Paulicius

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Coat of arms of the "Paulutio Anafesto". It shows the form of the Dogenname as it was common in the 17th century, when a coat of arms was invented that corresponded to that of the Falier family. This claimed the first doge as their ancestor. The Heraldry began only in the third quarter of one of the 12th century, and later Arms were awarded to the early doges in retrospect, who had never done such a coat of arms ( "fanta-araldica"); this served to relate the families of this epoch to the earliest possible doges, which gave them prestige as well as political and social influence.

Paulicius , often called Anafestus Paulucius or Paoluccio Anafesto in the historiography of the modern Republic of Venice , was the first Doge of Venice according to tradition . After this state-controlled historiography, which became increasingly dominant from the 14th century, he was chosen as Dux of the settlements of the Venetian lagoon and the surrounding area in 697 to coordinate the defense against the Lombards . The oldest narrative source, which was only created around 1000, only allows the time between 713 and 715 for the time of the election. According to the more recent tradition, the first doge died in the year 717 after about twenty years of reign. The older historical works, however, give strongly divergent dates of rule.

The historicity of the Doge has been disputed since research in the early 20th century. He has not counted as the first doge since the work of Roberto Cessi , a view that has since prevailed. The same applies to his alleged successor Marcellus , who was also long counted among the 120 doges who were recognized by official historiography towards the end of the Republic of Venice . With the reinterpretation of the first two alleged doges, for example as representatives of Eastern Roman power, Orso Ipato is now considered the first doge. In the most recent research, Marcellus , the alleged successor of Paulicius, is more likely to be the ruler of at least parts of the lagoon and its immediate surroundings, while Paulicius perhaps dominated Treviso , which belonged to the Longobard Empire .

Surname

In the few sources that are closer to the time, the names Paulucius or Paulitius appear , only in the tradition from the 1360s Paulucio prenomado Anafesto , then Paolo Lucio Anafesto or Paoluccio Anafesto but also Paolicio . In the chronologically closest narrative source, the Istoria Veneticorum of Johannes Diaconus , Paulicius appears as the first doge, but without a nickname. Already in 1769 Johann Friedrich LeBret contradicted the deduction of Paul Lucas in the first volume of his four-volume State History of the Republic of Venice . According to Heinrich Kretschmayr , the sources “were the first of these duces to be Paulus, son of Lucius, Paulutius”.

The name of the Doge was interpreted in the later tradition that Anafestus or Anafesto became the family name. In addition, it was believed that Anafesto was the original name of the noble Falier family . Therefore the part of the name “Anafesto” was added, the first name was Italianized as “Paolo Lucio”, or in Venetian as “Paoluccio”. Accordingly, his name appears in the late medieval depictions as "Paoluccio Anafesto" or "Paolo Lucio Anafesto".

According to Giovanni Monticolo ( Le vite dei dogi , p. 99 f.) The name "Anafesto" appears for the first time in the Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo , which has been edited since 2010. It was created between 1360 and 1362/65, as the editor Roberto Pesce notes. The part of the name "Anafestus" also appears in the only slightly more recent chronicle, which supposedly comes from Nicolò Trevisan , and the Heinrich Kretschmayr in the 15th / 16th. Dated century. This chronicle has since been dated to the later 14th century, as it reports in detail on the revolt of the Venetian settlers on Crete (1363-1366) . In the high and late medieval historiography, however, the name Paulucius otherwise appears without the (alleged) family name. The autograph by Piero Giustinian, transcribed by Fiori Luca, proves this as early as the 16th century, as does the Chronicon Altinate or Chronicon Venetum from the late early Middle Ages .

In the Latin historiography of the early modern period, however, the name Paulucius Anafestus established itself , for example in the work of Pietro Marcello in 1502 , and also in the two-volume Historia Veneta by Alessandro Maria Vianoli from 1680, which was translated into German in 1686 under the title Der Venetianischen Herthaben Leben / Government , and withering / from the first Paulutio Anafesto on / until the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani appeared, the first doge was still called "Anafestus Paulucius". On the other hand, in the Italian version of Vianoli's work from 1680, he was named "Paoluccio Anafesto" (from p. 21), similar to that in 1602 in Francesco Sansovino , Girolamo Bardi: Delle Cose Notabili Della Città Di Venetia, Libri II , Salicato, Venice 1606, where his name was "Paolo Lucio Anafesto". The lexicon of the Middle Ages lists the doge in the form of the name Paulicius .

Chronical transmission and dating

The news about Paulicius is even rarer than about the doges who followed. According to Johannes Diaconus , the Venetian historian, chaplain and diplomat of Doge Pietro II. Orseolo (991-1009), Paulicius came from Eraclea , the capital of Venezia Marittima , which had been founded under the Eastern Roman-Byzantine Emperor Herakleios (610-641) . Paulicius was elected dux by the people's assembly of the Venetici , which was equated with the adult men of the lagoon . Historiography since Johannes Diaconus has reported on this election.

Doubts about the election arose from the fact that the next traditional Doge election did not take place again until 887, when Giovanni II Particiaco was elected.

Longobard shield boss, 7th century

Paulicius was supposed to end the (alleged) rule of the tribunes that had ruled the islands for 150 years. According to Johannes Diaconus, these tribunes were elected annually, but their power was too little to withstand the pressure of the 'barbarians'. Therefore, it was decided to put all power in one hand, as this was "honorabilius", which roughly translates as "honorable". The honor has a specific meaning in the early Middle Ages , because it rather describes the preservation of externally visible signs of the honor of the Venice-bearing community, especially the leading members, for whom symbolic communication was of central importance. With this justification, John shows a parallel to the thinking of the Lombards, because it was about the same motive from which the Lombards ended their ducal days by appointing a king, namely by King Authari in the year 584. Perhaps Johannes wanted the deacon, who copied many times from the Longobard Paulus Deacon , placing the Venetians on a par with them, or he wanted to grant them the same honor. Paul's note refers to the Pactum Lotharii of 840, but does not mention any choice.

After a long debate, the people's assembly, perhaps called up by the Patriarch of Grado , agreed , together with him and the bishops - clerics only appear in the elections in the 11th century - on Paulicius, who was considered to be extremely experienced and illustrious . They had sworn allegiance to him and proclaimed him Dux in Eraclea . According to the Venetian tradition, a series of 120 doges began, which lasted until 1797, and which was only interrupted from 737 to 742, when five magistri militum ruled the lagoon. According to Johannes Diaconus - and thus he deviates from the dating that is still common today - the election took place at the time of Emperor Anastasius (713–715 / 16) and Lombard King Liutprand (712–744), i.e. between 713 and 715.

According to later chroniclers, the election took place 706, but the year 697 was generally accepted, as this is given in the Chronica extensa of Doge Andrea Dandolo (1343-1354). This first of the state-controlled chronicles of Venice was considered to be more reliable than the chronicle of Johannes Diaconus, which was closer in time. Dandolo writes on the Doge's election that “Tribuni et omnes primates et plebei cum patriarcha et episcopis et cuncto clero in Heraclea hiis diebus pariter convenerunt” ('The tribunes and all the lords and the people gathered with the patriarch, the bishops and the entire clergy' ). As is so often the case in Venetian national historiography, the conflicts and interests behind this process were concealed (or were no longer known at all) in order to suggest a consensus on the order of power that existed from the beginning. In addition, Dandolo rhetorically emphasized the separation between clergy and lay people , which was of greater importance for Venetian history than for that of other states. In the Chronica brevis from the same pen, however, it says: "Paulucius dux ab universis tribunis maioribus ac populi multitudine laudatus fuit Dux in Civitate nova, elapsus ab incarnacione Domini Nostri Yesu Christi annis septingentis quinque." So he was accredited in 705, the clergy is not mentioned here by Andrea Dandolo. The year 697 as the election year for "Paulucius Anafestus Heracleanus" justified Willem Theodor Graswinckel's Libertas Veneta from 1634 explicitly with a quote from the Chronicle of Andrea Dandolo.

The dating in the first chronicle of Venice, which was written in Volgare , the so-called Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo (this does not refer to the doge of the same name ), contradicts the chronology recognized well into the 20th century. On the one hand, the author believes that the election took place during the reign of Pope Gregory II , who was in office from 715 to 731, and at the same time during that of the emperor "Anostasio II", i.e. Anastasius II , who was from 713 to 716 prevailed. On the other hand, although only the years 715 and 716 come into question, it explicitly states the year "DCCV", i.e. the year 705.

classification

Longobard and Eastern Roman areas in Italy
Veneto around 600

In Ravenna , an exarchate was set up by the Eastern Roman government in order to combat the Longobards who had settled in Italy from 568 onwards . The Exarch of Ravenna was installed by Constantinople and sent to his place of office from there, enjoying extensive civil and military rights, rights that were otherwise usually kept separate. This bundling of rights was due to the precarious situation of the Eastern Roman areas in Italy, which were often separated from one another by Lombard areas. The control of the individual, often isolated territories was given to duces or magistri militum . Dux could be an expression of a more civil function derived from the respective local nobility, while the magister militum corresponded more to a military rank. Dux tasks were occasionally assigned to these magistri . Below this level were the tribuni or comites who presided over settlements or commanded forts.

The first ducats were set up in the 6th century, so that Venice could also have been such a case, but this cannot be proven from the sources. Accordingly, there could be a connection with the transfer of power from the tribunes to the Duces . But also the separation of Venetia from Histria , which until then formed a common region , could be related to it. According to Eastern Roman regulations, all armed men were entitled to vote, especially the exercitus . These men together formed the core of the popular assembly. This was called concio generalis or arengo . In addition to the patriarch and the bishops, it also included abbots , so that the assembly, as in other regions of the empire, formed an important core of the political association. However, this popular assembly does not appear explicitly in the sources until 887, even if an assembly of the people and clergy voted on the occasion of a gift from Doge Agnello Particiaco and his son Giustiniano as early as 819 .

When choosing (perhaps) 697, the role of the exarch remains unclear. There is no approval or transfer of office. This may be due to the tendency of the Venetian sources to remain silent about the original Eastern Roman-Byzantine rule over the lagoon, or to the weakness of the exarchate around 700.

The source situation is even more unfavorable than in the rest of Italy. The narrative sources of Venice do not set in until around 1000, and even this assumption is fraught with great uncertainty. According to Roberto Cessi , the oldest Venetian spring ever comes from the year 819 and has only survived in one copy.

The only sources that Paulicius explicitly mention are the Pactum Lotharii from 840 on the one hand, and the Chronicle of Johannes Diaconus , the Istoria Veneticorum , on the other .

Reign of Paulicius

If one follows the much later sources, then during the rule of Paulucius or Paulicius there were disputes with the Patriarch of Grado, which cannot be determined. Paulicius made peace with the Lombard king Liutprand (king from 712 to 744), a treaty that was still valid at the time of Johannes Diaconus, namely in the form of a border that was taken over by the Franks. The Pactum Lotharii of 840 in section 26 refers to this so-called Terminatio Liutprandina , which was confirmed by King Aistulf (749-756) : “De finibus autem Civitatis novae statuimus, ut, sicut a tempore Liuthprandi regis terminatio facta est inter Paulitionem ducem et Marcellum magistrum militum, ita permanere debeat, secundum quod Aistulfus ad vos Civitatinos novos largitus est ”. Accordingly, the demarcation was negotiated at the time of Liutprand by "Paulitius" and "Marcellus" (who is traditionally the successor of the first Doge), one Dux , the other Magister militum . Section 28 also states with reference to the grazing rights for sheep: “Peculiarumque vestrarum partium greges pascere debeat cum securitate usque in terminum, quem posuit Paulitius dux cum Civitatinis novis, sicut in pacto legitur, de Plave maiore usque in Plavem siccam, quod est terminus vel proprietas vestra ". Here on the Venetian side only "Paulitius" is mentioned. Tradition has long overlooked the fact that in the Pactum Lotharii, looking back, the division of roles between Liutprand on the one hand and Paulitius and Marcellus on the other does not mean a contract between the Longobards and the two men mentioned, but that during the reign of the Longobards between a Dux Paulitius and a master's degree by the name of Marcellus was signed.

Johannes Diaconus writes about the treaty of 840: “Hoc tempore Lotharius imperator anno sui primo, pactum, initum inter Venetos et vicinos subiectos imperii super jure redendo et solutione datiorum, requirente duce, per quinquenium confirmavit terras que ducatus distinsit a terris Ytalici regni; et terminationem factam inter Paulucium ducem et Marcelum magistrum militum de finibus Civitatis Nove sub Liutprando rege et ab Astulffo confinatam comprobavit. "In the first year of Emperor Lothar, he saw a contractual border regulation that started between Venetians and nearby" subiectos " of the empire.

Overview map of today's lagoon

Besides this statement and the claim that Paulicius reigned for twenty years and six months and that he was buried in Eraclea under the new Duca Marcellus , who is also mentioned in the Pactum Lotharii (if the Magister militum of the source is the same person) we learn nothing about Paulicius. If one follows the Chronicon Altinate from the same period, it ruled for nineteen years and six months, if one follows the information from Antonio Rossi from 1845. If you follow Roberto Cessi's edition, however, it was either 20 years, 6 months and 9 days if you trust the Dresden handwriting of the Chronicon Altinate, or 18 years, plus an illegible number of months, and 8 days if you trust one refers to the manuscript of the same chronicle in Venice.

Possibly there was an uprising against his rule, led by Maiores from Malamocco and Equilio ( Iesolo ), in the course of which Eraclea was burned down and the Dux was killed. Only one cleric survived the bloodbath that continued the line of descent through two sons. But he introduces the claim that the Doge was killed in the process with “Dicesi”, “They say” or “It's called”.

reception

From the late Middle Ages

For Venice, the question of the origin of its highest state office was of considerable importance, so that the leading bodies, which in any case attached great importance to control over historiography, attached great importance to the question of Paulicius' importance for the raison d'être and the constitution. Above all, the questions about the sovereignty between the great empires, the derivation and legitimation of their territorial claims, but also the type and initiators of the appointment of the first doge were the focus. So one often ignored the influence of the people's assembly, which finally lost its influence in the 13th century without explicitly denying that it stood at the beginning of the Doge's office. At the same time, when the Doge was raised, a role for the clergy was not introduced until the 14th century.

The said Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo from the late 14th century, like Andrea Dandolo, depicts the events on a level that has long been known by individuals, especially the Doges, where, as already mentioned, “Paulucio prenomado Anafesto universalmente dagli nobili et tuti altri habitanti in Erecliana fu electo primo Doxe ”. So he had been elected first Doge by both the Nobili and all the other inhabitants of Heraclea, without the clergy playing a recognizable role here, as with Andrea Dandolo. Paulucio won a victory against the Longobard king Liutprand, who wanted to conquer Istria. To protect it, he drew a wall and a ditch around his territory, "una grande cercha et fossa attorno le sue habetancie". But the residents of “Exolo” (meaning Jesolo ), “essendo molto acresudi”, no longer wanted to submit to the Doge. There were fights, to "molta discordia", which caused serious damage to both parties ("grandissimo dano"), but which the Doge was able to end through an agreement ("alcun concordia"). However, this “concordia” was short-lived. After a reign of "anni VIII, mexi I, di V", after eight years, one month and five days, Paulucius died and was buried in Heraclea.

Pietro Marcello noted laconically on the first two pages in his work, later translated into Volgare under the title Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia , that "Paoluccio Anafesto" was the first doge in 697 after the incarnation of Christ, "fu creato" the derivation of the office and the connection to the popular assembly and the clergy in the dark. He also says that the tribunes had previously ruled the lagoon for 230 years. Marcello was also aware of the contract with Liutprand. In addition, the "Equilini" or "Iesolani" rose against Venice. The residents of Torcellos built a church in honor of Mary, where they kept “Eliodoro d'Altino” and the relics of many saints. In the underlying Latin edition from 1502, the entry for the first doge was "Paulucius Dux Primus". It says lapidarly there “dux est declaratus”; an election by the popular assembly does not appear here either. It only becomes clear that the translator turned “dux est declaratus” into “fu creato”. Overall, Marcello, like most chroniclers according to the chronicle of Andrea Dandolo, is largely dependent on his work.

According to the Chronicle of Gian Giacomo Caroldo , which was written until 1532, the attacks of the Lombards were also the trigger for the first Doge election. “Tribuni, cittadini et plebei, con il Patriarcha, Vescovi e tutto il Clero, convennero insieme in Heraclea”, the tribunes, the cittadini and the common people, together with the patriarch, the bishops and the entire clergy came together to form one To choose Doge, who should avert the said danger. This should rule with “giustitia et equità”, with “justice and equality”, but also “with power” (“con auttorita”), to convene the people's assembly (“la general concione”) for general matters, as well as “tribuni” and “ Giudici ”. In other respects, too, the author of the chronicle projects the circumstances of the 13th century back into the early Middle Ages when he believes that the doge installed the prelates in their office after the election through appropriate assemblies ("investitura"). After all this had been settled, "Paolucio de gl'Anafesti", "cittadino" of Heraclea, was installed in his office. He negotiated a treaty with the Lombards to 'consolidate his ducat' (“stabilir il Ducato suo”). In return, he and the “Popolo Veneto” received “molte esentioni et immunità”. With “Marcello Maestro di Cavallieri” he laid down the limits of Heraclea, which ranged from “Piave sin alla Piave secca overo Piavicella”. Here the author shows a deeper understanding of the Pactum Lotharii , because he recognizes Paulucius and Marcello as the contractual partners, not the Longobard king. With Caroldo Paulucius reigned significantly longer than in the Cronica di Venexia , namely "anni XX, mesi VJ, giorni VIIJ", i.e. 20 years, 6 months and 8 days (p. 47), i.e. exactly one day shorter than in the Dresden manuscript des Chronicon Altinate , but about two years longer than in the Venetian manuscript. His successor was chosen because the 'inhabitants of the named Venetian islets' (' habitatori delle dette Venete isolette ') knew from personal experience the value of a doge' for peace, tranquility and advantages for everyone '(' conoscendo per esperienza di quanta pace , tranquillità et beneficio di ciascuno ").

Representation of the first doge, Jost Amman 1574

For the Frankfurt lawyer Heinrich Kellner , "Paulutius Anafestus was the first Hertzog", but almost everything else is uncertain. According to him, the "Hertzog" was "a pious and very just man" - a topos . In the accompanying marginal note, the author notes next to the year “697.” with a view to the name: “Sabellicus calls him Paulucium Heracleanum / in the first book of his Venedische Histori.” If one was still certain about the place of the office, the author mentions a lot Opinions differ greatly from the time of the election. The text says that the Doge was “elected / to Eraclia / in the two hundred and two and eightieth jar / (as some would like) after the edification of Venice / and after the Incarnation of Christ in 697th than the congregation earlier than 230th jar through Tribunos or Zunfftmeister had been ruled. ”Again in a marginal note, Kellner notes that, in the opinion of others, the elevation did not take place in Venice's 282nd year, but in the 297th or 266th, i.e. 15 years later or 16 years earlier. Apparently the authors not named by Kellner were of the opinion that the Doge had come into office between 681 and 712, an uncertainty that actually persisted for many authors for a long time. Kellner assumes that Paulicius had to swear an oath "that he should rule and provide everything / as required by the glory or dignity of the community and rule of Venice." Here, too, is a back projection of the circumstances later than the Doge took an extensive oath of office, which Promissio ducale had to take. According to him, the Doge allied himself with King "Luitprando / Kings in Lombardi", and he brought more through his reputation than by force the "Equiliners or (as some say) the Jesolans to obedient / who had fallen away from the Venetians". On Torcello "a very beautiful church was built ... and Eliodori from Altin's corpse and many other holy bones were laid dareyn." According to Kellner, the doge died after "twenty years and six months."

Alessandro Maria Vianoli's Historia Veneta from 1680 (Volume 1), which appeared six years later in German, tries to make it clear to the readers that Anafestus, as an elected citizen, got the government into his hands, while princes and monarchs at the time of the author rulership by mere means Inherit or through “at their times of life / through stately merits and heroically performed deeds”. For the former, in turn, the door to power was opened for their gender through appropriate acts. According to him, Anafestus endeavored to "the most noble piece / which may bliss a state / which is peace" (p. 35). To this end, he had sought “the alliance with Aritperto, the King of the Lombards” and also concluded with his successor “Luitprando”. The idea of ​​a power that confidently concluded treaties with external powers had long been firmly established. Vianoli saw Venice, which had been ruled by mayors until 466, from then on again under the rule of "Zunfftmeitern". Only in a third form of government, according to Vianoli, was it decided in Eraclea (276 or, as others want, 281 after the city was founded) to “hand over the government to a single person”. Therefore one chose "Paulutius Anafestus".

In 1687 Jacob von Sandrart believed in his work Kurtze and increased description of the origin / recording / areas / and government of the world-famous republic of Venice , “this Republicq” had “stood for two hundred and several and sixty years without great separation and turmoil, which other one Pulling out the 272nd year ”. But now there were "disputes" that "Luitbrand, Hertzog von Friuli" wanted to use to "master them". Because of this threat, the Venetians saw themselves compelled to “win a Hertzog for his life”, who should settle the internal disputes and all the better to oppose the external enemy. In doing so, "his power should be so limited / that he could not abuse his sovereignty / or pose as a tyrant among them." "And so around the year of Christ 696, Paulutius Anafestus Heracleanus was elected to (1st) Hertzog". The author only mentions from his twenty-year reign that he "ruled cautiously / brought the war to a commendable end / also built a church". In 717, "Marcellus Tegalianus" was chosen to succeed him.

In addition to dating contradictions, there were other, significantly different interpretations of the overall process through which a first doge was elected. In his German translation of an English edition of the travelogue of Blainville, which appeared in 1765, Johann Tobias Köhler writes that the city of Padua chose the places of the lagoon as a refuge early on in order to be able to bring its inhabitants to safety there if necessary. This case occurred when the Hun king Attila had northern Italy devastated in 452. After this experience, the Paduans are said to have set up “tribunes or guild masters” in the lagoon to maintain control of their refuge. After Blainville, the nobles who remained in the lagoon managed to be declared “protectors of the people” by the non-nobles “through all kinds of pleasant services and good words”. It so happened that "each Eyland chose its own tribunes from among themselves, which gradually drew all power and prestige to themselves". These tribunes of the individual islands joined forces and asked the emperor for permission to use a common head in order to become independent from Padua. They did so, according to Blainville, in remembrance that the Paduans had already complained to the Eastern Roman general Narses in 552 that the islanders had illegally withheld "their swamps and harbor" from them, the Paduans. The tribunes therefore had "Paulum Anafestum as their first doge" in the year 697, because these (noble) tribunes, who had achieved a high degree of autonomy, got together in this way - together and under the legitimation of the emperor in Constantinople - that is, by choosing a doge that Padua wanted to withdraw.

Edward Gibbon interpreted the development in a more romantic way , without going into the possible causes for the transition to the Doge's office: “In the midst of the waters, free, poor, hardworking, inaccessible, they gradually merged into a republic ... and in place of the annual election of twelve tribunes entered the lifelong office of duke or doge ”.

A slightly different interpretation of the events that led to the choice of the first doge found its way into popular representations. So took August Daniel of Binzer 1845 that it was the disunity of the tribunes, which forced them "to restore the unity and integrity of independence of the state" a "dial monarchy to found".

After-effects of the Venetian historiographical tradition, modern historiography

Johann Friedrich LeBret published his four-volume State History of the Republic of Venice from 1769 to 1777 , in which, in the first volume published in 1769, he first devoted himself to the “writers” “who described the origins of the city” (from p. 21), then to the history of the various Peoples in Italy (up to p. 45), the third chapter is entitled “Of the lagoons in general, and the Venetian islands” (up to p. 53), followed by their “political constitution” and “Freedom and independence” (up to P. 63), and finally the “Church Constitution”, which he takes up again on pp. 83–92. The author does not deal with the first Doge until p. 70, but also sends sections on the Lombards (up to p. 78) and the government of the tribunes, then the reasons for the election, the popular assembly. Finally, on p. 83, the first doge “Pauluccius” is elected by the popular assembly at the instigation of the Patriarch “ Christoph von Grado ” (682–717), whereby LeBret notes in a footnote: “Paoluccius is a compound name from Paul, not Paul Lucas . The Venetian language loves such changes in names ”(p. 83, note 3). LeBret gives an extremely positive judgment on Paulicius. The Doge had been given general respect because of his “wisdom and seriousness”. But his "power was not unlimited and independent", it was, always according to LeBret, "subordinate to the general estates of the nation ... These still retained the legislative power, left the judicial power to the tribunes, and transferred the executive power to the doge." sought to prevent inheritance, but the "special offices of each island depended on the appointment of the people". "They decided war and peace after mutual agreement with the people". Hence, LeBret believed, the “earliest writers” would “never attribute such decisions to the princes alone, but to the whole people”. The foreign political pressure, which the author identified as the cause for the election of a first doge, he sees embodied in Lupus , the Duke of Friuli , who, incited by Fortunatus of Aquileia (“a secret schismatic”, p. 87, “a Arch hypocrite ”, p. 91), attacked Grado. According to "Paul Warnefried" - Paulus Diaconus - this attack took place via an "artificial road made in the sea". “We can't believe him. Because Grado has always been an island ”. Only now does LeBret speak directly about Paulutius. This "gained a certain reputation with his neighbors", internally he ensured compensation, "he handled justice seriously, and partisanship was far from him". He took his "place of residence" in Eraclea, "shipping came up". "He had the ship's materials collected, set up certain armories, and encouraged his people to make the sea the main object of their intentions and to drive the pirates out of these waters." With this, the author unfolds almost the entire program for the centuries to come. In addition, "his peace ... is the basis of all other comparisons with the Lombard and the other kings who have established themselves in Italy." The chronicle of John the Deacon, at that time called "Sagornini Chronicle", undated the peace with the Longobards Liutprand near the coronation year 712 (p. 94). Paulutius had succeeded in winning the friendship of the Lombard king. The border of the "State of Heraklea" "began at the great Piave, and reached as far as the dry Piave, called Plaviscella or Plavisda". With this, “Paulucius expanded his state to the north”, “got a firm foothold in the country” - that is, on the mainland across the lagoon, on the Terra ferma . LeBret believed that "castles" had already been built at various estuaries to secure borders. The Equilians, on the other hand, "as rude and indecent people who merely watched over cattle breeding, he brought back to obedience through his skill, after he had tried in vain for them to separate from the general covenant." In addition, according to LeBret, he acquired himself "The real glory of having educated his people in something". He died after 20 years of reign, in 717, as the author shows in a marginal note.

In 1861 Francesco Zanotto described the legendary connections in more detail in a footnote in his Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia , because it was not enough to explain the ancestry of the Venetian noble families, but rather to give the Doge an ancestor as far back as possible. At that time it was assumed that the family of the first Doge came from Padua. At that time it was called Antenorea , after Antenor , the legendary Trojan founder of the city. This family was traced back to the Roman family Asconia , which gradually took over the names Anafesta , Anapesta or Anasesia .

Wilhelm Obermüller presented another thesis in his German-Celtic, historical- geographic dictionary in 1868 : “In 697 Paulitius Anafestus, a citizen of Heraklea, was elected first duke (Dux or Doge) and assigned executive power to him, while the tribunes presented the nobility, and sat in courts, but the people retained the legislative power. ”So while the doge represented the executive in the Venice constitution, the people were entitled to the legislature. The tribunes, however, made up the nobility.

In contrast to the extremely scarce sources, Samuele Romanin , in his Lezioni di Storia Veneta , published in Florence in 1875 , expanded the centuries-old, imaginative, but also deliberately used for political purposes tradition about the first Doge and the early history of the lagoon on 23 epic pages. The said section under the title "Il primo doge Paoluccio Anafesto" included almost the history of the entire Late Antique-Early Medieval Mediterranean area. In addition, there were internal conflicts, which Romanin's description from p. 36 added as a further threat. In this acute situation, "Cristoforo patriarca di Grado" called a "generale assemblea" to Eraclea. Only a “duca”, similar to that in Rome, Genoa or Naples, would give the “Repubblica” greater significance. When 'the tribunes of the different islands' agreed on this, a corresponding decision was made. In order to limit the Duca's power, Romanin also projects half a millennium back in time, even a “promissione durcale” was drawn up. In it his right to convene the general assembly was recorded, which he should preside together with the patriarch, with bishops and "Giudici" (probably judges). He had the right to elect magistrates, but also to dismiss or punish them. He was allowed to negotiate with foreign masters, but without the consent of the whole people he was not allowed to pass "convenzioni", laws, peace agreements or declarations of war. In addition to other rights, according to Romanin, he also had considerable rights in the clerical area - but these were actually only enforced much later. They were also allowed to conduct free trade, which allowed them to decorate churches and public buildings, they were given lands, forests, meadows and hunting areas, and finally, accompaniment for visits to the numerous islands (p. 38). Romanin basically grants the early Doges everything that was later forbidden to them by the said promissione ducale . In the main square of Eraclea the 'deputations' of the islands gathered, led by their respective tribunes. Paoluccio, as Romanin cautiously notes, “perhaps from the Falier family” (“forse della Casa de'Faliero”), was elected by the tribunes. The rest of the people just acclaimed. Romanin rarely shows any doubts about the historicity of the descriptions. The chosen man prostrated himself in front of the altar and said a prayer, then rose and, with the Gospel in hand, swore his promises . On the contrary, the author provides many more details. Then Romanin even indulges in descriptions of clothing, the basis of which is a representation of 'perhaps the 8th century', in which St. Mark's Basilica is, as Romanin notes. This representation is above the portal of the choir . The author even knows how to report on the daily routine, but admits that election 697 took place, after others 712. Romanin did not mention the core of the whole description until late, when he said that this choice indicated the independence that he now had (p. 42). One side offered protection (Byzantium), the other (Eraclea and the islands) reverence, but by no means subject status (“di protezione da una parte, e di reverenza, ma non di sudditanza, dall'altra”). Accordingly, the rulers of the rest of the world were only shown the choice. If the doge was strong, the people would deprive him of power by force; if he was weak, he was the slave of patricians and clergy. The tribunes had become "magistrati subalterni", from which numerous families later derived, and which were often at odds with the new power. Romanin uses this constellation as an explanation for the extremely troubled times, but also as an explanation for the later dominance of the old houses , large families, which can be traced back to the Doge's voters or to certain tribunes, yes, to the alleged Doge himself.

August Friedrich Gfrörer († 1861) argued completely differently . In his history of Venice from its founding to 1084 , which appeared only eleven years after his death, he assumes that “the Byzantines” exercised their rule through tribunes, “which, however, in my opinion were elected by the people and then confirmed by the court. “Gfrörer believes that there have been twelve tribunes since Theodoric the Great . More important cities, however, were ruled by "Duces". When Venice grew in importance, the opinion arose in Constantinople that Veneto now also needs such a “duke” (p. 36 f.). Thought this through to the end, according to the author, shows the legal way of an election initiated by the exarch by “the bishops and all respected lay people of the isles”. While Johannes Diaconus explicitly considered the external dangers to be the cause, Gfrörer named another possibility. He also points to the contradiction within the Chronicle of Johannes Diaconus, who stated that the appointment of the doge took place during the reigns of Liutprand (712-744) and the emperor Anastasius (713-716). So while the choice between 713 and 716 must have been made, the chronicler himself states that Paulicius died in 727 after twenty years of reign. The election would then fall in the year 707 (p. 40). In contrast to his colleagues, Gfrörer does not believe that the chronicler Andrea Dandolo projected the legal ideas common in his time - the said assignments of tasks to doge, tribunes, clergy - back into the early Middle Ages, because this was what the Venetians learned in Byzantium. "Even more, it was not the Doge Pauluzzo, but the Basileus of Constantinople himself who prescribed the above-mentioned conditions when the first Doge was appointed." Gfrörer's explanation for the concealment of the Byzantine dominance is explained by the later history in which the Venetians despised the “rag people” of the Greeks, whose rule Enrico Dandolo , “the historian Ahn”, put an end to. Therefore, according to Gfrörer, the chroniclers withheld as far as possible the fact that the Venetians were subject to these Greeks of all people (p. 42 f.). Gfrörer himself considered the rule of the Byzantines to be "the most senseless and dishonorable of the Middle Ages" (p. 43). Andrea Dandolo, however, did not want to lie, and so he wrote in clauses: “Through those thrown words he indicates the truth to those who know without the great bunch noticing it. The real historians understand one another by means of certain signs. ”This explains an essential difference between Johannes Diaconus and Andrea Dandolo among the voters. While John "lists all Venetians, but especially the Patriarchs and the Bishops, as participants in the act, the latter says that Pauluzzo was chosen by the tribunes, all the nobles, the common people, the Patriarchs and the entire clergy." common people, which Emperor Justinian had already considered "nothing more than a tax-collecting machine and no political power", was a mere concession to local conditions: "the brave and active sailor people were not willingly excluded from the elections" ( P. 44). The nobility, in Gfrörer's eyes exclusively “ship owners and merchants”, had, however, divided the offices among themselves. “But the people, that is, the sailors and tradesmen, voted in the elections as the employers wanted, where they earned bread and bacon.” Gfrörer speculates that Johannes Diaconus did not explicitly name the Lombards as an external threat because he did Slavs had in view, which Paulus deacon mentioned for the first time in the year 726, but who had fought against the Longobards half a century earlier, namely between 666 and 678. “For if the southern Slavs dared to attack the kingdom of the mighty Longobard king, they will they certainly did not spare the Venetians ”concludes Gfrörer (p. 47). In doing so, however, he prefers to date Dandolo to the year 697. However, since the contract with the Longobard king had been concluded by both Paulicius and Marcellus, who had a Byzantine title, namely that of Magister militum , Gfrörer concluded that the doge had "presided over the civil administration". The "army order", however, was carried out by someone else. This division of tasks is in turn proof that the doge was "not an independent duke, but the governor" of the emperor.

These idiosyncratic views were not without contradiction. Pietro Pinton , who translated and annotated Gfrörer's work in the Archivio Veneto in the annual volumes XII to XVI, corrected numerous assumptions by Gfrörer, especially when it came to those for which the evidence was missing from the sources or contradicted them. His own critical examination of Gfrörer's work did not appear until 1883, also in the Archivio Veneto. Pinton, who considered Gfrörer to be a master of his field, believes that he bent his general theses to interpret the sources. He does not care that Johannes Diaconus tries to date the doge election with the greatest accuracy, and he does not even mention his statement that there had been violent internal conflicts, which would have been in contradiction to his thesis of the dominance of the emperor (P. 36 f.). Pinton counters Gfrörer's argument that the Doges invested the higher clergy because they knew this from Byzantium that the Longobard kings did the same, certainly without an Eastern example. Pinton reads the alleged contract with the Lombards "alla lettera" and thinks (with reference to Henry Simonsfeld , Archivio Veneto XIV, 97) - without this being initially taken up in the scientific discourse - that the contract was instead concluded between Paulicius and Marcellus could. However, according to Pinton, the demarcation itself contradicts this, as does the later tradition (p. 38). A simple explanation for the appearance of Marcellus could be that he had received a mandate from the emperor or the exarch. In addition, it is unclear whether it was the later second Doge. Andrea Dandolo's alleged unwillingness to admit subjection to Byzantium is refuted by Pinton with a few expressions from Dandolo's work: “adhaerere, devoti, obedientia” against the empire.

Heinrich Kretschmayr said in 1905 in the first volume of his three-volume history of Venice that the sources named "Paulus, son of Lucius, Paulutius as the first of these duces". But Kretschmayr not only interprets the name differently, because he sees the lagoon as politically fissured: "The individual islands have their special rights, traditions, legends". "The Dux does not find the obedience of the hereditary tribunes", the office only attained an "unquestionable preponderance" in the 9th century. The imperial Dux, so Kretschmayr believes, stood in opposition to the "local tribunician aristocracy". The instigator of the revolution in Ravenna (706-711) against the "terror regiment of the exarchs", "Georgios, the son of Johannaces", appears again in the internal battles, especially those between Heracliana and Jesolo. Kretschmayr speculates about whether the first doge died in these fights. In turn, Kretschmayr interprets the treaty of 713-716 in such a way that it came about between “Luitprand and the Byzantine military plenipotentiary Magister militum Marcellus of Istria with the involvement of Dux Paulutius”. The demarcation contained therein "was then repeatedly recognized over the centuries by the Lombard kings and German emperors." The author believes that the successor of Paulicius, that Marcellus of Istria, was "entrusted with the administration of the ducat of Veneto". He would have had stronger means of power at his disposal, so that “the domestic resistance would have kept quiet for a while” (p. 44).

Liberation from the Venetian myth, the question of historicity

Still Frederic Lanes Venice. A Maritime Republic , published in 1972, saw Venice - against the backdrop of American post-war history - as a bulwark against tyranny. Other historians also adopted the portrayal of Venice and its righteous rule, designed and widely used by the Venetian patriciate. It was not until 1975, with an essay by Eric Cochrane and Julius Kirshner, that the deconstruction of this closed circle of patterns of interpretation began, which continues to this day.

The historicity of Paulicius was first questioned by historians in the 1920s, above all by Roberto Cessi . For him, the series of doges only began with the third doge, according to legend, with Orso Ipato , because the tradition of the second doge is based on the same sources as that of the first. In addition, the sources do not even provide a definite statement as to whether the second Doge was anything more than a Magister militum . After Cessi, the third doge was chosen in an uprising against Byzantium after Emperor Leo III. tried to enforce his anti-image policy in Venice by means of a decree . For Cessi, the choice of a doge under what he believed to be a too strict regime of Constantinople was unthinkable before this point in time. While Cessi saw Marcellus as a possible representative of Byzantine rule, he believed that a local representative could not have had the imperial power to determine borders as sovereignly as they are called in the Pactum Lotharii . Cessi therefore ruled out the existence of a Doge Paulucius and identified the signatory named in the Pactum with the exarch Paulus . Its title of "patricius", which the imperial governors regularly wore, was merged with a proper name in the corrupt tradition, in the form of Paulus patricius = Paulicius. Only then was a "Paulicius" invented. It is possible that the Patricius Paulus, previously Duca Sicily, retained this title. Gino Luzzatto subscribed to this view in a commemorative publication for Cessi only insofar as he considered Paulucius to be one of the duces common in Byzantine times who now controlled the lagoon from a military and administrative point of view on behalf of the Ravennater exarch. He did not express any doubts about the existence of the first Doge.

The reservations about the representation by Andrea Dandolo were soon reflected in general representations. For example, Andrea Da Mosto said in his work I dogi di Venezia that the portrayal of the Doge should be treated with caution, and that it was obviously wrong in some points. The transition to the new form of government was by no means final, nor was it peaceful, even if the myth was cultivated later that Venice had managed to keep itself free from the hatred that families and factions had against each other in all other cities have applied. The 'facts, however, contradict an interpretation that is too simple not to sound interested and thus convince us of the opposite', adds the author, who leaves out the traditionally named second Doge Marcellus in order to join the rule of the Magistri militum and Orso Ipato .

Breaking away from the Venetian tradition, however, required further decades of research. Reinhard Härtel wrote in the 6th volume of the Lexikons des Mittelalters published in 1993 : “Today that solution is considered the most probable, after which P. a Hzg. In the langob. Treviso. "

Most recently, however, Stefano Gasparri contradicted Roberto Cessi on essential points. Gasparri agrees with him insofar as he also considers the existence of Paulicius to be unlikely, but the equation with the Ravennaten seems to him to be an expression of "isolationism", Venice's special role, in which the entire story deviated from that of the neighbors and led an isolated life of its own. Cessi had practically rejected any influence from the mainland, be it by Lombards or by Franks. Gasparri also believes that the pacta with the Lombards were also an invention of John the deacon. The naming of the Lombard king Liutprand only served the purpose of dating, the treaty was by no means concluded with the king, but rather it belongs to a number of other treaties of the Lombard rulers below the royal level. There was no Doge Paulicius: "Paulicio non fu il primo doge" (p. 35). As Gian Piero Bognetti had already suggested, Paulicius could have been the Duca of Treviso, or one of his neighbors, possibly a Lombard (p. 38). The Pactum Lotharii thus became a mere coordination of the borders between two adjoining territories, namely the originally Longobard ducate Treviso and the Exarchate Ravenna.

Anna Maria Pazienza followed a similar line in 2017. The author of the Chronica de singulis patriarchis Nove Aquileie plays a decisive role in this, and a number of documents from the patriarchal archive must have been available to him. Among them was a kind of letter that Patriarch Fortunatus II had sent to his clerics in Grado, possibly from the Byzantine exile, and which resembles a will . Fortunatus lists his services to the Gradensian Church , and he expresses his hope for a speedy return. Since Giordano Brunettin (1991), this source has been viewed 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. In view of this far-reaching access to documents that are mostly lost today, Pazienza explains how the chronicler describes the election as the first Doge. As already mentioned, he puts it at the time of Emperor Anastasius and the Longobard King Liutprand (i.e. around 713), and explains how this Paulicius signed a treaty and Cittanova had the Longobard king assure him. According to Pazienza, this is reminiscent of the text of the Pactum Lotharii , in which the emperor recognizes the borderline that Liutprand once promised Paulicius and the Magister militum Marcellus . For Pazienza it was not a Lombard-Venetian treaty at the highest level, but Liutprand guaranteed a treaty between Paulicius and Marcellus (which at the same time moved the border from the Piave Maggiore to the Piave Secca). For the author, this defined the border between the Longobard Empire and the Byzantine province of Venice. For them, Paulicius is also not the first Doge of Venice, as the Venetian historiographical tradition has maintained for a millennium, but the Dux of Treviso. The Byzantine province, however, was ruled by that Marcellus, a Magister militum . "No peace agreement was ever concluded between King Liutprand and Venice, nor was Paulicio ever the duke of the lagoon city, as the chronicler states, misinterpreting - if deliberate or not is difficult to say - the evidence at his disposal: the pactum Lotharii or its following renewals ”(p. 42). A founding myth of Venice, derived from the Pactum Lotharii , would be a mere back projection of the author of one of the oldest chronicles of Venice.

The first doge as the protagonist of a historical novel was presented in 2017, unaffected by the research debate, Lodovico Pizzati under the title Venetians. The First Doge .

swell

One of the few narrative sources is the Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum ( Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , edited by Roberto Cessi in 1933 , Rome 1933, pp. 28, 46 (line 2), 115 (duration of reign), 127 (line 22 f.) , 154-157 (lines 26-28, 1 and 18-19 as well as 22-24 and 27), 165 (lines 14-27), 166 (lines 1-11), 169 (lines 3-5) and p. 170 (Line 30).

Andrea Dandolo's Chronica per extensum descripta , which was published by Ester Pastorello in 1938 , as well as the Chronica brevis by the same author, is particularly important for the later state-controlled tradition . Important editions are also the Documenti relativi alla storia di Venezia anteriore al Mille , vol. I, secoli V-IX, Venice 1991 (actually a corrected edition of the edition provided by Carlo F. Polizzi in 1942), n. 18 , also edited by Roberto Cessi (Letter from Pope Gregory II to the Bishops of Veneto and Istria), pp. 28–30 ( digitized version ) and finally Luigi Andrea Berto (ed.): Giovanni Diacono, Istoria Veneticorum , Bologna 1999.

literature

Unless otherwise stated, this article is based primarily on Giorgio Ravegnani: Paoluccio, Anafesto , in: Raffaele Romanelli (Ed.): Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani , Vol. 81 (Pansini-Pazienza), Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, Rome 2014, S 206. Valeria Favretto is not yet available: Paulicius dux. Le origini del potere ducale a Venezia , tesi di laurea, Venice 2006.

  • Anna Maria Pazienza: Archival Documents as Narrative: The Sources of the Istoria Veneticorum and the Plea of ​​Rižana , in: Sauro Gelichi , Stefano Gasparri (Ed.): Venice and Its Neighbors from the 8th to 11th Century. Through Renovation and Continuity , Brill, Leiden and Boston 2018, pp. 27–50.
  • Stefano Gasparri: Anno 713. La leggenda di Paulicio e le origini di Venezia , in: Uwe Israel (ed.): Venezia. I giorni della storia , Venice 2011, pp. 27-45.
  • Fiori Luca: Il codice autografo di Piero Giustinian: un esempio di genesi ed evoluzione della cronachistica medievale , dottorato di ricerca, Bologna 2014 (on Venetian historiography). ( online , PDF)
  • Stefano Gasparri: Venezia fra i secoli VIII e IX. Una riflessione sulle fonti , in: Gino Benzoni , Marino Berengo , Gherardo Ortalli , Giovanni Scarabello (eds.): Studi veneti offerti a Gaetano Cozzi , Vicenza 1992. ( online , PDF)
  • Girolamo Arnaldi : Le origini dell'identità lagunare , in: Storia di Venezia , Vol. 1: Origini. Età ducale , Rome 1992, p. 431.
  • Antonio Carile , Giorgio Fedalto: Le origini di Venezia , Bologna 1978, from p. 226.
  • Andrea Da Mosto : I dogi di Venezia con particolare riferimento alle loro tombe , Venice 1939, p. 33.
  • Giuseppe Maranini: La costituzione di Venezia , vol. 1: Dalle origini alla serrata del Maggior Consiglio , Venice 1927, p. 30 f. (Reprinted in Florence 1974).
  • Roberto Cessi : Paulicius dux , in: Archivio veneto-tridentino 10 (1926) 158-179.

Web links

Commons : Paulicius  - collection of images, videos and audio files

Remarks

  1. ↑ So the coats of arms of the much later descendants of these doges, especially since the 17th century, were projected back onto the alleged or actual members of the families (allegedly) ruling Venice since 697: "Il presupposto di continuità genealogica su cui si basava la trasmissione del potere in area veneziana ha portato come conseguenza la già accennata attribuzione ai dogi più antichi di stemmi coerenti con quelli realmente usati dai loro discendenti "(Maurizio Carlo Alberto Gorra: Sugli stemmi di alcune famiglie di Dogi prearaldici , associazione nobiliare regional veneta. Rivista di studi storici, ns 8 (2016) 35–68, here: p. 41).
  2. ↑ 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, Leipzig and Riga 1769, p. 83, note 3 ( digitized version ).
  3. ^ Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , 3 vol., Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, p. 43 f. ( Digitized version , pages 48 to 186 are missing!).
  4. ^ Robert Pesce (ed.): Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo. Origini-1362 , Centro di Studi Medievli e Rinascimentali Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna, Venice 2010, p. 14.
  5. ^ Roberto Pesce (Ed.): Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo. Origini-1362 , Centro di Studi Medievli e Rinascimentali Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna, Venice 2010, p. XLI.
  6. ^ Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, p. 417.
  7. ↑ Fiori Luca: Il codice autografo di Piero Giustinian: un esempio di genesi ed evoluzione della cronachistica medievale , tesi di laurea, Bologna 2014, p. 21.
  8. ↑ MGH, Scriptores XIV, Hannover 1883, p. 60, Chronicon Venetum (vulgo Altinate) and Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo civitatum Italie seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Tipografia del Senato, Rome 1933 (= Fonti per la storia d'Italia, 73) ( digitized version ).
  9. ^ Pietro Marcello : De vita, moribus et rebus gestis omnium Ducum Venetorum , Venice 1574 ( digitized version ).
  10. ↑ 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 ).
  11. ↑ Alessandro Maria Vianoli: Historia Veneta , Giovanni Giacomo Hertz, Venice 1680 ( digitized version ).
  12. ↑ Francesco Sansovino , Girolamo Bardi: Delle Cose Notabili Della Città Di Venetia, Libri II , Salicato, Venice 1606 ( digitized version ).
  13. ↑ Reinhard Härtel : Paulicius . In: Lexicon of the Middle Ages (LexMA). Volume 6, Artemis & Winkler, Munich / Zurich 1993, ISBN 3-7608-8906-9 , Sp. 1812.
  14. ↑ The name of the author does not appear anywhere in the chronicle. For a time it was attributed to a Giovanni Sagornino, which is why it was known as Sagornina . On the authorship of Johannes Diaconus indicates that the mysterious visit of Otto III. in Venice comes from him, and that some of the events could only be known to him, as well as to the two rulers, the emperor and the doge at the time. In addition, his name appears among the firmators of the contracts between Venice and Otto III. ( Giovanni Monticolo : Cronache veneziane antichissime , Rome 1890, pp. XXIX-XXXV).
  15. ↑ The Cronaca of Johannes Diaconus covers the period from the creation of Venice to 1008. First, John appears in the sources in the privilege of Otto III. from May 1, 995, it is last documented for the year 1018 (Antonio Menniti Ippolito: Johannes Diaconus . In: Lexikon des Mittelalters (LexMA). Volume 5, Artemis & Winkler, Munich / Zurich 1991, ISBN 3-7608-8905- 0 , col. 569 f.).
  16. ↑ Stefano Gasparri: Anno 713. La leggenda di Paulicio e le origini di Venezia , in: Uwe Israel (ed.): Venezia. I giorni della storia , Venice 2011, p. 27-45, here: p. 30 f.
  17. ↑ Andreae Danduli chronica brevis (Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, 12), pp. 351–373, here: p. 353 ( digitized version ).
  18. ↑ Willem Theodor Graswinckel Libertas Veneta , ex Officina Abrahami Commelini, Leiden 1634, p 411 ( digitized ).
  19. ↑ Roberto Pesce (Ed.): Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo , Centro di studi medievali e rinascimentali 'Emmanule Antonio Cicogna', Venice 2010, p. 14.
  20. ↑ Stefano Gasparri: The First Dukes and the Origins of Venice , in: Sauro Gelichi , Stefano Gasparri (ed.): Venice and Its Neighbors from the 8th to 11th Century. Through Renovation and Continuity , Brill, Leiden / Boston 2018, pp. 5–26, here. P. 11.
  21. ↑ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Documenti relativi alla Storia di Venezia anteriori al Mille , Vol. I: Secoli V-IX , Padua 1942, n. 44, pp. 71-75.
  22. ^ Antonio Rossi: Sulla Cronaca Altinate , in: Archivio Storico Italiano 8 (1845) 3-228, here: p. 20 ( digitized version ).
  23. ^ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo civitatum Italie seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Tipografia del Senato, Rome 1933 ( digitized version ). Cessi shows in footnote (b) on p. 115 that in the handwriting S, that is, the handwriting in the Patriarchs' Seminar in Venice, “a. .XVIIII. et m. ** et d. .viii. ”( digitized version ).
  24. ↑ This is what N. Stivieri claims: Storia di Venezia dalla sua origine fino ai giorni nostri , Milan / Venice / Triest 1870, p. 4 ( digitized version ).
  25. ^ Roberto Pesce (Ed.): Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo. Origini - 1362 , Centro di Studi Medievali e Rinascimentali "Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna", Venice 2010, p. 14 f.
  26. ↑ Heliodorus of Altino, around 335-404, was the first bishop of Altinum .
  27. ↑ Pietro Marcello : Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia in the translation by Lodovico Domenichi, Marcolini, 1558, p. 1 f. ( Digitized version ).
  28. ↑ Petri marcelli De uitis principum et gestis Venetorum compendium , Venice 1502, o. S. ( digitized version ).
  29. ↑ 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. 46 f. ( online ).
  30. ^ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo civitatum Italie seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Tipografia del Senato, Rome 1933 ( digitized version ). Cessi shows in footnote (b) on p. 115 that in the handwriting S, that is, the handwriting in the Patriarchs' Seminar in Venice, “a. .XVIIII. et m. ** et d. .viii. ”( digitized version ).
  31. ↑ Pietro Marcello, New Year Girellus, Heinrich Kellner : De vita, moribus et rebus gestis omnium ducum Venetorum , Paul Reffeler for Sigismund Feyerabend, Frankfurt, 1574th
  32. ↑ Heinrich Kellner : Chronica that is Warhaffte actual and short description, all life in Venice , Frankfurt 1574, p. 1r – 1v ( digitized, p. 1r ).
  33. ↑ 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 ).
  34. ↑ Alessandro Maria Vianoli: Der Venetianischen Herthaben life / government, and withering / from the first Paulutio Anafesto on / bit on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , Nuremberg 1686, p. 30.
  35. ↑ Jacob von Sandrart : Kurtze and increased description of the origin / recording / areas / and government of the world famous Republick Venice , Nuremberg 1687, p. 11 ( digitized, p. 11 ).
  36. ↑ J. de Blainville: The Lord von Blainville, former secretary of the embassy of the States General of the United Netherlands at the Spanish Court, travel description through Holland, Upper Germany and Switzerland, but especially through Italy , Vol. 4.1, Lemgo 1767 (especially pp. 37-84 , Section Venice including onward journey) ( digitized version ).
  37. ↑ Johann Tobias Köhler (transl.): The Lord von Blainville, former secretary of the embassy of the States General of the United Netherlands at the Spanish Court, travel description especially through Italy containing a description of Venice, the way to Rome and of Rome itself with the surrounding area , vol. 2 , Dept. 1, Meyersche Buchhandlung, Lemgo 1765, p. 47 ( digitized version ).
  38. ↑ Quoted from: Johann Sporschil: Gibbon's History of Decay and Fall of the Roman Empire , Leipzig 1837, p. 2277.
  39. ↑ August Daniel von Binzer : Venice in 1844 , Gustav Heckenast, Leipzig 1845, p. 11 f.
  40. ↑ 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, Leipzig and Riga 1769, pp. 83 f., 92–94 ( digitized version ).
  41. ↑ Francesco Zanotto: Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia , Vol. 4, Venice 1861, p. 7, note (1).
  42. ^ Wilhelm Obermüller : German-Celtic, historical-geographic dictionary , vol. 2, 7th delivery, Denicke, Leipzig 1868, p. 901.
  43. ^ Samuele Romanin : Lezioni di Storia Veneta , Vol. 1, Florence 1875, pp. 23–45 ( digitized version ).
  44. ↑ 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, pp. 35-48 ( digitized version ).
  45. ^ Pietro Pinton : La storia di Venezia di AF Gfrörer , in: Archivio Veneto 25.2 (1883) 23-48 ( digitized ).
  46. ^ Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , 3 vol., Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, p. 43 f. ( Digitized version , pages 48 to 186 are missing!).
  47. ↑ Eric Cochrane, Julius Kirshner: Deconstructing Lane's Venice , in: The Journal of Modern History 47 (1975) 321-334.
  48. ↑ Roberto Cessi : Paulicius dux , in Archivio Veneto-tridentino 10 (1926) 158-179.
  49. ↑ Gino Luzzatto : L'opera storica di Roberto Cessi , in: Miscellanea in onore di Roberto Cessi , 3 vol., Vol. 1, Rome 1958, pp. XIII – XXIV, here: p. XX.
  50. ↑ Andrea Da Mosto : I dogi di Venezia , Taylor & Francis, 1977, reprint Pisa 1999, p. 8 f.
  51. ↑ Reinhard Härtel : Paulicius . In: Lexicon of the Middle Ages (LexMA). Volume 6, Artemis & Winkler, Munich / Zurich 1993, ISBN 3-7608-8906-9 , Sp. 1812.
  52. ↑ Stefano Gasparri thinks of Piero Bognetti: Natura, politica e religione nelle origini di Venezia , in: Le origini di Venezia , Florence 1964, pp. 15 and 32.
  53. ↑ Stefano Gasparri: Anno 713. La leggenda di Paulicio e le origini di Venezia , in: Uwe Israel (ed.): Venezia. I giorni della storia , Venice 2011, pp. 27-45.
  54. ↑ Anna Maria Pazienza: Archival Documents as Narrative: The Sources of the Istoria Veneticorum and the Plea of ​​Rižana , in: Sauro Gelichi, Stefano Gasparri (ed.): Venice and Its Neighbors from the 8th to 11th Century. Through Renovation and Continuity , Brill, Leiden and Boston 2018, pp. 27–50.
  55. ↑ Giordano Brunettin: Il cosiddetto testamento del patriarca Fortunato ii di Grado (825) , in: Memorie storiche forogiuliesi 71 (1991) 51–123.
  56. ↑ Lodovico Pizzati: Venetians. The First Doge , AuthorHouse, Bloomington 2017.
  57. ↑ Roberto Cessi (Ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 28 ( digitized version ).
  58. ^ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 46, line 2 ( digitized version ).
  59. ↑ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 115 ( digitized version ).
  60. ↑ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 127, lines 22 f. ( Digitized version ).
  61. ^ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 154 ( digitized version ).
  62. ^ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 165 ( digitized ).
  63. ^ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 166 ( digitized version ).
  64. ↑ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 169 ( digitized version ).
  65. ^ Roberto Cessi (ed.): Origo Civitatum Italiae seu Venetiarum (Chronicon Altinate et Chronicon Gradense) , Rome 1933, p. 170, line 30 ( digitized version ).
  66. ^ Ester Pastorello (Ed.): Andrea Dandolo, Chronica per extensum descripta aa. 460-1280 dC , (= Rerum Italicarum Scriptores XII, 1), Nicola Zanichelli, Bologna 1938, pp. 105-108 ( digital copy , from p. 104 f. ).
  67. ↑ Also Luigi Andrea Berto: Il vocabolario politico e sociale della “Istoria Veneticorum” di Giovanni Diacono , Il poligrafo, Padua 2001.
predecessor Office successor
--- Doge of Venice
697–717 		Marcello Tegalliano
personal data
SURNAME Paulicius
ALTERNATIVE NAMES Paulucius; Anafesto, Paolo Lucio; Anafesto, Paoluccio
BRIEF DESCRIPTION first doge of Venice
DATE OF BIRTH 7th century
DATE OF DEATH 8th century