Orso II. Particiaco

Orso II. Particiaco or Ursus II. Particiacus , later also Partecipazio , also Orso II. Badoer (* 2nd half of the 9th century, † after 932 in Ammiana ), was the 18th Doge of Venice according to the historiographical tradition controlled by the state . Little is known about his reign, from 912 to 932.

His son Peter was robbed on his return journey from Constantinople and handed over to Tsar Simeon of Bulgaria , who released him, probably for a ransom . With two of the post-Carolingian rulers, there were renewals of the trade privileges that went back to the time of Charlemagne . In one case, Venice was given the right to mint its own coins . In the absence of any news to the contrary, the years 912 to 932 are considered unusually peaceful, and some historians consider the years of peaceful economic expansion.

Family, relationship between Particiaco and Badoer

The Particiaco were among the most powerful and influential tribunician families in Venice. Together with the Candiano and Orseolo, it was the Particiaco-Badoer family who, according to traditional considerations, provided most of Venice's doges from 810 to the constitutional reform of 1172. The first doge of a Venice de facto independent of Byzantium was Agnello Particiaco (810-827), followed by his sons Giustiniano and Giovanni (829-836). After almost thirty years of government Pietro Tradonicos the Particiaco returned with Orso I. back to the Dogenthron. He was followed by his son Giovanni II. As the last Particiaco, or Partecipazio, according to the later historiography, his son Pietro Badoer (939-942) from a branch of the Particiaco family came to the Dogenthrone seven years after the death of Orso II . In addition, several bishops and patriarchs emerged from the families of the Particiaco and the Badoer.

Belonging to the Particiaco is claimed in the Chronicle of John the Deacon , who wrote about 80 years after the Doge's death. The Chronicon Altinate gives it the nickname Paureta . Johannes Diaconus calls him the father of Pietro Badoer, who ruled from 939 to 942, the Chronicon Altinate identifies the Badoer with the Particiaco. Badoer 's brother Giovannis II. Particiaco, who died before 886 after being seriously injured during his capture by Count Marino of Comacchio, is considered to be a rather weak indication of equation . Assuming that this Badoer was the father of Orsos II, his son could have adopted the grandfather's baptismal name as a cognomen .

Doge's Office

The Bulgarian Empire at the time of Simeon I.

Ursus was only elected Doge by the popular assembly several months after the death of his predecessor. Shortly after the election, he sent his son Peter to Constantinople to see Emperor Leo VI. who, as has been customary for some time, bestowed the title of protospatharius on the son of the Dog . On the way back, Peter fell - probably in 911 or 912 - into the hands of the ruler of Zahumlje ( Herzegovina ) Michael , actually Mihailo Višević , who handed him over to the Bulgarian tsar Simeon , with whom he was allied against Byzantium. He released the son of the Dog for a ransom . The freedman later appeared on a diplomatic mission led by Domenico, the future bishop of Malamocco .

Ursus kept Venice more in the sphere of influence of Constantinople , but also maintained good relations with the Regnum Italicum . This was the most important gateway for Venetian goods from the Orient. In 924, Rudolf II , King of Burgundy and Italy, granted Venice the right to strike coins. A delegation traveled to Pavia to the court of Rudolf and on February 28, 925 received another renewal of the privileges that had last been confirmed in 891. On February 26, 927, the Venetian diplomacy received such a confirmation from Hugo of Provence , who had become king of Italy in 926. With each of these renewals, mostly on the occasion of a change of ruler, the Venetians obtained more favorable clauses, most recently Marco Pozza.

In 931 Ursus abdicated and retired to the monastery of Santi Felice e Fortunato on La Salina , which at that time was still part of the later submerged city of Ammiana . There, in the north of the Venice lagoon , he died at an unknown time and was also buried in the city.

After his death he was venerated as a blessed by the Venetians , but the cult was not recognized by the church . In the Capella Morosini of the Madonna dell'Orto church , an ideal portrait recalls the Doge, whose appearance is unknown. The reason for his resignation is unknown, but an indication of internal conflicts could be that his successor Pietro II Candiano pursued a much more aggressive foreign policy.

The ransomed son of a dog, Pietro Badoer or Petrus Badoarius, became a dog himself in 939. Little is known about him, much like his father. He probably pursued a peaceful foreign policy, while his successor was again a doge from the House of Candiano.

reception

For the Venice of the 14th century, the interpretation given to the rule of the second Ursus was of symbolic importance in several respects. The focus of the Chronicle of Andrea Dandolo represents in perfect form the views of the long-established political leadership bodies that have steered historiography especially since this Doge. The focus was always on the questions of the political independence between the disintegrating empires, of law from its own roots, and therefore of the derivation and legitimation of their claim to territorial and maritime domination, because Venice was forced at this time to be extremely independent in a politically fragmented one Environment to act. The struggle between Bulgaria and Byzantium played an essential role, but so did the relationship with the empires that had emerged in Italy. The chroniclers know particularly little to report about Ursus.

The Bulgarian Tsar Simeon, persecuted by Hungary, takes refuge in Silistra , the illuminated manuscript of the Skylitz , originally made in the 1070s; illustrated copy from around 1150 to 1175, made in the vicinity of the Norman royal court in Palermo, Biblioteca Nacional de España in Madrid, fol. 108v

The oldest vernacular chronicle, the Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo, from the late 14th century, like Andrea Dandolo, presents the events on a level that has long been familiar and dominated by individuals, which once again gave the Doges greater power. The decision-making processes remain in the dark. According to this chronicle, "Orso Badoer" - the descent of the Badoer from the Particiaco had also already established itself - sent his son Piero to Constantinople, where he received "honorificentie et dignitade grandissime", the most important honors and dignities. On the way back, however, he was imprisoned by “Michiel bam, overo duxe” “frauodolentemente” and handed over to the Bulgarian ruler Simeon along with his “bando” - probably his companion. In this chronicle the son of the dog managed to escape. Otherwise, the Chronicle reports nothing about the Doge's tenure, except that he ruled for 19 years and where he was buried.

Pietro Marcello also reports very briefly . In 1502, in his work, later translated into Volgare under the title Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia , he led the Doge in the section “Orso Badoero, Doge XVII.” He ruled there from “DCCCCIX”, ie from 909. Marcello only reports on the capture of the Son of Dog and Orso's retreat to the monastery in the 11th year of his reign. He does not name the Croat who took Pietro prisoner, but only dubs him “un certo Signorotto di Dalmatia”.

The historical work of Gian Giacomo Caroldo , which he completed in 1532, also tells little about the new Doge “Orso Badoaro 2 °”, but rather initially tells relatively detailed about the capture of his son “Pietro”. “Per gratificarsi il Greco Imperatore”, Orso sent his son to Constantinople, where, in addition to honors and gifts, he also received the title of protospatharius , a sword-bearer. He was captured on the border to Croatia and brought to Bulgaria. In order to free Pietro from the hands of the Bulgarian ruler, Orso sent "Dominico Archidiacono di Malamocho" to the court with many presents. He obtained his release and on his return was raised to the rank of Bishop of Malamocco 'to compensate for his efforts and careful approach'. However, this happened against his will. From then on he lived with his family in "castità" ('chastity'). Finally he resigned from his office and went to Jerusalem. Under the pretext that the Chioggiots are not meeting their obligations as quickly as they should, “contro loro fece qualche innovatione”. The chronicler does not explain what this “innovation” consisted of. But the look into the privileges and also the doge's will to reassure them probably led to a renewal of their privileges. When King Hugo was in Pavia in 927 , Ursus sent "Ambassatori, Ioanni Flabanico et Stephano Caloprino" there, who achieved the renewal of the earlier privileges. The doge, “poco prezzando le cose mondane”, withdrew from the “little esteemed worldly life” after 20 years of rule and went as a monk to “San Felice d'i Mani”, which was once known in Ammiana under the name “San Stephano ”had passed. He was also buried there. Caroldo thinks that Orso was "di singular ingegno et religione, amator di giustitia, elemosinario et pieno di virtuosi costumi".

In the Chronica published in 1574, this is Warhaffte actual and short description, all the lives of the Frankfurt lawyer Heinrich Kellner in Venice , who based on Marcello made the Venetian chronicle known in the German-speaking area, is "Orsus Badoer the Seventeen Hertzog". Kellner cites his “piety / honesty and goodness” as the reasons for choosing the new Doge “im jar 909”. His son was "sent to the emperor in Constantinople / and knighted by him / and given many gifts." But on the return trip he was "captured by a gentleman in Dalmatia / taken in all his gifts / and he was banished in Misiam." "The doge resigned from his office" in the eleventh year of his regiment "," became a munch / and spent the rest of his life in the monastery at S.Felice. "

In the translation of Alessandro Maria Vianoli's Historia Veneta , which appeared in Nuremberg in 1686 under the title Der Venetianischen Herthaben Leben / Government, und Absterben / Von dem First Paulutio Anafesto an / bis on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , the doge “Ursus II. Badoarius, called the Eighteenth Hertzog ”. Vianoli, who describes the doge as “extremely brave prince”, as “extremely pious” etc., reports on the capture of “his son Petri”, as he was told by “Michaele Ban” “as a slave to Simon the king from Misien was venerated ”and how he“ escaped the hands of an Ertz chaplain from Malamocco and was released ”(p. 122). Then he lists which churches were built during this time. "Yes, the Hertzog himself [...] handed over the Hertzogthum / accepted the spiritual clothing / became a Münch / and spent the rest of his life in the monastery of S. Felice [...] in the greatest happiness and devotion." His successor " Petrus II. Candianus ”was elected in 932.

"B. Vrsvs Badvario Dux “, oil on canvas, early 17th century, Madonna dell'Orto

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 even more laconically than about the Doge's predecessor: “In the year 909 (XVII.) Ursus Badoarius, who eilff Year reigned. Finally, however, he abdicated voluntarily and went to a monastery / although others write / that he became bishop of Venice. "

According to Johann Friedrich LeBret , who published his four-volume State History of the Republic of Venice from 1769 , the “Venetian people” had “such respect for the Badoer house that after the tribune's death they again elevated a participant to the throne”. At the same time, it feared no overwhelming power of the family, because the doge was “modest, protected justice, was benevolent towards the poor, […] but brought a certain penchant for religion with him on the throne, which is better for a monk than a prince and who finally determined the prince to exchange the prince's coat for the monk's robe. ”Then he describes how the Doge sent his son to Constantinople“ according to the custom of the Venetian princes ”, but how he - contrary to the Particiaco's custom -Family - did not make his son a fellow Doge after the Doge election, probably out of mistrust. When the Croatians captured Pietro, he sent him to Bulgaria “to make the prince of the Venetians all the more offended”. LeBret finally claimed that Pietro had been freed by "Dominicus, an archdeacon of Malamocco", "by a large sum of money". According to LeBret: “The character of the Italians always remains the same. All things are of as much value to them as they can get money for ”(p. 189), whereby he combines this with sharp criticism of the curia of his presence. He also mentions the contract confirmations with Berengar and Rudolf. All in all, the peaceable doge "made his people happy", he "expanded the plot, and provided his people with the most essential advantages without the sound of weapons". "But all riches were in the hands of a few noble houses, which had done the most shipping".

In 1853 , Samuele Romanin describes the peaceful reign of Ursus II in the first of the ten volumes of his Storia documentata di Venezia in much less detail, almost laconically, the alleged character of which he only goes into marginally. Instead, he discusses in detail the later confirmed privilege for Chioggia , which he dates to the year 919, i.e. the reign of Doge Ursus, not, as usual, that of his predecessor - whereby he uses a large number of conjectures to explain why there chronologically unsuitable names appear (only copies of the document have survived), yes, even a doge named Dominicus, not mentioned anywhere else, appears. According to Romanin, when Pietro, the son of a dog, could have 'perhaps' had a motive for hostility towards Venice. In any case, Romanin also claims that Pietro was ransomed for a “grossa somma”. The doge, who did everything to make Venice richer, used a large part of his fortune as charitable gifts. In 924 the Doge had sent Domenico, who had meanwhile been raised to Bishop of Malamocco and who had already obtained the release of the Doge's son, and Stefano Coloprino, to Rudolf's court in Pavia . The negotiators achieved the confirmation of the Venetian privileges, which has now become customary, whereby the Ripaticum no longer appears, a levy for the landing of the ships - in contrast to the contract with Hugo of Provence , where it appears again. However, the contract with Rudolf allowed the Republic of Venice to mint its own coins for the first time. Romanin assumes that there were references to a Zecca under Charlemagne (p. 224 f.), Similar to what the Pactum Lotharii of 840 already knew "libras veneticorum". During this time, only imperial coins with the inscription "Venecias" were minted. The custom of minting foreign coins in Venice was actually prohibited by the Grand Council only in 1356 (p. 226). Finally, the author briefly reports that Orso II went to the monastery of San Felice di Ammiana, a monastery that had only been founded 32 years earlier, namely by monks who had fled from Santo Stefano d'Altino before the Hungarians in the year 900 had looted the cities around the lagoon.

August Friedrich Gfrörer († 1861) assumes in his History of Venice from its founding to 1084 , which was published only eleven years after his death , that Byzantium still exercised the greatest influence in the lagoon, which is reflected in the fact that, like Andrea Dandolo writes that the Doge has only been "confirmed". For the author, such a confirmation could only come from Constantinople. Gfrörer is certain that the stays of the Dogensons, including that of Pietro, were only used to "serve as scourges of the loyalty of their fathers, and to be taken to school". According to the author, “Peter” fell “into the hands of Slavic pirates”, “who delivered him to Simeon, who seems to have been an enemy of his father.” Looking at Ursus, Gfrörer states that Johannes Diaconus “passes over with a few lines him away ”, and Andrea Dandolo's chronicle only knows three political acts,“ although he was a doge for 20 years ”. This is what he calls Rudolf and Hugo's privilege extensions, confirmed in the documents dated February 28, 924 and February 26, 927. Gfrörer suggests that the third political act, the privilege for Chioggia, served to improve his loyalty, that of a " Subject Country ”to move to his house and away from the Tribuni, who had issued a previous privilege that Chioggia had invoked. He sees a parallel to Poveglia , where “the bodyguards of Doge Peters Trandonico were once settled”. Finally, the Doge's retreat into the monastery and, for him, the simultaneous resignation of the younger Dominicus (not the older, the archdeacon who had succeeded in liberating the son of the Dog and who was finally appointed Bishop of Malamocco), a married layperson, from Gfrörer interprets his episcopate, including the pilgrimage to Jerusalem, as “repentance for wrongdoings committed” (p. 229). A “Catholic party” that otherwise only existed at Gfrörer understood “to wipe out the shame of the episcopate assigned to a layman”.

Pietro Pinton, who translated and annotated Gfrörer's work in the Archivio Veneto in volumes XII to XVI, corrected his idea of ​​an interregnum at the beginning of the reign of Orsos II. His own account did not appear until 1883, also in the Archivio Veneto. It came to very different, less speculative results. On the basis of a document dated January 14, 932, Pinton refutes Gfrörer's assumption of a longer interregnum according to Pietro Tribuno, from which the Austrian had derived hard conflicts, because this would be reduced to a few months by recalculating the years of rule. The alleged imperial recognition, which Gfrörer believed he could derive from Dandolo's “laudatur dux”, refute the annals, in which no “essere confermato” appears, but only an “acclamato”, as Pinton shows. For Pinton the Dogensöhne just did not travel to the court in Constantinople Opel to primarily the Emperor homage to prove, and to get great gifts and title, or, as Gfrörer claiming to take residence there as hostages, with which Byzantium controlled the Doge, but mainly to renew trade privileges. The two-year stay of the son of Doge Pietro II. Candiano at court, cited by Gfrörer as evidence, appears in the older chronicler Johannes Diaconus after the expedition against Comacchio and after the death of Bishop Domenico Orciano von Olivolo, i.e. around 934. This also marks this long stay reduced to a few weeks or months. Finally, he refutes Gfrörer's assumptions about the transition of the relationship between the Chioggiots and the Doge House. The situation is not comparable to that of Poveglia, because their duties were related to the diocese of Malamocco, the former seat of the Doge.

In 1861 Francesco Zanotto had reported in his Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia , in which he gave the popular assembly considerably more influence, that the Doge was also counted as the third of his name, because Giovanni II had a fellow Doge of that name. However, he never ruled alone. Like Pietro Pinton, this author also assumed that the son of a Dog traveled to Constantinople primarily to confirm the trade privileges. It seems clear to the author that the son of a dog was robbed and delivered to Simeon because of the imperial gifts he carried with him, but the motive of the Bulgarian tsar remains unclear, as historians point out. In any case, it was ransomed for a lot of gold. However, whether it was only "love of peace" that kept the Doge from having a "vendetta" cannot be proven from the sources. The treaties of 924 and 927 also supposedly had their starting point there. After all, Zanotto mentions the right to mint coins. Withdrawn in the monastery, the doge died 'a little later'.

For Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna , in the first volume of his Storia dei Dogi di Venezia , published in 1867, the 18th Doge, as mentioned in Zanotto, was counted by some historians as the third of his name. For him, the son of a Dog returned overland from Constantinople, where he was robbed and taken prisoner. With him, too, Pietro's release at the court of Tsar Simeon was achieved by means of gold. The negotiator, Archdeacon Dominicus, now Bishop of Olivolo, succeeded in renewing privileges at the courts of Rudolf and Hugo - once accompanied by Stefano Caloprino, then by Domenico Flabanico. Cicogna also mentions the right to coins. However, Cicogna does not speculate about the cause of the dispute with Chioggia. With him the Doge went to the monastery for reasons of age and died in Ammiana in the reputation of holiness ("odore di santità").

Heinrich Kretschmayr sketched the reign of the Doge "Petrus Candianus II." Only extremely briefly as "an era of peace, a period of valuable inner collection."

In his History of Venice , the peaceful dogates of Pietro Tribuno and Orsos II also offer little cause for a few lines for John Julius Norwich . However, the author emphasizes the - voluntary - resignation of the Doge after twenty years. For the author, the two doges are apparently only the prelude for the 44 following years, in which the Candiani dominated Venice.

swell

Narrative sources

• 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 ( text edition based on Berto in the Archivio della Latinità Italiana del Medioevo (ALIM) from the University of Siena).
• 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. 131-133, 178 (“Catalogo dei dogi ") ( digitized version ).
• Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, pp. 29, 118, 125 (see Chronicon Altinate ).
• Ester Pastorello (Ed.): Andrea Dandolo, Chronica per extensum descripta aa. 460-1280 dC , (= Rerum Italicarum Scriptores XII, 1), Nicola Zanichelli, Bologna 1938, pp. 168–170 ( digitized, pp. 168 f. )
• Roberto Cessi, Fanny Bennato (eds.): Venetiarum historia vulgo Petro Iustiniano Iustiniani filio adiudicata , Venice 1964, pp. 2, 52-54.
• Alberto Limentani (Ed.): Martin da Canal, Les estoires de Venise. Cronaca veneziana in lingua francese dalle origini al 1275 , Olschki, Florence 1972, p. 22 f.
• 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. 2, 52-54.

Legislative sources, letters

• Capitularia regum Francorum ( Monumenta Germaniae Historica , Legum sectio II , II), Ed .: Alfred Boretius , Victor Krause , Hannover 1897, pp. 148, 150.
• Luigi Schiaparelli (ed.): I diplomi italiani di Ludovico III e Rodolfo II , Rome 1910, p. 129 ( digitized version ).
• Luigi Schiaparelli (ed.): I diplomi di Ugo e di Lotario, di Berengario II e di Adalberto , Rome 1924, p. 27.
• Roberto Cessi (Ed.): Documenti relativi alla storia di Venezia anteriori al Mille , 2 vol., Vol. II, Padua 1942, p. 47 f.

literature

• Marco Pozza:  Particiaco, Orso II. In: Raffaele Romanelli (ed.): Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani (DBI). Volume 81:  Pansini – Pazienza. Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, Rome 2014, (forms the basis of the presentation part).

Web links

Commons : Orso II Participazio  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Remarks

1. ↑ La cronaca veneziana del diacono Giovanni , in: Giovanni Monticolo (ed.): Cronache veneziane antichissime , Rome 1890, p. 132 ( digitized version ).
2. ^ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 118.
3. ↑ La cronaca veneziana del diacono Giovanni , in: Giovanni Monticolo (ed.): Cronache veneziane antichissime , Rome 1890, p. 133.
4. ^ Roberto Cessi (Ed.): Origo civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 157.
5. ↑ On the Badoer / Particiaco cf. Marco Pozza: I Badoer. Una famiglia veneziana dal X al XIII secolo , Francisci, Padua 1982.
6. ^ Roberto Pesce (Ed.): Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo. Origini - 1362 , Centro di Studi Medievali e Rinascimentali "Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna", Venice 2010, p. 41.
7. ↑ Pietro Marcello : Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia in the translation of Lodovico Domenichi, Marcolini, 1558, p 31 ( digitized ).
8. ↑ 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, p. 67. ( online ).
9. ↑ Heinrich Kellner : Chronica that is Warhaffte actual and short description, all life in Venice , Frankfurt 1574, p. 12r ( digitized, p. 12r ).
10. ↑ Alessandro Maria Vianoli : Der Venetianischen Hertehmen Leben / Government, und dieback / From the First Paulutio Anafesto to / bit on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , Nuremberg 1686, pp. 120-123, translation ( digitized ).
11. ↑ Jacob von Sandrart : Kurtze and increased description of the origin / recording / areas / and government of the world famous Republick Venice , Nuremberg 1687, p. 22 ( digitized, p. 22 ).
12. ↑ 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, pp. 187–190 ( digitized ).
13. ↑ 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. 215–222, on Ursus p. 222-228 ( digitized version ).
14. ↑ 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. 225; to Orso II. pp. 225–230 ( digitized version ).
15. ^ Pietro Pinton: La storia di Venezia di AF Gfrörer , in: Archivio Veneto 25.2 (1883) 288–313, here: pp. 300–303 (part 2) ( digitized version ).
16. ↑ Francesco Zanotto: Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia , Vol. 4, Venice 1861, p. 42 f. ( Digitized version ).
17. ^ Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna : Storia dei Dogi di Venezia , Vol. 1, Venice 1867, o. P.
18. ^ Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , 3 vol., Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, p. 104.
19. ^ John Julius Norwich : A History of Venice , Penguin, London 2003.

predecessor	Office	successor
Pietro Tribuno	Doge of Venice 912-932	Pietro II Candiano