The Franks could hardly accept this.

Although Charles also promoted the church in northeastern Italy, rivalries such as the one between Aquileia and Grado stood in the way of this promotion . This applied to Istria , for example , where Charles wanted to strengthen Aquileia's rights on the one hand, and Fortunatus on the other hand was important for the common struggle against the pro-Byzantine groups in the upper Adriatic. Therefore he turned to Fortunatus in 803 as "Venetiarum et Istriensium patriarcha", with which he legitimized his obedience demands with a view to the Istrian bishoprics, especially Pola . Fortunatus went to Istria after the Venetian military attack, where he initiated the decision of Risano , the Placito del Risano , together with five bishops and other representatives from his birthplace Trieste, as well as from Istria . The patriarch and his entourage presented their demands to the royal messengers (Missi Dominici) of Emperor Charles, most of which were accepted. The region was granted extensive freedom from customs duties and - which was an unusual right in the Frankish feudal system - permission to regulate its own internal affairs and to elect its bishops and officials independently.

In 805 Fortunatus had to leave Grado for the first time, and he was replaced by the deacon John, from whom an inscription has been preserved in Grado. It reads: "Iohannes siquidem patriarcha, qui per quattuor annorum spacia Gradensem sedem vivente pastore usurpavit, sinodali censura depositu est". The patriarch usurped the patriarchal chair for four years, i.e. until 809.

In the course of this "usurpation" Fortunatus was raised to the position of Bishop of Pula in Istria on the initiative of Charles, who turned to the Pope , an office that he filled until 810. Since Fortunatus formally continued to hold the office of Patriarch of Grado, Pope Leo III refused . his appointment as Bishop of Pola initially from. Only after the agreement to give up the bishopric in Pola again, as soon as he was able to resume his seat in Grado, which he had lost "propter persecutionem Grecorum seu Veneticorum", did the Pope confirm Fortunatus in his office as Bishop of Pola. According to an allusion by the author of the Chronica de singulis patriarchis Nove Aquileie , Karl is said to have wished for Fortunatus as his spiritual father. The Pope, on the other hand, admonished the Emperor not to listen to Fortunatus' apologists, because his entire behavior was unworthy of an archbishop and the said apologists had been corrupted. This reproach is probably confirmed by the recovery of goods by Fortunatus' successor, Patriarch Venerius , who bequeathed the goods in question to his nephew Domenico.

Denarius from the time of Louis the Pious

In 810, King Pippin of Italy , one of the sons of Charlemagne, conquered a number of locations in the Venice lagoon . Although the Venetians successfully resisted the Frankish invasion and Obelerio had to resign from his Doge office due to his alliance with the Franks, Fortunatus was able to return to Grado. Charles recognized in 810 that the lagoon belonged to the Eastern Empire. The ambitious plans of Fortunatus thus lost their foundation, even if a source from the year 819 still calls him the 'Patriarch of the Church of Aquileia and Grado'. In the Patriarchate Grado, the cultural influence of the Franks grew in the following years, as can be seen in the works of art of the time.

In 815, at the instigation of Fortunatus, Charles' son Louis the Pious renewed the right for the Istrian region to raise its own bishops and officials. In 820 Fortunatus participated in a conspiracy to overthrow the new Doge of Venice, Agnello Particiaco . The plot, however, was exposed and Fortunatus was banished; as the Venetian chronicler Johannes Diaconus claims, after 27 years of reign. The Abbot of San Servolo assumed his office as Patriarch of Grado as John V.

According to Franconian sources, Fortunatus was overthrown for completely different reasons. He is said to have supported a rebellion in Pannonia inferior in 821 under the leadership of Lyudevit , whose core was around the Croatian Sisak . A war broke out, which the Franks ended victoriously; Constantinople appears to have been unable to support the rebellion. This victory can also be proven archaeologically, because an idiosyncratic archaeological culture with ties to Bohemia disappeared in western Croatia . After being asked to go to the imperial court, Fortunatus traveled to Istria to feign obedience - after all, as Abbot of Moyenmoutier he was obliged to obey the emperor - but soon afterwards fled to Zara , that is to the Byzantine sphere of influence. The local prefect of the province of Dalmatia had the escaped immediately brought to Constantinople . Either the Treaty of Aachen from 812 had changed the relations between Franks and Byzantines in the Grado-Istria area, or Emperor Ludwig had abandoned the policy of protection that his father had led until 814. Fortunatus stayed in the Byzantine capital until 824. Whether he used the stay, about which nothing is known, to purchase relics or jewelry for his church in Grades cannot be proven from the narrative sources.

Reliquary of St. Hydulph in the Moyenmoutier monastery

Fortunatus returned to the Frankish court with a group of Byzantine ambassadors, presumably to pursue his return to the patriarchal seat. But Ludwig referred the deposed patriarch to Rome . According to the chronicler von Moyenmoutier, he died in 826 during this stay in Rome, while after Johannes Diaconus he ended his life in Franconian territory. Said Frankish sources have not been interested in Fortunatus since he was sent to Rome by Ludwig. In December 824 the patriarch stayed in his Franconian monastery Moyenmoutier. A chronicler of the early 11th century, who in his Liber de sancti Hidulfi successoribus about the successors of St. Idulfo or Hydulphe von Moyenmoutier († 707) writes: "Mira autem dispositione divinitatis repertus est ibidem Fortunatus patriarcha venerabilis, qui gratia salutandi famosum principem, from Hierosalimis peregre disgressus erat", so Fortunatus has returned from Jerusalem. The same chronicler also reports how Fortunatus had sent an embassy to Harun ar-Raschid a few years earlier on behalf of Emperor Charles , although it remains unclear whether he himself took part in this embassy.

According to the necrology of the Moyenmoutier monastery, Fortunatus died on March 12th, probably in the year 825 or 826 at the latest, and February 26th is also given. He was buried in the monastery near the altar of Gregory the Great . In a kind of letter, possibly from the Byzantine exile, which he sent to his clerics in Grado and which resembles a will, Fortunatus lists his services to the Gradensian church and he expresses his hope for a speedy return. The document is not dated. This source is now seen more as an excerpt from a court record in which the patriarch tried to emphasize his merits while he was accused of stealing from the Grades church.

An archaeological find speaks in favor of Fortunatus' stay in Jerusalem. During the excavations at the church of S. Maria delle Grazie in Grades in 1925, an inscription on a ciborium came to light that was heavily fragmented (Grado, Museo Lapidario). Because of this, it was not possible to decipher its meaning for decades, especially since some letters are missing and the subsequent order of the fragments did not result in a meaningful text. In 2017, Maurizio Buora proposed the reading "GLORIO (sis) TEMPORIB (u) S TER B - caput - EATI M [VN] ER (a) Q (uae) E SION [DVX] IT SE (cum)", whereby " [tul] IT “is conceivable. "Sion" stands for "Jerusalem" (pp. 36–38), so the inscription reminds of the said stay in Jerusalem and the "munera" that Fortunatus brought with him.

This is important insofar as it is known that Harun ar-Raschid had a piece of the Cross of Christ sent to the Frankish emperor, which Helena , mother of Constantine the Great , had received. There is also a piece of the said cross in Grado, and thus one of the most important relics. Although the container is much younger, it may be a relic that Fortunatus had obtained. The temporal proximity to the robbery of the relics of the Evangelist Mark in the year 829 from Alexandria makes this scenario, according to Maurizio Buora, even more likely. In addition, it seems reasonable to assume that Fortunatus wanted to use these foundations to prepare his return to the Church of Grades.

reception

Pietro Marcello noted in 1502 in his work, later translated into Volgare under the title Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia , that "Mauritio Galbaio" had succeeded in what no one had done before, namely to make his son his successor. Marcello reprimands Johannes mainly for his behavior towards the Patriarch Fortunatus and the subsequent military intervention by Pippin . Fortunatus, who had to flee after his conspiracy against the Doges was exposed, spoke badly to Karl about the Venetians and upset him (“lo attizzò in tal modo”) that he gave his son the said order.

Francesco Sansovino (1512–1586) believes in his opus Delle cose notabili della città di Venetia, Libri II , published in Venice in 1587, in a conspiracy ('congiura') led by Obelerio and Fortunatus, the nephew of the murdered Patriarch of Grado, who “ i dogi “('the doges') 804 forced to flee.

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, and Die Die / Von dem First Paulutio Anafesto an / bis on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , was that of one Turm overthrew Patriarch John of Grado “a very sincere and honest man”, whose murder resulted in the Venetians beginning to “incite against them” the two exponents Fortunatus and Obelerio, “the then master of Malamocco”. Fortunatus had "determined to take revenge on them" (p. 67) for the unjust and through no fault of his ancestor's death. But the conspiracy was uncovered - "because they were not best attacked / still linked to the necessary secrecy ..." - and Fortunatus and Obelerio had to flee with their supporters.

Johann Friedrich LeBret knew from 1769 in his state history of the Republic of Venice that, after Obelerius had been elected duke by the supporters of Fortunatus who had fled to Treviso and the anti-dynastic thinking “nobles” who remained in Venice, “the mere rumor of this exclamation ”,“ made Johannes and Morizen so afraid ”that they decided to flee. Like the Doges, the Bishop "Christoph", appointed by the two Doges, fled to "France" and was never allowed to return either. When Johannes was still in office, he tried to neutralize the suspicious Pippin by saying that "Nicephorus", the Eastern Emperor Nikephorus I , should send a fleet to "keep Pipin in check" (p. 123). According to LeBret, Obelerius only came to Venice after learning of the Doge's flight. The driver of the coup attempt, which failed at the time, was Fortunatus, who felt justified in taking revenge for the death of his predecessor (p. 122). In a letter from Pope Leo to Charles, the Pope declares that Fortunatus “better send himself to a court than to care for the soul”. "Fortunatus, the restless Patriarch of Grado, who played his role so masterfully during the entire breakdown of the state, to its ruin, came back from France and brought the fugitive Bishop Christoph von Olivolo with him." LeBret seems inexplicable, why he brought Christoph with him, although his predecessor had not wanted to consecrate him, and although he had been a supporter of the overthrown Doges. "These two clergymen must have entered into such a close friendship through a special connection, of which we can find no trace." The author speculates that Karl himself may have achieved a balance between the clergy. When Fortunatus, “a man full of intrigues”, had to flee from the fleet of the Nicetas and thus for good, “So the state was freed by a prelate, whose greatest joy it was when the fatherland was put into utter disruption” (p . 125). Finally, the author mentions that after the death of his patron Karl, Fortunatus fell out of favor in connection with his all too independent politics, in particular when he supported “Lintwitus”, whom he “gave a lot of support” and “sent many skilled workers” to “their he used himself to fortify his castles and cities ”(p. 140). "The matter was betrayed to K. Ludwig by one of his priests, who called him to his court because of it." Fortunatus traveled to Zara after a detour via Istria, where he sought Byzantine protection. As a result, Fortunatus, who had already incited Karl ("because they knew from experience what kind of fire this man had blown at the court of Charlemagne"), was deposed. The abbot of the "Monastery of H. Servulus, Johannes" took Fortunatus' place. The new Emperor Michael sent Fortunatus, who had fled to Constantinople, with an embassy to Emperor Ludwig's court. Ludwig sent him to Rome with the embassy, ​​accompanied by some of his men, but Fortunatus died on the way.

Samuele Romanin believes in the first volume of his ten-volume opus Storia documentata di Venezia that Fortunatus had started a “vendetta” to avenge the death of his predecessor, with the author Johannes Diaconus following. After this Fortunatus won above all the Obelerius, the tribune of Malamocco, but also numerous other men as accomplices (“complici”, p. 136). In interpreting the negotiations between Karl and Nikephoros, Romanin followed Andrea Dandolo's statements, according to which all of Northern Italy should go to the Franconian Empire, while Venice and the cities of Dalmatia, because they were loyal to Byzantium ("costanti nella sincera devozione all'imperio orientale") ), should remain with the Eastern Empire as well as its southern Italian areas. Also follows the author Andrea Dandolo, who describes how Fortunatus incited Charlemagne by reporting that the Venetians were completely attached to Byzantium - "qui Constantinopolitano Imperio totaliter adhaerere videbantur" he quotes Dandolo - and that they had murdered his predecessor (p. 137 ). The Doges fled, with father Johannes going to Mantua, but his son Mauritius finding an overpowering opponent at the imperial court. In contrast, Fortunatus recommended (Romanin does not resolve this contradiction either) the bishop "Cristoforo". Even when 'his friend' Obelerius was elected Doge, he could not dare to bring him back to the patriarchal chair because of his Francophone commitment. In addition, there had been renewed fighting between Jesolans and Equilians. The leading families are said to have moved from Equilio and Grado to Malamocco. Fortunatus, meanwhile, operated his return from Campalto . First, however, with the support of Charles, he settled on Istria, where he became Bishop of Pola. Together with Cristoforo, who was again bishop of Olivolo, he ran the Franconian cause after his return to Grado. With the Niceta's fleet, the balance of power changed again. Another Cristoforo became bishop of Olivolo, Fortunatus fled to the Frankish Empire. With the peace treaty of Aachen, Karl recognized the special role of Venice and Fortunatus was able to return to Grado (p. 158). But in 820 the patriarch stumbled upon another attempt to overthrow a doge. He went to the Frankish Empire, where he died, or, as others report, in Rome.

August Friedrich Gfrörer († 1861) believed in his History of Venice, which was published posthumously in 1872, from its foundation to 1084 , that Fortunatus had expressly subordinated the dioceses of Istria, which had been withdrawn from the Patriarchate in 771 by the Lombards. As Andrea Dandolo observed, Karl did not consider Lake Veneto as part of his kingdom (p. 97). In addition, according to Gfrörer, the Franconian “Eginhard” notes: “In 803 the Patriarch Fortunatus appeared at the Frankish court, coming from the land of the Greeks”. Fortunatus also complained to Gfrörer that the Venetians had murdered his predecessor and that “the Venetians had made up their minds to attach themselves completely to the empire of Constantinople”. In Treviso, his partisan Obelerius was elected Doge, who came from Malamocco, "as the center of the Lombard party, which through the power of circumstances gradually turned into a Frankish one after the fall of King Desiderius" (p. 98 f.). Fortunatus and Christoph stayed “in the village of Cypriano (near Mestre) because they were not allowed to enter the islands”. By cunning he brought another Johann, the Bishop of Olivolo, into his power, but he was able to flee and complained to the Doge about his mistreatment. Nevertheless, Fortunatus managed to get Christoph back through Olivolo first, only to return to Grado himself (p. 103). Until then Obelerius had probably not been able to get his ally back, either because of the Greek party - Gfrörer sees only this and the Franconian party at work everywhere - or because of enemies from the Franconian party itself. So it was Fortunatus who responded to the promise to be supported himself, namely then by the pro-Byzantine groups, first brought back the former opponent Christoph, in order to then take his doge seat again.

After the posthumous editor Dr. Johann Baptist von Weiß had forbidden the Italian translator Pietro Pinton to annotate Gfrörer's statements in the translation, Pinton's Italian version appeared in the Archivio Veneto in the annual volumes XII to XVI. However, Pinton had achieved that he was allowed to publish his own account in the aforementioned Archivio Veneto, which did not appear until 1883. Although Pinton often came to completely different, less speculative results than Gfrörer, he largely agreed with the author in connection with the first Doge dynasty. But Pinton believes that Gfrörer was threatened by the Franks when he claimed that by the time the bishop was assassinated, almost all of the land ruled by the two Doges was threatened. In doing so, he held against Gfrörer that he had come to incorrect conclusions about the motivations of those involved through a wrong chronology. This is evident from the fact that although he had written that Andrea Dandolo had copied from Paulus Diaconus , after that he only followed the Doge's work without Gfrörer noticing the differences between the two authors (pp. 40-42) . Pinton also does not believe that there was a conspiracy under the aegis of the Franks with the subsequent flight of Fortunatus, because after Obelerius came to power, he was hardly denied return for nothing (p. 53), and above all, Obelerius was , according to Gfrörer, one of the heads of the Fortunatus Franconian conspiracy, supported with a fleet for the reconquest of Dalmatia, and his brother Beatus was given the title of Ipato , a consul (p. 55). The Byzantine fleet anchored below him in the lagoon. Overall, Pinton recognized Fortunatus' ties with the Franks, but Gfrörer misinterpreted the composition of the revolutionaries of 804, more precisely their respective roles in the dispute between the empires.

In 1861, Francesco Zanotto believed in his Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia that Fortunatus had led a "vendetta" against the Galbaii, a blood revenge that was ultimately crowned with success. At the behest of Charlemagne, this act led both doges into exile.

For Heinrich Kretschmayr , Fortunatus was "a personal favorite of Charlemagne", he was "violent, ambitious, unsteady, bitter through the murder of relatives, personally threatened by stalking by the Greek party". He was the champion of a Frankish party, but also of those who felt “displeasure” “about the act of violence in Grado”. He fled to Treviso with his followers, "then hurried alone to the court of Charlemagne in Selz". Kretschmayr assumes that the "haughty rejection of his application for an alliance by Emperor Nikephoros" was the reason that he supported Fortunatus in his efforts to overthrow the "Duces loyal to Greece". Fortunatus not only received the Moyenmoutier Monastery and the aforementioned freedom of trade, but also the commitment to subordinate the Istrian bishoprics to Grado. In 804 Obelerius overthrew the pro-Byzantine doges and made his brother Beatus a fellow doge. The author asks rhetorically: “Was this revolution of 804 the victory of a Frankish party in Veneto?” “As recently as 805, both Duces decided on strict submission to the Franconian Empire” and “In the Reich Partition Act of February 6, 806, Veneto, Istria and Dalmatia assigned to King Pippin's share ”(p. 55 f.). A Byzantine fleet appeared in the spring of 807, Obelerius submitted, the Greeks took Beatus, Christophorus von Olivolo, “Fortunat's protégé”, and the tribune Felix, “one of the main conspirators of 804”, hostage. Fortunatus had already escaped capture at the rumor of the approaching fleet by fleeing into the Franconian Empire. Pippin, who Kretschmayr assumes that he not only attempted to conquer Venice but brought it to a successful conclusion, first reached an understanding with Niketas on a peace that would last until August 808. Beatus returned, "trained in the Greek interest," and the third brother, Valentinus , was also made a doge. Another fleet from Constantinople appeared in 809, but it was not possible to capture Comacchio. Pippin now used the withdrawal of this fleet for the decisive attack on the lagoon, in revenge for "the apostasy of 807 and the malicious drifts of 809" - the Doges had brought the Frankish-Byzantine negotiations to failure. After "Heracliana in the north, Brondolo, Chioggia, Pelestrina and Albiola in the south", "also Malamocco - there is no doubt about that" fell after heavy fighting near Albiola. After Kretschmayr, the Doges also became Pippin's prisoners. Rialto might not be conquered, however, or Pippin's army might even suffer a setback. Otherwise, the author believes that Rialto has been conquered "despite all Venetian fables". Venice remained Frankish, even when another Byzantine fleet appeared, which could only repel a Frankish attack on Dalmatia. During this time Fortunatus returned to Grado, before or after the Peace of Aachen. According to Kretschmayr, “Konstantin Porphyrogennetos” can only report two events from Venice's history a century and a half later, namely the flight from Attila and the conquest by Pippin (p. 58).

In his History of Venice , John Julius Norwich , who largely ignores the history of reception, emphasizes that Fortunatus, "more bitterly opposed to the regime of the Galbaii, than even his uncle had been", immediately fled to the Franconian Empire. Under the alleged leadership of Obelerius, the opposition gathered in Treviso, which finally achieved a breakthrough in 804. But now there was fighting within the lagoon, especially between Heraclea and Malamocco, the new regiment got into a situation similar to that of the Galbaii before. But now Fortunatus appeared, "fresh from the court of Charlemagne with an offer". This offer consisted of the reinstatement of his person and the recognition of Franconian sovereignty over the lagoon, in return the two Doges remained safely in office under Franconian protection. After Norwich, neither Obelerio nor his brother Beatus had any sympathy for the Franks, but the two brothers now had little choice. Therefore, they performed at Christmas 805 the emperor in Aachen the homagium . Obelerius even went so far as to look for a wife for himself from the women of the court, who for Norwich was the “first Dogaressa known to history”.

swell

• Ester Pastorello (Ed.): Andrea Dandolo, Chronica per extensum descripta aa. 460-1280 dC , (= Rerum Italicarum Scriptores XII, 1), Nicola Zanichelli, Bologna 1938, pp. 126-129, 131, 140, 142 f. ( Digitized version )
• 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. 100 -103, 105, 107 f. ( Digitized version )
• Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chron. Altinate et Chron. Gradense) , Rome 1933, pp. 44, 99 f., 125.
• Roberto Cessi (ed.): Documenti relativi alla storia di Venezia anteriori al Mille , Padua 1942, Vol. I, n. 37–45, p. 56–78 ( digitized, p. 56 ), n. 47, p. 81 f. ( Digitized, p. 81 )
• Georg Heinrich Pertz : Einhardi Annales , Hannover 1826, pp. 191, 208, 212, also in Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum , Hannover 1845. ( digitized version )
• Friedrich Kurz (Ed.): Annales Regni Francorum inde from a. 741 usque ad a. 829 qui dicuntur Annales Laurissenses Maiores et Einhardi (= Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum, VI), Hanover 1895, p. 155 f. ( Digitized ), 165 ( digitized ).
• Georg Waitz (Ed.): Liber de sancti Hidulfi successoribus in Mediano Monasterio , (= Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum, IV), Hanover 1841, p. 88.
• Pietro Kandler (Ed.): Codice diplomatico istriano , Triest 1862-1865, Vol. I, pp. 69, 108, 110-128 ( Regesti ).
• Giovanni Monticolo : Chronica de singulis patriarchis Nove Aquileie , in: Cronache veneziane antichissime (= Fonti per la storia d'Italia, IX), Rome 1890, p. 14 f.
• Karl Hampe (Ed.): Leonis III papae Epistolae X (= Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Epistolae, V, 3), Hannover / Berlin 1898, p. 94 f. ( Digitized version )
• Karl Hampe (Ed.): Epistolae variorum , Hanover / Berlin 1898, n.10 , p. 313 f. ( Digitized version )
• Bernhard von Simson (Ed.): Annales Mettenses priores (= Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum, X), Hanover / Leipzig 1905, p. 89 f. ( Digitized version ), 102.
• Engelbert Mühlbacher (ed.): The documents of the Karolinger , I, Hanover 1906, p. 269 f. ("Charlemagne gives the Church of Grado immunity") ( digitized version )
• Paul Fridolin Kehr : Italia pontificia , VII, 2, Berlin 1925, p. 40 f.
• Cesare Manaresi (ed.): I placiti del Regnum Italiae , Rome 1955, n. 17, pp. 50-56.
• Reinhold Rau (Ed.): Annales regni Francorum (= sources on the Carolingian history of the empire, part 1, selected sources on the German history of the Middle Ages, FSGA, vol. 5), Darmstadt 1955, reprint Darmstadt 1974, pp. 9–155, here: Pp. 126, 138.
• 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.
• Ferdinando Ughelli , Nicolò Coleti (Ed.): Italia sacra , V, Venice 1720, Sp. 1094–1103 ( digitized version )
• Flaminio Corner: Ecclesiae Venetae antiquis monumentis nunc etiam primum editis illustratae ac in decades distributae , Vol. V, Venice 1749, pp. 103, 105.
• Flaminio Corner: Ecclesiae Torcellanae antiquis monumentis nunc etiam primum editis illustratae , Venice 1749, I, p. 142 ( digitized version ).

literature

• Daniela Rando :  Fortunato. In: Fiorella Bartoccini (ed.): Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani (DBI). Volume 49:  Forino – Francesco da Serino. Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, Rome 1997, pp. 235-239.
• Maurizio Buora: Fortunato II, Grado e il dono delle reliquie da Gerusalemme , in: Ce fastu? (2017) 35-47. ( academia.edu )
• Sergio Tavano: Fortunato II , in: Dizionario biografico dei Friulani.
• Sergio Tavano: Fortunato II, patriarca di Grado , in: Cesare Scalon (ed.): Nuovo Liruti. Dizionario biografico dei friulani , Vol. I: Il medioevo , Udine 2006, pp. 335–338.
• Vittorio Piva: Il patriarcato di Venezia e le sue origini , Vol. I, Venice 1938, pp. 86-88.
• Aldo Tassini: Fortunato di Grado e il placito di Risano , in: Pagine istriane, s. 3, I (1950) 22-28.
• Roberto Cessi : Venezia ducale , Vol. I, Venice 1963, pp. 133-138, 140-142, 145-147, 152 f., 174-185.
• Giuseppe Bovini: Grado paleocristiana , Bologna 1973, pp. 79 f., 95, 99, 133, 135, 140, 163-165, 219-221.
• Gherardo Ortalli : Venezia dalle origini a Pietro II Orseolo , in: Storia d'Italia, Vol. I, Turin 1980, pp. 377-381, 387.
• Antonio Carile : Chronica Gradensia nella storiografia veneziana , in: Storia d'Italia , Vol. I, Turin 1980, pp. 122-124.
• Gherardo Ortalli : Il Ducato e la "civitas Rivoalti". Tra carolingi, bizantini e sassoni , in: Lellia Cracco Ruggini , Massimiliano Pavan, Giorgio Cracco , Gherardo Ortalli (eds.): Storia di Venezia dalle origini alla caduta della Serenissima , vol. I: Origini - Età ducale , Rome 1992, p. 725-790, pp. 728 f.
• Simone Dellagiacoma: Fortunato di Trieste patriarca di Grado, 803-825 , in: Archeografo triestino, ns 3 (1872-1875) 317-339. ( Google Books )
• Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, p. 54, 402-404 (mentions a "Fortunatus" who had seized the patriarchy from 626-627 (p. 24), then simply "Fortunatus" without distinction in his list “Patriarchs of Grado” on pp. 402–404).

Remarks

1. ↑ The name version as Professor "Della Giacoma" seems to be based on an error by Roberto Cessi .
2. ↑ Simone Dellagiacoma: Fortunato di Trieste patriarca di Grado, 803-825 , in: Archeografo triestino, ns 3 (1872-1875) 317-339, here: p 317th
3. ^ Place near Koper .
4. ↑ Maurizio Buora: Fortunato II, Grado e il dono delle reliquie da Gerusalemme , in: Ce fastu? (2017) 35–47, here: p. 38, note 19, there cited from Amelio Tagliaferri : Corpus della scultura altomedievale , vol. X: Le diocesi di Aquileia e Grado , Spoleto 1981, n. 540–543.
5. ↑ This also mentions the Chronicon Venetum ( edition by Henry Simonsfeld ).
6. ↑ For classification cf. Hrvoje Gračanin: Lower Pannonia before and after the Treaty of Aachen , in: Mladen Ančić, Jonathan Shepard, Trpimir Vedriš (eds.): Imperial Spheres and the Adriatic. Byzantium, the Carolingians and the Treaty of Aachen (812) , London and New York 2018, pp. 207–224.
7. ↑ Maurizio Buora: Fortunato II, Grado e il dono delle reliquie da Gerusalemme , in: Ce fastu? (2017) 35–47, here: p. 39.
8. ↑ Maurizio Buora: Fortunato II, Grado e il dono delle reliquie da Gerusalemme , in: Ce fastu? (2017) 35–47, here: p. 41.
9. ↑ Giordano Brunettin: Il cosiddetto testamento del patriarca Fortunato ii di Grado (825) , in: Memorie storiche forogiuliesi 71 (1991) 51–123.
10. ↑ Pietro Marcello : Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia in the translation by Lodovico Domenichi, Marcolini, 1558, p. 8 f. ( Digitized version ).
11. ↑ Francesco Sansovino : Delle cose notabili della città di Venetia , Felice Valgrisio, Venice 1587, p. 86 f. ( Digitized version ), then again printed at Salicato at the request of Girolamo Bardi , Venice 1606, p. 58 ( digitized version ).
12. ↑ Alessandro Maria Vianoli : Der Venetianischen Herthaben life / government, and withering / from the first Paulutio Anafesto to / bit on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , Nuremberg 1686, translation ( digitized ).
13. ↑ 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 the next , 4 vols., Johann Friedrich Hartknoch , Riga and Leipzig 1769–1777, Vol. 1, 1769.
14. ^ Samuele Romanin : Storia documentata di Venezia , 10 vols., Pietro Naratovich, Venice 1853-1861, 2nd edition 1912-1921, reprint Venice 1972 ( digitized from vol. 1 , Venice 1853). The enormous historical work has a volume of about 4000 pages.
15. ^ Samuele Romanin: Storia documentata di Venezia , vol. 1, Pietro Naratovich, Venice 1853, p. 135; he quotes Andrea Dandolo in the footnote there: “In hoc foedere, seu decreto, nominatim firmatum est, quod Venetiae urbes et maritimae cevitates Dalmatiae, quae in devotione imperii illibate persisterant, ab imperio occidentali nequaquam debeant molestari, invadi velet minorari et quod possessionibus , libertatibus et immunitatibus, quas soliti sunt habere in italico regno pacifice perfruantur. Dand. p. 151 ".
16. ↑ 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. 96 ( digitized version ).
17. ^ Pietro Pinton: La storia di Venezia di AF Gfrörer , in: Archivio Veneto (1883) 23–63, here: p. 52 ( digitized version ).
18. ↑ Francesco Zanotto: Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia , Vol. 4, Venice 1861, pp. 13–15 ( digitized version ).
19. ^ Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , 3 vol., Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, p. 54.
20. ^ John Julius Norwich : A History of Venice , Penguin, London 2003.

predecessor	Office	successor
John of Grado	Patriarch of Grado 803-820	John V.
Aemilianus	Bishop of Pula 806–810	John I.
Tiziano	Bishop of Treviso 777–803	Landolo