Pietro II Orseolo

Saints John and Paul, part of a diptych , Byzantium around 990, Venice National Archaeological Museum

Pietro II. Orseolo (* 961 in Venice ; † 1009 there), one follows the so-called Venetian tradition, i.e. the historiography of the Republic of Venice , its 26th doge , which has been increasingly state-controlled since the 14th century . The Doge, referred to in the sources as Peter ( or Piero in Venetian ), usually supplemented by the family name Ursoylus or Ursiulus , later Ursiollo , ruled from 991 to 1009.

He is considered the most important doge of the early Venetian period ( Gerhard Rösch ). At the same time, we are not so well informed about any doge of the early Middle Ages . This is because Johannes Diaconus , the author of the Istoria Veneticorum , one of the oldest Venetian historical works, was not only a contemporary, but was personally in the service of the Doge and acted personally at the highest diplomatic level. Since his chronicle breaks off with Peter II, the sources of his successors are much less favorable.

Under the militarily extremely successful Doge began a phase of increased economic expansion of Venice into the Adriatic region, where Peter fought piracy on the east bank and the power of the Narentans there broke. Even if the cities of Dalmatia were by no means permanently subordinate to Venice, the claim born from them was never given up. Due to the new security for shipping - reinforced by the conquest of Bari, which was occupied by the Saracens in 1002 or 1003, which he returned to the empire - closer trade relations extended to Constantinople , but at the same time also to a greatly increased extent in the Roman-German Empire Dimensions. A series of treaties secured the borders of the small state in terms of area, whose traders were privileged for the first time in both empires and which were soon subject to their own jurisdiction. Both friendly relations with the emperors of the two great empires and marriage projects of his two sons Giovanni (Johannes) and Ottone (Otto), who became co-doges one after the other, contributed to this. The older son, John, died with his Byzantine wife Maria and their son Basilios, named after Emperor Basilios II , of an epidemic that historiography referred to as "pestilencia". In his place followed the younger son Ottone, whose name on Emperor Otto III. went back and who was his godfather , his late father in the Doge's office.

Life and domination

Origin, political advancement

The Maximianskathedra , created in the middle of the 6th century, wanted the second Pietro Orseolo to send to Emperor Otto III. give away, as it says in the Chronicle of Johannes Diaconus . The chronicler was supposed to hand the play over to the emperor, who however died. Archbishop Maximianus (* 498 or 499 in Pula, † 556 or 557) consecrated the church of San Vitale with the famous mosaics by Theodora and Justinian ; only a few quotations have come down to us from the archbishop's chronicle.

Pietro Orseolo came from two of the most influential families in Venice. His father of the same name was a Doge from 976 to 978 - he was canonized in 1731 - his mother was Felicita Malipiero (or Badoer?). However, in 978 his father fled to the Catalan monastery of Cuxa , leaving his family behind. Pietro married Maria, daughter of Doge Vitale Candiano , with whom he had nine children.

For the first time, Pietro appears as a witness in the document that led to the foundation of the Benedictine monastery on San Giorgio Maggiore on December 20, 982 . This was made out by the Doge Tribuno Memmo (979–991). After his forced abdication in 991 - probably as a result of the clashes between the factions led by the Caloprini and Morosini, which had led Venice into an open conflict with Emperor Otto II - the barely thirty-year-old Pietro was elected Doge.

Trade privileges, based on Otto III.

Right at the beginning of his rule, Venice received two important privileges . On July 19, 992, the city received a comprehensive bull of gold that gave its merchants in the Byzantine Empire enormous advantages. The two emperors Basil II and his younger brother Constantine VIII issued this imperial certificate with a gold bull. Venice achieved something similar against the King of the Holy Roman Empire and Emperor Otto III. who also granted the Venetians extensive immunities (Pactum von Mühlhausen). The Venetian diplomacy eventually reach these agreements with the major powers of their time with those less significant immediate neighbors decisive contracts. Treaties were signed with the bishops of Treviso , Ceneda and Belluno . However, there were violent disputes with Giovanni II, the Bishop of Belluno, which lasted from 996 to 998. He had seized the city of Eraclea during the trade and hunger blockade against Venice initiated by Otto II , but finally had to give in because of a blockade imposed by Venice.

Decisive for the emerging, initially economic superpower position of Venice, in addition to the immense commercial advantages of the two privileges, was the reference to Otto III, who came to Italy in 996. While taking up residence in Verona , he agreed to become a godfather ('padrino') of one of Pietro's sons on the occasion of his confirmation . The Doge, for his part, changed the name of his son to “Otho” (analogously, he named another son “Enrico”, this time in honor of the new ruler of the Roman-German Empire Enrico II , as Henry II is called in Italian).

Overall, the visible wealth of the lagoon city grew, and, as Gherardo Ortalli was able to demonstrate, not only the large families with their extensive economic resources, but also small and medium-sized fortunes, from the expansion of trade under the aegis of privilege and personal, participated Contacts with the other rulers.

Dalmatia

The historiography focused on maps and military successes meant that the Doge's decisive successes were seen elsewhere. It was about land ownership in Dalmatia and thus the rule over the Adriatic . The Doge succeeded in skilfully interfering in the expansion policy of both empires. While in the west the Byzantine mother emperor Theophanu exercised considerable influence on the politics of the young western emperor, and in the east Emperor Basil II extended the northern borders of his empire back to the Danube and in this area mainly conquered Bulgaria , just as Croatia was incorporated into his empire , Venice succeeded in laying the foundations for a maritime empire between these powers.

Venetian possessions around the year 1000

The Slavs at the Narenta Estuary ( Neretva ), considered pirates and known as Narentans , were such a disruptive factor for Pietro II's trade policy that he began one of the numerous punitive expeditions that had been carried out at great intervals for a long time. In contrast to these campaigns, however, he now attacked the pirates' bases, which were difficult to conquer, with a considerably larger fleet, and he also used the galleys, a new type of ship that was smaller but considerably faster and more agile. The trigger was repeated complaints from the Dalmatian city-states. Pietro took the opportunity to set out with a huge fleet in 998 (or 1000). He first drove along the east coast of the Adriatic to receive publicly visible signs of subordination from the bishops and representatives of the municipalities. So the fleet drove to Grado , Pola , Cherso and Veglia , then on to Zara , where the population was prompted to take an oath of loyalty, as they were in the course of the intra-Croatian battles between Svetoslav and his brother Krešimir III. had been bullied. Finally the fleet continued its voyage to Spalato , Ragusa , Curzola . She found serious resistance on the island of Lagosta , which only surrendered after a fierce battle. After his triumphant return in July, Pietro held the title of Dux Dalmatiae (Duke of Dalmatia). The victory over the Narentans in no way made Venice the master of Dalmatia, because Byzantium initially enforced this claim, but Venice's claim later had a decisive effect on politics there until the end of the republic, i.e. until 1797. This victory is held today in the Festa della Sensa , which is celebrated on the Sunday after Ascension Day. This Ascension Day is the oldest festival in Venice. The Doge and the Bishop of Olivolo (today Castello ) blessed the water at the Lido and prayed for a happy seafaring. In the German-speaking world, this festival is also known as the "Marriage of the Doge with the Sea", in Italian "Sposalizio del mare". It is unclear whether this festival actually goes back to around 1000 or whether it has its roots in the 12th century.

The expedition had taken place in consultation with the Byzantine court, but it in no way led to an exclusive orientation of Venetian policy towards the east. Pietro also maintained excellent relations with the West Emperor to compensate. Under the pretext of wanting to take care of his health there, Otto III stayed. in April 1001 in Pomposa , where, as agreed, he met Johannes Diaconus , the important chronicler who describes these events in great detail. According to his portrayal, the two men secretly drove in a boat to Venice, where they first met the Doge in the monastery on the island of San Servolo , and then made further agreements in the monastery of San Zaccaria in the vicinity of the Doge's Palace . In addition to outward demonstrations of friendship - this is how Otto became godfather, the child got his name - and mutual appreciation, Pietro managed to avoid more precise obligations within the framework of the imperialist rule plans that Otto had probably had in mind.

San Michele in Pavia, the coronation place of Charles I for rex Langobardorum in 774, but also of Arduin in 1002 and Henry II in 1004

Death of Otto III. (1002), turn to Byzantium, marriage project and death of the eldest son (1007)

But Otto III died in 1002. completely surprising at the age of 21. Three weeks later, on February 15, 1002, Arduin was crowned king by Ivrea in Pavia . Otto's successor across the Alps, Heinrich II , who initially struggled to assert himself, only crossed the Alps in 1004. Heinrich called Arduin a “regni nostri invasor” (meaning: intruder into our kingdom). Arduin's northern Italian opponents, especially Leo von Vercelli , but also the margraves of northeast and central Italy had turned to Heinrich, who then sent Otto von Worms , the Duke of Carinthia and grandson of Otto I, to northern Italy. He suffered a heavy defeat against Arduin in January 1003 at the Veronese Klausen . Now Heinrich was crowned King of Italy (rex Langobardorum) in Pavia on May 14, 1004 - the coronation of a German king as King of Italy, which took place for the first time since Otto I, took place in the same church in which Arduin was crowned - , but the night after the coronation, the citizens of Pavias attacked Heinrich and his companions, causing the city to go up in flames. Even if he accepted homage from other Lombards on a court day in Pontelungo , the splintered balance of power seemed to return before Otto I, because Arduin was undefeated. But even for years he did not succeed in exercising royal rule beyond northwestern Italy. It was not until the turn of the year 1008/09 that an Italian law firm of Henry II was set up again. Upper Italy, especially the northeast, was left to its own devices until 1014.

This situation played into the hands of the Doge, who increasingly turned to his eastern sphere of influence. In 1002 Pietro had co-opted his son, 18-year-old Johannes (984-1008), as a fellow doge. Between August 10 and September 6, 1003 (or 1002) the Doge personally led a fleet against the Saracens in Apulia , who had succeeded for the last time in driving the Byzantines from Bari . This expedition was also discussed with the Eastern Emperor, to whom the Doge returned the city.

To seal the alliance, John married the Byzantine princess Maria, niece of Basil II. According to John the deacon, the couple "ab imperatoribus aureas diademas suis capitibus perceperunt". So they received their gold diadems from the imperial hands (Johannes Diaconus, ed. Monticolo, p. 168). Three days of celebrations followed. Their child, conceived a year later in Constantinople and born in Venice, was named in honor of an emperor, this time "Basilio" or "Vasilio" ("Vassilium ob avunculi sui imperatoris nomen imposuit" it says in the Istoria Veneticorum , ed. Monticolo, p. 169). On the occasion of their return, the Doge donated 25,000 libra to further decorate the chapel, which was considered to be St. Mark's Basilica. This marriage of a member of the imperial family would have opened up entirely new possibilities for the Doge's wide-ranging policy, especially since Henry II left Italy without having achieved anything, had it not been for an epidemic ('plague' or 'pestilentia') in 1007 for both his son and his son killed his Byzantine daughter-in-law, 'the Greek', as she calls Johannes Diaconus, and his grandson. John and Maria were buried in San Zaccaria , which had developed into a kind of burial place for the Orseolo. Pietro now, at the request of the people, co-opted his second-born, only 14-year-old son Ottone as a fellow doge.

Death, burial in San Zaccaria, descendants

The Doge himself died two years later after bequeathing some of his riches to the poor and the clergy . He was buried next to his firstborn son John in the atrium of San Zaccaria.

With his wife Maria he had five sons and four daughters, including Johannes, who died in 1008. These were Orso (988-1049), Bishop of Torcello and Patriarch of Grado , and Vitale (* around 998, † after 1040), also Bishop of Torcello, succeeding his brother, then Ottone , who finally succeeded the Doge in office Enrico, of whom only the name is known. Her daughters were Hicela (Icella), Stephan (Stjepan), the son of the Croatian king Krešimir III. married, as well as the three daughters Felicita, who had been given the name of her grandmother and who became the abbess of the monastery of San Giovanni Evangelista di Torcello , and two other daughters, whose names have not even been passed down.

reception

High Middle Ages until the end of the republic

Pietros II Orseolo coat of arms according to the ideas of the 17th century

Emperor Otto III. and the Doge Pietro II. Orseolo visit the monastery of San Zaccaria in 1001 (but it could also be Frederick III and the Doge Cristoforo Moro in 1469), historical paintings by Giovanni Antonio Fumiani († 1710) in the monastery of San Zaccaria

This phase was of decisive importance for the relationship with both the Ottonians and the Macedonian dynasty , because Venice was able to maintain friendly relations with the far superior, extremely expansive empires, and to restore them to the Roman-German Empire. After the conflict with Otto II, these efforts resulted in an unusually friendly relationship with his son and successor Otto III. We do not have such a vivid and detailed chronicle of any of the earlier Doges as that of the contemporary Johannes Diaconus, who acted in the immediate vicinity and on behalf of Orseolo. For Venice in the 14th century, the interpretation given to Orseolo's rule was accordingly of the highest symbolic importance in the continuum of external relations. The focus of the Chronicle of Doge Andrea Dandolo represents in perfect form the views of the long-established political leadership bodies, which have steered the writing of history especially since this Doge. His work was repeatedly used as a template by later chroniclers and historians, so it became extremely dominant in the ideas of Venetian history before its time. More important than this source, however, is the chronicle of John the deacon, who was apparently personally involved in the events. For both chroniclers, the focus was on law from their own roots, i.e. the derivation and legitimation of their territorial claims. Therefore, the recognition and, if possible, the expansion of the “old treaties” by the newly appointed emperors (and kings) has always been of enormous importance, but in 992 a breakthrough was achieved in the east with a privilege that Venice traders there had an enormous, irreversible one Dominance, which was to be further strengthened by the decline after the Macedonian dynasty. The question of the hereditary monarchy , which the Candiano tried to enforce at the time, and which soon became virulent again despite the catastrophe of 976, at the time of Andrea Dandolo was no longer in any way with the interests of the ruling families at that time, but above all with the To bring the state of constitutional development in line. At the same time, the balance between the ambitious and dominant families remained one of the most important goals, and the derivation of the prominent position of the 'nobili' in the state was of great importance. The stages of political developments that ultimately led to the disempowerment of the Doge, who was increasingly assigned representative tasks but no longer allowed to make independent decisions, was a further objective of the presentation, even if Pietro II Orseolo embodied the opposite of this type of ruler, because in him one could almost see absolutist traits. In contrast, the institutional integration of the office was comparatively far advanced in the 14th century.

Portrait of the Doge with his son Ottone Orseolo (II.), Domenico Tintoretto , oil on panel, 1570s, Doge's Palace; in Pietro II Orseolo's book the book highlights the conquest of Dalmatia.

The oldest vernacular chronicle of Venice, the Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo from the late 14th century, depicts the processes, just like Andrea Dandolo, on a level that has long been known by individuals, especially the Doges. This is all the more true more for the second Pietro Orseolo. The individual doges even form the temporal framework for the entire chronicle, as was customary in Venice. The Cronica reports on "Piero Orsiolo", who is descended from the aforementioned saint, and "tucta la Dalmatia", besieged by the Narentans, offered him and the Venetians the rule. Therefore the Doge, “personalmente” leading a large “armada de galleie et nave”, took over the “signoria”. "Giara" (Zara) received him with processions and singing, the whole hinterland swore allegiance to the Doge and his successors. Likewise, everyone from “Belgrado, Sibenico et Thrau, Spalato, Ragusi, Arbe et tucte altre contrade de Sclavania” came to Venice to take an oath of loyalty to the “Comun di Venesia”. Then the doge defeated the Narentans. The new possessions were named "Dalmatia et Croatia", the Doge sent "rettori" to all cities. "Octo Orsiolo", the Doge's son, went to Ragusa, "Domenego Pollani" after "Spallato", "Giane Corner" after "Trau", "Vidal Michiel" after "Sibinico", "Mapheo Justinian" became Rector in "Belgrado" , “Marin Memo” in “Ziara”, as the chronicler knows. After this list, the author of the chronicle adds: "dele altre et luogi et terre non trovo che fusse, ma può esser che li dicti per prima sufficiase in tucti luogi". So he could not find out who had become rector in the other cities of Dalmatia, but it could also be that the men in question were initially sufficient. Regarding Otto's visit, the author says that he visited Venice because of its “grande divotion et riverentia” in order to look up the relics of St. Mark. There he was received with due honors. The friendship between the rulers was so great that Otto returned the usual tribute “per dono et liberalitade” that had to be paid. This probably consisted of “alcun pano d'oro”, cloth with a gold weave. Without details, he only mentions the privilege exhibited, but does not mention the Byzantine counterpart at all. Only shortly after the emperor had been honored with escort to Lombardy, the doge, "habiando ducado ani XVIII", died after 18 years of doge rule.

Page from an edition of Pietro Marcello's Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia, depicting the (alleged) first Doge.

Pietro Marcello meant in 1502 in his work later translated into Volgare under the title Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia , the doge "Pietro Orseolo Doge XXV." "Fu creato doge dal popolo". Venice has not only flourished internally and externally, but has grown considerably. According to the author, Venice initially received a privilege from the two Byzantine emperors, which freed the Venetian traders from the "gabelle". Then the Doge sent envoys to the Egyptians and Syrians and "li fece amici de'Venetiani", thus made friends of them, similar to what he achieved with all princes of Italy through gifts and kindnesses ("amorevolezze"). He imposed peace on the Narentans on the condition that they compensate for the damage and give up piracy. Equipped with the standard of St. "Ermagora", which he had received from the Patriarch of Grado, succeeded in the first submission of Parenzo, but also of Pola, just as 'many other cities in Istria and Dalmatia' recognized Venice's rule. Curzola was taken by force, as was Lesina. The Doge returned to Venice after clearing the sea of ​​“assassini” (“purgato”) and subjecting Istria and Dalmatia. He was no longer only to be the Doge of Venice, but also of Dalmatia. Pietro, one of his sons, was sent to Verona. He was named "Otone" after his godfather. Venice received very great privileges from the godfather. Marcello also reports on the emperor's secret visit to Venice. Because of his merits, the Doge was allowed “per publico consentimento” to raise his son Giovanni to “compagno”. He returned from Constantinople with his wife and brother "Otone" as well as many gifts and died. After Pietro had reigned happily for 18 years, the author adds immediately after the tragic death of his son, daughter-in-law (and grandson, whom Marcello does not mention), the doge died and was buried in the "segrestia" of San Zaccaria.

After the chronicle of Gian Giacomo Caroldo , the Historie venete dal principio della città fino all'anno 1382 , which was rather laconic for earlier Venetian history before 1280 and completed in 1532, a comparatively detailed report follows. Otto II had forbidden food deliveries to Venice, and the Venetian traders had also been expelled from the empire. The Venetians who, according to the chronicles, wanted to defend their freedom were starving. Cavarzere allowed himself to be driven into revolt by the Caloprini, who had fled to Verona to the imperial court. It submitted to Otto II. The Bishop of Belluno occupied many of the Venetian properties. The emperor, who persisted in his hatred of Venice, died in 983, so that Venice was freed from this danger. The Doge Tribuno Memmo became a monk. When Pietro II Orseolo was elected, the chronicler gave the age of a Doge for the first time, namely 30 years. He not only brought peace and tranquility, but also expanded the territory. In contrast to the Cronica , the new ruler sent envoys to Constantinople who received from the two emperors "privilegio d'immunità, che Venetiani liberamente potessero navigare et essercitare la mercatia in tutti li luoghi del loro Imperio", an immunity privilege that the Venetians had the free Allowed shipping and trade in goods in all places in their empire. Also to Otto III. The Doge sent two men, namely “Marino Diacono et Gioanni Orsiolo”, who received not only the 'usual' privileges, as the author emphasizes, but also new prerogatives honoring the republic, “et massimamente ch'alcuno ribello Venetiano non fusse accettato nelle terre et luoghi dell'Imperatore ”, meaning that no rebel can be accepted into the empire - these were probably the consequences of the flight of the Caloprini, who caused Otto's father to besiege Venice. In addition, the Doge issued an edict that no one was allowed to pay tribute to the Narentans when sailing on the Adriatic , who practiced their “arte piratica” there. In order to regain the goods that had been stolen from Venice by the Bishop of Belluno, Venice for its part successfully blocked the "Bellunense". As Otto III. came to Italy, a peace treaty was signed. If you follow Caroldo, the doge sent his son Pietro to Verona, where the emperor became his godfather. The son was now called "Otho" and he returned with rich gifts. When the emperor was in Ravenna - also in contrast to other chronicles - the Doge sent his "Oratori" Pietro Gradenigo and "Gioanni Diacono", who received a new privilege. The “giudice delli Croati” inflicted severe damage on Venetians who refused to pay tribute due to the Doge's edict, whereupon “Baduario Bragadino” took “Scusa” with six ships, where he freed and took many prisoners with him. The author thinks that the emperors "Basilio et Constantino" asked the Doge to send his son to Constantinople, who returned "honorato" and with "no small gifts" (p. 79). Then the author describes in unusual detail the disputes with the Narentans, which arose because the two sons of "Tirpunir Re de Slavi" fought over their inheritance. From this dispute between "Murcimer et Sarigira" the Dalmatian cities suffered so much damage that "consentirono li Greci Imperatori che Dalmatini fussero aiutati da Venetiani" that the Venetians helped them with the consent of the Byzantine emperor, who himself in the fight with 'northern and barbaric peoples stood '("nationi"). With that, as Caroldo expressly states, the legal subordination began under Venice's rule (“principio di dominar la Dalmatia giuridicamente”). The Narentans abducted 40 residents of Zara, whereupon the Dalmatian cities asked the Doge for help. He drove with the fleet to Aquileia after the standard in San Pietro di Castello had been handed over to him by the Bishop of Olivolo . From there it went to Grado, to the "Isola di Parenzo", then to the monastery "San Andrea" on an island near Pula, on to Ossero, where even the castellans belonging to the Roman-German Empire "spontaneamente" the oath of allegiance to him and his successors swear. Zara solemnly received the Doge as his "Signor", whereupon the 'King of the Slavs' sent two messengers asking for peace, which the Doge refused. On the contrary, he consulted with the “principali capi dell'una et l'altra Natione, Veneta et Dalmatina” on how to occupy the enemy’s places. The Venetians lay in wait with ten galleys near the island of "Cazza" ( Sušac ), which was furthest off the coast, and after a short chase to Trau, they captured the 40 Narentan merchant ships who wanted to return from Apulia . "Serigna", who had been expelled by his brother, allied himself with the Orseolo and left him his son "Steffano" as a hostage. The Doge married this to his daughter "Nicela". Now Spalato also submitted to Venice by oath. After the 'Prince of the Slavs' promised him compensation for the damage, he released all but six men. The island of Curzola, which refused to take the oath, was violently subjugated. Now it was against the "Lesignani, huomini di perversa sorte", bad and greedy, who had robbed the Venetian ships. They were ready to submit to the arrival of the entire fleet, but the Doge demanded the destruction of the city, whereupon the residents refused to submit (p. 83 f.). At this point the chronicle offers an address to the "soldati" for the first time. In it, the Orseolo accused the enemy not only of piracy, but also of attacking Venice itself. After the conquest, the city was destroyed, but the residents were pardoned. The fleet withdrew to the "Isola di San Massimo". Now the bishop of Ragusa also took the oath of allegiance with his family - as the bishops appear as the real city lords in the chronicle. “In antiche scritture”, according to the author, he found the said rectors, who have now been placed over the cities. Thereupon, according to the author, the Doge sent "Gioanni Diacono" to Emperor Otto to report the victory to him. The envoy moved with the emperor to Rome, where the borders of Venice at Heraclea were confirmed as they existed at the time of Pietro Candiano. On this occasion the emperor expressed the wish to meet secretly with the doge, "suo cordial amico", to embrace him and personally congratulate him on the victory. Otto went to Rome, then to the Pomposa Abbey , where he boarded a boat with six servants and confidants as well as Johannes Diaconus and came to San Servolo undetected . From there, the two rulers visited San Zaccaria and St. Markus, then the Doge's Palace. After all, the emperor kept a daughter of the Doge at the baptism and lifted the obligation to send the emperor a “palio d'Altare” every year. After Otto had left Venice the whole time in simple clothes, the doge called the people together to report on the visit of the emperor. He also arbitrated a dispute between Cavarzere and "Loredo", which went back to a privilege of Otto II, which had been issued during the said blockade. Because of the great merits of the Doge, the people asked him to raise his son to be a fellow Doge. The two doges, as it is expressly stated, sent Johannes Diaconus in 1002 to succeed the deceased emperor, to "Henrico Bavaro Imperatore", ie to Henry II. Johannes Diaconus received the usual privileges for Venice, who appointed emperor ("nominò") the second Pietro Orseolo not only to the Doge of Venice, but also of Dalmatia. A fleet led by his fellow doge and son supplied the Saracen besieged Bari with food. Together with the fleet under the leadership of the imperial "Gregorio capitano" he defeated the besiegers in a sea battle, whereupon the siege was blown up. The two sons of Doge, Johannes and Otto, were received with great honors by the two emperors in Constantinople. John was given the said Mary to wife. When he wanted to return to Venice with her, the Emperor Basil asked him to wait until he had defeated the Bulgarians. Upon his return, Johannes received the title of Patricius. With the relics of St. Barbara and "Otho" returned the couple, who shortly after their return had a son who was named "Basilio". In the next few lines the chronicler adds that the residents of Pieve di Sacco still had to pay the Ripaticum in Rialto and that the Falieri donated the church of San Benedetto they built to the Brondolo monastery . In the 15th year of the Doge “venne una mortalità”, “there was a death”, like “almost” everywhere in the world. No cure was found (“remedio”), because what helped one, harmed the other. The sick became lethargic and allowed the "pestilenza" to overwhelm them. On the 16th day, Johannes and Maria died. To comfort the Doge, the Venetians made Otho on Torcello a fellow doge. There Felicita was ordained abbess of San Giovanni Evangelista. The Doge completed the reconstruction of the Doge's Palace “con la Capella di San Marco”, as it is explicitly stated there, and distributed half of his fortune to his children and the other half to the poor. In the 17th year of his reign and in the 48th of his life the doge died and was buried in San Zaccaria.

In his Chronica, which appeared in 1574, Heinrich Kellner begins the actual and brief description of all life in Venice, likewise with a very positive assessment of the external and internal situation, but first emphasizes the Byzantine privilege of 992. His envoys made Egyptians and Syrians "friends", similarly in Italy. Against the Narentans he went to sea with a "large armor," forced a treaty that provided for reparation and an end to piracy; then the "Armada" "roams through" "the whole Dalmatian or Schlavonian Sea or Sea". After Kellner, Parenzo was subjugated for the first time at all, then the cities of Dalmatia followed, whereby "Then the Ragusa were frightened and moved / that they sent their envoys / and surrendered". Kellner was not the first to claim that "all the towns in the country had been filled with new officers or governors". To King Otto, on the way to Rome, Peter sent his son to Verona “and Otto was called”. “Afterwards Otto came to Venice / but unknown / then he had praised God” - this is Kellner's only reason for the secret visit to Venice. “For the sake of his merit / against the common good”, the Doge was finally allowed “to neme his Son Johannem as an assistant or Coadiutum.” But he died after he had returned “with his wife / and his brother Otone” from Constantinople was. Immediately after this, the author adds the Doge's death, "and his body was buried in Sanct Zacharias / in the Sacristey."

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 author counts, deviating by Pietro Marcello, "Petrus II. Orseolus, Der 26th Hertzog." For him, "all his attacks and underpinnings are refused at will and as it were by Fortuna herself and sent to her; When he started with the conquest of the Illyrian and Dalmatian provinces and landscapes, the empire was multiplied enormously: And / what is still the most astonishing thing / so he has the state not with cunning or violence [...] but with voluntary invitation and unconstrained will of these peoples / who by themselves / because of their love and friendliness / subordinate to / expand and enlarge ". They took their "only refuge in the Venetians" when the raids of the Narentans got out of hand, because Byzantium was far away and had "more important business to expedite". Now the bishop and the people of Parenzo, then Pola, "Belgrado, Zara, Tran, Veggia, Arbe and Sebenico", then "Spalato" submitted. Only “Curzola” was forced with force, as was “Lesina”, whose walls “seemed to be insurmountable”. Terrified of this surprising conquest, “Ragusa” also submitted to the Doge. Then the author reports how “Kayser Otto IV.” “Completely unknown knowledge / came to Venice / wherever he was in the monastery of St. Servol, accompanied / turned in by only five of his servants”. "But when he was recognized by the clairvoyant lynx eyes of political caution / even balden / he moved from the heart / but in silence / even received visits often". “By general approval”, the Doge “was allowed to take his son Johannem as an assistant”. But he and his wife died "of the plague that was rampant at the time" after returning from Greece. Only a few days later, since many Venetians were also dying of the disease, the Doge gave up his spirit in great "sorrow" and followed his son. Vianoli does not mention that the second Dogenson took over the office.

Portrait of Jacob von Sandrart (1630–1708), painter was Johann Leonhard Hirschmann , engraver Bernhard Vogel

In 1687 Jacob von Sandrart noted in his Opus Kurtze and increased description of the origin / recording / territories / and government of the world-famous republic of Venice that “In the year 991st Petrus Urseolus was elected.” Only at this time did a uniformity begin Enforce Count of Doges. Then von Sandrart goes on to say that he was a son of the one who "went away secretly / and went to a monastery". He "seized many cities in Histria and Dalmatia / so bit anhero was constantly attacked by the Narentan Slavonians / and made them submissive to the Republicq Venice." After him "he also conquered the island of Corcyra with the surname called the Black / so Today's day is called Curzola / and the island of Pharia, called anitzo Lisna ”and after his war campaign it was with the Narentans that“ neither a city / nor even the name of the people remained ”. A treaty was reached with Ragusa, the power of the Saracens was broken, and they were "expelled from all of Italy like this."

In his Opus Kurtze , published in the second edition from 1693, Johann Hübner mentions questions from the Political Historia only laconically (and with errors), under "Petrus Orseolus II." "The best cities in Dalmatia, namely Zara, Veggia, Sebenico, Spalatro, Curzola and Ragusa in the Venetian protection ”,“ because otherwise they were not protected from the Turkish sea-robbers. ”

Historical-critical representations (from the 18th century)

According to Johann Friedrich LeBret , who published his four-volume state history of the Republic of Venice from 1769 , the Orseolo "ruled" "well, they had creative national geniuses: but the more monarchical their way of thinking was, the more unbearable they became for a republic" (p. 233). When the newly elected doge announced his election to the Byzantine emperor, he received "on this occasion an open letter by which the Venetians were given permission to trade unhindered in all ports of the Greek Empire with complete exemption from all anchor money and customs duties." Byzantium delivered "Lush goods", their transport was in Venetian hands. Treaties were also concluded with the Islamic states (“Venice has never worried much about the papal shouting, which in a domineering tone wants to order all princes not to enter into an alliance with any unfaithful”), as well as with the Italians. “The times of Otto the Third were golden times for Venice”. In Mühlhausen, “Marinus and Johannes Urseolus” obtained the confirmation of the old treaties, and LeBret consulted a number of sources to prove that Venice sent the emperor a “coat of gold pieces” every year. But "Otto the third afterwards freed the Venetians forever from paying the cloak", a levy which, according to LeBret, expressed a relationship of subordination, even if not a relationship of domination. The so successful “spirit of action, which had already completely taken over the whole state, was only a hindrance to the pirates of Narenta.” In addition, according to the author, the doge developed ambition for urban planning: “Grado, the place of the patriarchy, saw a dilapidated Like a city, which without ornamentation looked like a village. He therefore rebuilt this city from scratch [...] In Heraklea he also had an excellent palace performed, next to which he built a country chapel ”(p. 236). When Bishop John of Belluno did not respond to Venice's demands for restitution or imperial orders, Venice blocked the Verona march, and the emperor tolerated this when he came to Italy. The son of a dog, Piero, came to Verona so that the emperor could act as godfather on the occasion of his confirmation . On this occasion the son of the Dog was given the name Otto, and the emperor in turn successfully put pressure on the Bishop of Belluno. This enabled the blockade to be lifted after the stolen goods were returned. On the return journey from Rome, Otto III. to Ravenna, where he confirmed her property to the "abbess Petronia, of the monastery of St. Zacharias in Venice". Not so on the east coast of the Adriatic. There three dominions arose there, namely "Croatia, Servia and the actual Dalmatia". As soon as the Croats had "thrown off the Frankish yoke, they also worried the Dalmatians who lived on the islands." The Byzantine emperor allowed the Dalmati to pay the Croatians the requested tribute, but only "a small gratitude to the Byzantine governor." ". Since they could not expect any more help from Byzantium, they went "under the protection of the Venetians". "Peter Urseolus was not a prince whom a band of robbers frightened", so he sent a fleet against the "predatory nests of the Croats". Badoer Bragadin then destroyed Pago, the doge promised "scornfully" to come himself to bring the Croatians their gold. The son of a dog "Otto" visited the emperor again in Pavia, who showered him with gifts. The imperial support made it possible for the Doge to conquer "entire provinces". After consulting the “Council of State” (p. 240), a fleet set sail under the command of the Doge. LeBret now also describes in detail the triumphant advance from Grado, but he doubts the submission of the city, added by later chroniclers, as well as that of Trieste, Pirano, Rovingo, Humago etc., because Istria was still part of the empire. In Dalmatia, on the other hand, he accepted gestures of submission and incorporated crews into his fleet - for LeBret he laid the "foundation for the constant warlike nursery from which Venice has drawn its best troops up to our times" (p. 241). Even before the campaign, the Doge had sent his son John to Constantinople, where he had received the emperor's consent. The author also carried out the marriage project with one of the Croatian kings, while Spalato, “the capital of Dalmatia”, submitted to him. Finally he conquered the two main islands of the Narentans, where he had the capital of the hated Lesina destroyed. “Orseolo therefore returned to Venice in triumph”, but “the oldest historians still do not report anything about the authorities that the Venetians put down in Dalmatia. This is a mere invention of Sabellicus, which is nowhere established but in his brain ”(p. 244 f.). At LeBret's, Johannes Diaconus meets Otto III in Como, where he learned of the Doge's triumph late. "The emperor was so astonished at this that, as a great regent who had a lofty spirit, he wished to get to know the equally lofty spirit of the Venetian prince." Therefore, he had the Doge propose a secret meeting in Venetian territory, a meeting which LeBret describes in detail. With him, in any case, the initiative came from the emperor. On this occasion, the Venetians were exempted from the annual gold coat tax. As a gift, the author lists, among other things, the “armchair made of ivory”. “They finally parted as true friends and their departure cost them tears.” Finally, the author describes the expulsion of the Saracens from Bari. The Byzantine emperor initiated a marriage project through which Maria "a daughter of Patricius Argyropulos" married Johannes, the eldest son of the Dog. Because of its length, LeBret suspects that Johannes Diaconus traveled with the son of the Dog. That Basil was born in Venice. "How crude must the customs of this century have been and how much attention must the Greek gallantries have caused", if a two-pronged fork was one of them, the author asks himself rhetorically.

Festa della Sensa , known from the 16th century as the marriage of the Doge to the sea : The Doge Alvise IV. Mocenigo 1763 on the Bucintoro in front of the Riva di Sant'Elena , Francesco Guardi , oil on canvas, 66 × 101 cm, around 1775 until 1780, Louvre

Samuele Romanin , the historian who depicts in great detail and embedded it in the historical context, who portrayed this epoch in 1853 in the first of ten volumes of his Storia documentata di Venezia , believes that the Doge's first act was the sending of negotiators to the emperors of the West and the East passed. 'Perhaps', said Romanin, the Chrysobull of 992 had already negotiated Mauritius, son of his predecessor, but he may have left the honor to Peter II. Romanin remarked that the Venetians were not allowed to ship goods from Amalfi , Jews or Lombards with all these facilities. The “Protetti” (“Protected”) became “Protettori” (“Protector”). In order to protect this trade in the West as well, good contacts were established with the rulers there; In 992 the old privileges were extended in Mühlhausen. The Venetians in the empire were also not subject to imperial jurisdiction, and the fodrum was omitted . Eventually Capodargine and Loreo Venice were restituted. In addition, diplomatic contacts extended to the Saracens. This alone indicates that the political concept of Venice has changed. The three bishops of the Verona march, that is, of Belluno, Treviso and Ceneda , had to submit , which at first even the emperor could not induce to give in, but which had to give in after a trade blockade. Belluno could not sell meat, butter or wood, Venice no longer supplied salt. When the emperor came to Italy, they found themselves ready to compromise. In 996 the Doge received imperial permission to build a port on the Sile, not far from the ruins of Altinum . Commercial agreements were made with "Siccardo", Bishop of Cenedia, and with his colleague from Treviso. From the former he received half of the fort and the port of Settimo at the mouth of the Livenza in the lagoon of Caorle, where there was competition with the traders from Oderzo, Ceneda and for 29 years with the possibility of extension, for lease for 60 libra oil Feltre existed, but mainly with German dealers. In the event of violation, a doubling of the rent or 10 libra gold for the bishop was provided. Siccardo's successor Grauso confirmed the contract in 1001 and also granted Venice the port of Villano, which was perhaps on the Lemene , on the same lease terms . In addition, there were regulations on the legal relationships of the respective merchants. The salt was exempt from all taxes up to an amount of 20 modii . Similar to Comacchio, Venetian Gastalden were used in the places mentioned, which according to Romanin can be regarded as the predecessor of the later consuls (p. 273). The discounts in Treviso, which were also granted in 1001, were even more extensive. Salt extracted in Venice remained tax-free up to 300 modii , Venice merchants received three houses in the city, otherwise they continued to pay the usual quadragesimum and could trade anywhere in the bishop's area. Romanin sees this as an increased dependence of the neighboring areas on Venetian trade. - Within Venice, the Doge, together with the People's Assembly, the Concio, caused everyone to behave appropriately in the presence of the Doge, with respect and deference, to prohibit riots or arms in the Doge's Palace - in times when even slaves had weapons carried out, an extremely important step in order to return to the “santità della parola” ('holiness of the word') and to public calm, and to end violence and the brutal exercise of power, as Romanin adds. Then Romanin describes the procedure against the Narentans (pp. 274–281), whereby he, like other historians, thinks he knows exactly who the pirates were and who the peace-loving traders - the pirate expedition and capture of 40 Narentans returning from Apulia, that were arrested in Traù was for him a legitimate act of war. After all, he explains in more detail how Dalmatia became independent. He uses pathetic words for the decline of the region ("campagne desolate", the most beautiful cities fell into ruins, etc.). The Byzantine emperors consequently preferred to see Dalmatia in the hands of their friendly Venice rather than in those of the pirates. In contrast to his usual distinction between the former Johannes Diaconus and Andrea Dandolo, who wrote more than three centuries later, he does not mention that the cities had by no means permanently submitted to the Doge. For him, the cities and islands accepted a kind of vassalage because they sought the protection of Venice. However, he mentions that Johannes Diaconus expressly states that the hymn of praise to the doge was only given after the one to the emperor. The doge rejected the Croatian ambassador because he believed that the king was only trying to gain time to better prepare himself. In the dispute between the Croatian kings, he corrected the chronicler's view on the basis of Dalmatian documents: the chroniclers named "Murcimiro" as the king and "Surigna" as his brother, but the former was "Dircislao", while the brother was "Cresimiro" , the father of “Stefano” (p. 278). On the return journey, the Doge visited all the cities that had “accepted Venice's protection”, but they accepted - with which Romanin gave the rule a new accent - the new masters not as “Signori”, but only as “Governatori”. The laws of the cities were respected, as were the customs and habits, only a slight toll was demanded. Arbe had to deliver 10 libra silk, Ossero 40 marten skins, Veglia 15 marten skins and 30 fox skins, Spalato had to provide two galleys and a “barca” when the Venetians kept a “squadra” at sea. Pola was supposed to deliver libra oil to San Marco in 2000 as well as some “barche”; the other cities, Romanin said, paid similar tributes. In return, the aforementioned magistrates were sent to Spalato, Traù, Sebenico, Belgrado, Zara and Curzola (p. 280). Trading houses emerged in Zara, the Venetians were subject to their own laws, the wood of the forests on Curzola caused the price to fall, because until then wood from Trevigiano and Bellunese was only available under strict export conditions. This in turn benefited the expansion of the fleet. The Concio unanimously granted the Doge the title “Duca di Dalmazia”. The annual celebration of the conquest was already called in the time of Pope Alexander III. "Sposalizio del mare", so Romanin (p. 281).

Detail of the doge gift to Otto III, the Maximianskathedra , with the four evangelists and John the Baptist

Finally, Romanin, following Johannes Diaconus, reports on the secret visit of Emperor Otto III. in Venice. According to Romanin, the visit fit in well with the emperor's plans to rebuild the Roman Empire and make Rome its capital. The Byzantine marriage of the emperor also goes with this. In addition, the embellishment of the Doge's Palace, admired by the emperor, who after all knew Rome, but also the breadth of Venice's political horizons, should be emphasized. St. Mark's Square, like the Doge's Palace, was fortified, as was Grado. And the sense of art has also taken root. Otto and Pietro gifted each other with works of art, such as the aforementioned Maximian cathedra . Otto's successor Heinrich II confirmed Venice's privileges. The good relations continued with the Eastern emperors, Venice returned Bari to Byzantium after the reconquest and helped drive out the Saracens after a three-day battle. According to Romanin, the son of a dog was invited to the court in Constantinople out of gratitude for the return of Bari. Giovanni and Ottone traveled to the court, the elder married Maria, a daughter of the imperial sister and of Patrizius "Argiro". The marriage and granting of the patrician title in the Romanin Hippodrome are described in detail. But the couple fell victim, in all likelihood (“a quanto pare”), together with their son Basilio, to the plague that raged for the first time in Venice, which was followed by hunger. Despite the hardship, the people suffering with the Doge allowed the younger son Ottone to be appointed as fellow dog. The doge bequeathed half of his fortune to the poor and the church, the end before his eyes, the other half to his sons. From then on he too lived chaste, separated from his wife, and devoted himself to the state and religion. In the end, Capodargine submitted to it, and Pieve di Sacco was given - on the mere oath of twelve of its residents - the exemption from taxes that its residents have always claimed to have. Only the annual delivery of 200 libra linen remained. A witness appears in the document issued in 1007, a Domenico, Bishop of Olivolo, who for the first time bears the title “vescovo Rivoaltense”, as the author says, “Bishop of Rialto”. With the appointment of Orso as Bishop of Torcello, the story of one of the most important Venetian chroniclers, that of John the deacon, ends. According to Romanin, the Doge died at the age of 48 in 1008, after eighteen and a half years of reign. He was one of the outstanding rulers, was able to win the affection of the emperors of both empires, even though they were enemies of each other, and, 'what matters most, the love of his people, who knew that it was his fame and prosperity owed '(p. 292).

Italy and the Adriatic region around 1000. Gfrörer interprets the division of Bavaria into the Marches of Carinthia and Verona as the embracing of Venice in the context of Otto II's world politics, while with his son Otto III. a much more favorable epoch for Venice began.

August Friedrich Gfrörer († 1861) assumes in his History of Venice from its founding to 1084 , which appeared eleven years after his death , that the tradition is “incomplete”, “in my opinion because the chroniclers do a lot out of state considerations have kept quiet. ”Gfrörer comes to completely different assessments. He states that the claim is incorrect that there had been two years of war with Otto II, because Otto II died in 983. On the contrary, Otto had "six months before his death, at the Verona Diet, reconciled with the Venetians" (p . 338). In addition, he already sees a growing influence of the Orseolo in the composition of the three-person embassy, ​​which also included a Morosini. Their opponents, the supporters of the “Byzantine Party” in the city, which Gfrörer saw at work throughout the entire preceding history of Venice, and who were faced with a pro-Western party, had meanwhile changed: They now stood for Venetian independence and the Constitution. This was in turn related to the fact that Byzantium no longer represented a threat to Venice, in contrast to the Ottonians , but that it could be very useful as an adversary against these Ottonians. As an expression of this turn, Gfrörer also applies the otherwise unthinkable return of the son-in-law of the Orseolo doge, who fled from the Dogat Tribuno Memmos, Johannes Mauroceno (Giovanni Morosini), who received permission to found a monastery on San Giorgio Maggiore in 982. For Venice's merchants, who were mainly active in the west, there was an overall “natural” tendency to support the Ottonians and for those of them who traded in the east, more of a side to Byzantium. Memmo, who was initially pro-Franconian, recently threw himself “into the arms of the Basileus”. The party behind it still tended towards Byzantium, but the appointment of a new Doge was now up to the Grand Council, whose early existence Gfrörer suspects, no longer to the East Emperor. This party came to power with Pietro II Orseolo in mid-March 992 (p. 357 f.). The circumstances were favorable, because "on the German throne sat a spoiled boy", from whom there was no danger, and Basil II found "so much to do in the Orient against the Bulgarians and Saracens" that he could hardly intervene in the Adriatic . Pietro made promises to both great powers for trade privileges, some of which contradicted each other, he "cheated the one and the other". Johannes Diaconus, the central source, only lasts until 1008, after which we have to rely on Andrea Dandolo, who, according to Gfrörer, withholds a lot about the 11th century. Then the author lists the details of the trade privilege that he believes can be read from the bad copy of the gold bull of 992 (pp. 360–367). Since this bull was issued practically at the time of Pietro's rise to office, Gfrörer suspects that the privilege was negotiated under his predecessor Tribuno Memmo, especially since the bull only speaks neutrally about the "Duke of the Venetians" without mentioning his name. In addition, as Dandolo suggests, the Venetians were granted “immunitas”, that is, their own jurisdiction in Constantinople. The "lower customs officers" were no longer allowed to investigate or settle disputes - they were Gfrörer "almost without exception as fraudsters" - instead, this was only the responsibility of the logothete, the "Oberhofmarschall" "with the involvement of the Venetian judges employed in Constantinople". Gfrörer believes that the logothet has been "lubricated". Gfrörer considers the Venetian customs system, which was based on the ship's cargo, not the value of the goods, to be “barbaric” - “something like a Huron or a Negro prince would do” - and “this right, which the Byzantine Basileis enjoyed to the fullest, makes people infallibly stupid; for all evil destroys itself ”(p. 364). Since the Venetian goods consisted of wood, iron, grain, slaves, i.e. bulky goods, while the Byzantine luxury goods represented a high value in a small space, the export duty was eight times as high as the import duty. From the fact that the export duty had to be paid by the Byzantine traders, the author concludes that they had pre-financed the Venetian purchases through loans. In his opinion, the local Venetian judges were responsible for the trustworthiness of the borrowers. From the fact that the Logothet supervised the commercial processes, who otherwise administered the imperial property, Gfrörer concludes that Venice was regarded less as a subject of the empire than as part of the imperial "private and household property" (p. 367 ). Then the author deals with the doge, for at the German court "he got even greater advantages than at the Byzantine". The certificate, which was issued on July 19, 992 - Gfrörer believes in Mühlhausen - not only confirmed Venice's old privileges. It allowed and protected the Venetian property, and it arranged the return of all goods that had been snatched from the Venetians in the last 30 years, as Andrea Dandolo explains. Venetians were not allowed to be summoned to court in the imperial territory, nor were they required to pay taxes on their goods, unless in the presence of Venetian judges (“co-jurisdiction”). The emperor left the area of ​​Loreo to Venice "as far as it is washed over by salt water (from the sea)". Should a count dispute their rights, Venice should be able to act on its own after exhaustion of all legal remedies ("unilateral, violent self-help") if the count does not react. Whoever fled from the Doge should be forced to “appeal to the Doge's grace”, that is, to “extradite all political refugees” (pp. 369, 372). Gfrörer sees this as the long-drawn-out plan to acquire "sovereignty" on the mainland, and this also goes well with the agreement with Byzantium to occupy Lombardy if necessary. All of this, according to the author, shows: “The weakling, who at that time sat on the throne of Germania, gave it away carelessly” (p. 372). After all, the doge paid a tribute: The doge initially had to deliver the silk coat and the 50 pounds of “silver or gold” that the emperor later issued him as annual consideration, Gfrörer concludes, who also assumes that verbal leverage is an important lever Support of Otto III. was in the realization of his world empire plans, as well as bribing the eunuchs at court. - The Doge also concluded treaties with the Muslim empires around the Mediterranean, Gfrörer notes laconically.

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 even contradicted them. His own critical examination of Gfrörer's work did not appear until 1883, also in the Archivio Veneto. For Pinton, the election of 991 for Venice opens “un'epoca gloriosa e vantaggiosissima”, an extremely glorious and advantageous one. As elsewhere, Pinton criticizes the way in which Gfrörer reinterprets the story according to his basic assumptions. Like that of Pietro IV Candiano , who was murdered in 976, Gfrörer sees a tendency towards Byzantium. But even Gfrörer has to change his location, because too much is in open opposition. Gfrörer Tribuno Memmo rightly ascribes the credit to the negotiations with Byzantium, which were carried out by his son Maurizio, so far that Pietro II Orseolo was able to inherit him. However, this contradicts the assumption, which Gfrörer puts forward at every opportunity, that the Sons of the Doges served Byzantium as mere hostages for the good behavior of the fathers. The question is also how a Byzantium-inclined doge should have obtained a privilege from the Roman-German emperor. Attributing the inner-city struggles to the West-East conflict does not go far enough for Pinton, for whom in this case the inner-Venetian conflicts dominated. But Gfrörer ignores this in practically every political maneuver in Venice. Pinton praises the astute thoughts on the Chrysobullon of 992, but does not believe in the strong legal privileges of the Venetians, which only began in the time of the Comnenes (i.e. from 1082). According to Pinton, the back-projected ideas about the credit system that can be found at Gfrörer cannot be derived from the source either. There is also no evidence of the obligation to help the navy, only to transport imperial troops. In addition, it was only an old and spontaneous promise, by no means a permanent one. By accepting that the sources no longer refer to the Venetians as 'subjects' but as 'strangers', Gfrörer also opposes his own concept of the Byzantine emperor's continued supremacy over Venice (p. 345). Pinton regards the expansion of Venice into imperial territory as assumed by Gfrörer - beyond what has long been recognized - as a predominantly economic, but not political expansion. Pinton does not consider the famous cloak that Venice had to provide the emperor to be an achievement that Venice - followed by Gfrörer LeBret - since Otto III. had to provide, but already since Pippin , that son of Charlemagne, who had tried to conquer the lagoon, because he already received 33 libre in Pavia. All in all, Pinton sees a continuity of the contractual relationships much more than a perfidious plan by the Doge to outsmart the inexperienced young emperor. Pinton also rejects Gfrörer's assumption that there was a connection between the marriage plan between the son of the Dog and a Byzantine princess, the co-reign of this son and the conquest of Bari. Both the plans with Heinrich II and those with the Eastern Emperors primarily served to secure the economy, and the long-distance traders of Venice therefore viewed the marriage plans more benevolently than negatively, as Gfrörer believes. In Pinton's eyes, marriages of this kind were primarily used to avoid attacks from the respective states, and less to pursue dynastic plans.

In 1861 Francesco Zanotto reported in his Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia that “Pietro II Orseolo. Doge XXVI ”, in the hope that after the troubled times in which the great families of Venice had fought, better times would come because he was the son of Saint Pietro I Orseolo. In fact, by expanding trade, he calmed the envy of the “maggiorenti”, as well as the “insolenza” of the people, he had brought peace and prosperity. He succeeded in obtaining a chrysobull that surpassed all its predecessors in terms of its privileges, as well as advantageous agreements with the princes of 'Persia, Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, Egypt, Spain and Sicily'. With Otto III. succeeded the recognition of Eraclea's borders, as they had existed since the first Doge "Anafesto, e Marcello maestro de 'militi", but also the return of Loreo and Capodargine. Zanotto nebulously describes the regulations with Belluno, Treviso and Ceneda as 'advantageous'. The Doge got its 'glorious name' after the author through his conquests in Dalmatia. The trigger was the Doge's refusal to continue paying tribute to the Narentans. When the Dalmatian cities asked in vain for help from Constantinople, they turned to Venice as the protective power with which they were in alliance, "in qualche modo di oboperza" - with which Zanotto derives an already existing relationship of obedience. In agreement with the 'Greek court', Pietro let 35 warships sail under his personal leadership. Parenzo, Pola, Cherso and Ossero 'peacefully' submitted to this power, as did Zara, Veglia and Arbe. The victory over the Narentans made the conquest of the 'Slavic continent' easy. In Spalato all cities on the coast between Istria and Ragusa submitted to him. The assembly of the people confirmed him after his return as Doge of Venice and Dalmatia , the marriage of the Doge to the sea was to take place every year from then on. Otto III, who was in Italy for the third time, wanted to get to know the Doge personally. The emperor confirmed all of Venice's rights in exchange for a silk cloak, which was to become due every time the contract was renewed, but under the 50 libre silver decree. The Emperor refused all of the Doge's presents, so that no one would believe that he had come to Venice for any other reason than to visit his friend, and that the relics of St. Adoring Marcus. He couldn't refuse just a seat and a bench, plus a cup and a silver vase of the finest workmanship. Three days after the emperor's departure, the doge reported to the people's assembly about the visit and its consequences. The great affection of the people led to the fact that two years later he was granted the right to raise his son Johannes as a fellow doge, who, although so young, was very promising. The emperor again sent presents to the doge, whereupon the doge wanted to send him the said cattedra. But Otto soon died, and the Doge successfully negotiated with his successor to renew his privileges. In 1004 the Byzantine emperor asked the Venetians for help for Bari, which had been besieged for three months. The fleet managed to get to Bari, where the Doge was led by the “Capitano Gregorio” 'in a kind of triumphal procession' to the “palazzo pubblico”. After Zanotto, the Doge took command; he ordered a failure after 40 days. After three days the Saracens were defeated. After all of Apulia had been freed from them, the Doge returned to Venice. To show their gratitude, the Byzantine emperors asked the Doge to send his son John to Constantinople to marry Mary, daughter of the Patricius "Romano Argiropulo" and sister of the Emperor Basilius. The brothers Johannes and Otto were received with a “splendidezza veramente orientale” (p. 63). The emperors themselves were not only present during the ceremony, but they crowned the newlyweds with golden crowns, with which they presented the two to the court and the people - Zanotto implicitly refers to an intended succession in Byzantium. Shortly after their return to Venice, their son was born, and to celebrate this event, the Doge issued “lire piccole” in 1250 for the benefit of the people. Finally, the Doge equipped the St. Mark's Church , including, as Johannes Diaconus writes, and as the author notes in a footnote, a “dedalico instrumento”, which since Filiasi has been interpreted as a “rare organ” (“organo raro”). But now the city was attacked by the plague, to which the son, daughter-in-law and grandson of the Doge also fell victim. As a consolation, the people allowed the Doge to raise his third-born son Otto to be a fellow Doge, even though he was only 14 years old. Pietro died at the age of just 48 after dividing his fortune among the people, church and family in the aforementioned way. He found his final resting place in San Zaccaria with his relatives who had fallen victim to the plague.

Memorial plaques from 1869 on the Bacino Orseolo not far from the Doge's Palace (facade of the Hotel Cavalletto), which reflect the state of knowledge of this time and the political-cultural attitude three years after the annexation to Italy: Pietro II. Orseolo, who with understanding and fortune the Republic of Venice from Ruled from 991 to 1009. The commune decided that this port of call, excavated by the Società per l'areazione in 1869, was named after him (left) and Adored by emperors of the Orient and Occident / it liberated and expanded the trade of the Venetians / won over pirates and Slavic people Dalmatia / smashed the Saracens, gave Bari back to Byzantium / he enlarged and decorated the temple of San Marco the Doge's palace / he did so much and more for the fatherland initiator of his greatness / Pietro Orseolo II.

Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna noted in the first volume of his Storia dei Dogi di Venezia , published in 1867, "Pietro Orseolo II, ventesimosesto doge di Venezia" was perhaps 30 years old when he was elected. "Highly famous" ("celeberrimo") is his name in the history of Venice. First he ended the discord between the nobili, then he brought with him extremely useful seafaring privileges from Constantinople. He also negotiated advantageous contracts with the sovereigns of Africa and Asia, as well as with Otto III. and the princes of Italy. Around 998 he freed Dalmatia from the 'violence of the Slavs' and built doge palaces, walls and towers in Eraclea and Grado. He succeeded in conquering Dalmatia. After his return, Otto III came. around 1001 to Venice; after his departure the doge announced the visit to the popular assembly. The Venetians wanted the Doge to raise his son John as a fellow doge, Pietro won the victory before Bari, where the Byzantines and Venetians together drove the Saracens out. After the marriage of John and Mary, their solemn return, they fell victim to the plague along with their grandson Basilio, with Cicogna giving the age of John at 24, that of his brother Ottone at 14. Shortly after Otto was raised to be a fellow doge, who the Volk had prevailed to comfort the Doge, the chronically ill Doge died at the age of 48. He was buried in San Zaccaria in 1008 with his eldest, daughter-in-law and grandson.

Heinrich Kretschmayr said that after Tribunus Menius with Peter II, “the unimportant” was followed by “the gifted”, “the helpless and helpless, repeatedly overrun by the conditions of the versatile and inventive” (p. 126). He saw in Otto III. and Peter similar natures, "the same interest in education, the same inclination for the fantastic", but with the Doge "tamed by careful consideration and clear will". He saw in the Doge a personality who "rises above all of their Italian contemporaries in solitary size". "He became the actual founder of the city of Venice." But Kretschmayr admits that initially there were "riots and tumults even in the Doge's Palace", and that these conditions were only changed by a "guarantee decree of Venetian nobles" of February 998, through which 90 Signatures feud and riot were ended. While the first and third sons, Johannes and Otto, became fellow doges, namely 1002 and 1008, respectively, the second and fourth sons, Orso and Vitale, became patriarchs of Grado. Orso had previously been Bishop of Torcello. The family thus dominated the two most important levels of Venetian politics. In terms of foreign policy, the marriages of his sons Johannes and Otto - with the Byzantine Maria and the eponymous sister of King Stephen of Hungary, who was also the sister-in-law of Emperor Henry II - testify that Venice for a short time acted on the same level as the two empires. During the Ottonian trade ban, which Kretschmayr dates from 981 to 983, trade relations with some of the Muslim states may have been intensified, and now the Doge has expanded these relationships into friendship agreements. The author suspects that Cordoba and Baghdad may have been ignored, "but by no means the Fatimids of Egypt, the emirs of Haleb, Damascus, and Sicily" (p. 130). The treaties with the Ottonenreich, drawn up on the initiative of the Venetian diplomacy, restored the state of pre-962 and restituted all of Venice's rights in the "Pactum of Mühlhausen" of July 19, 992. With a deed of May 1, 995, the borders and rights were against Treviso and Belluno precisely determined, but also the rule over Cavarzere and Loreo. The pact even allowed self-help against the adjoining powers of the empire, and again subject the Venetians - which Otto I and Otto II had ignored, although the earlier treaties had provided for it - to dogal jurisdiction. In return, Venice accepted the empire's “claim to sovereignty” and then ignored it. Especially against Belluno, Venice actually resorted to the right to self-help by trying to enforce the restitution of its old rake by means of a blockade, a tough process in which Otto III. Intervened in favor of Venice on March 25th, followed by a border deed on May 1st, 995, and again on January 7th, 999. Only trade agreements of 997 and 1001 ended the conflict in favor of Venice. King Otto, who was on his way to Rome for the imperial coronation, gave birth to the third-born of the Doge, Ottone, to be crowned in Rome on May 21, 996. On his second train to Rome, the young emperor was welcomed by his godchild in January 998, under the protection of a fleet, in Ferrara. At the end of June 1000 Otto III. from Johannes Diaconus about the progress of the Dalmatian campaign. Now the emperor wanted to get to know the doge personally, which led to the emperor's secret stay in Venice, which began on April 13, 1001. Again he gave birth to a child of the Doge, this time a daughter, only a few gifts were hesitantly exchanged, almost nothing political decided - for Kretschmayr pure "mood bliss" from "love of friends and St. Mark" (p. 134). But Otto died on January 23, 1002. Kretschmayr describes Petrus' naval venture to Istria and the conquest of Dalmatia, the battles against Narentans and Croats, the enforcement of unencumbered, free trade in the Adriatic (pp. 136–138), but qualifies: “Almost none of the conquests won were permanently earned. The appointment of Venetian governors in the capital cities of Dalmatia, which was first reported in the 14th century for this period, is to be rejected, however eagerly it was written down by the later chroniclers. ”The Byzantine prior of Zara also remained the Dux of Dalmatia, at the head of the city Priorities continued to exist in the hierarchy, the bishops and the dominant families retained their fuzzy rights. From the middle of the 11th century, Hungary also claimed supremacy. Even on the islands of Arbe, Veglia and Ossero-Cherso, where Venice was next to Istria most likely to be able to assert itself politically and permanently, the son of the Dog had to enforce his rule in 1018. Zara rebelled again and again, Spalato sometimes belonged to Byzantium, sometimes to Hungary, which ruled Croatia from 1091. Ragusa withdrew completely and was mostly subject to Byzantium (until 1205). Finally, the Normans of southern Italy also intervened there. After the "fleet walk", Venice retained its claim to the area, new opportunities and collateral for trade, and it had successfully used the phase of weakness of Byzantium and Hungary, which was not yet reaching, to secure trading posts. Kretschmayr therefore regards the year 1000 as "the first year of birth of the Adriatic supremacy of Venice" (p. 140). The back projection of the annual wedding of the Doge with the sea, which had its starting point in the fight against Friedrich Barbarossa, shows “a good view of the great events of patriotic history”, even though Venice's “late Venetian tradition”, “as so often does historical facts ”“ falsified ”. The main aim of the Doge's numerous treaties, however, was trade, even if he was called “a Pericles of Venice”, who had his city equipped with buildings and works of art.

John Julius Norwich says in his History of Venice that the Venetians could not have made a better choice in 991, in the midst of a deep crisis. The author praises the Doge almost frenetically: “Statesman, warrior and diplomatist of genius, Pietro Orseolo II towers above the other Doges of his day like a giant among pygmies; and from the outset his subjects seem to have recognized his greatness. ”For Venice, according to the author, fame was synonymous with trade, hence the early treaties in the Mediterranean region, especially with Byzantium. In return, he claims, Venice had to keep its fleet ready at all times for the transport of imperial troops. With the enthusiast Otto III. he succeeded in a similarly favorable arrangement, the starting point of which was personal admiration and friendship. In contrast to Kretschmayr, Norwich counts practically all Muslim states around the Mediterranean as Venice's new trading partners, for which he would like to show vividly how overloaded ships transported Venetian goods, as inaugurated the said celebrations for the marriage to the sea after the conquest of Dalmatia became, like the Venetians, trade successes were always more important than belief or "bloodshed". He also claims that the Venetians had a fleet company to support Otto III's plans. politely but firmly refused. Even after 1002 the Doge stood on the side of the empire, and he supported Henry II against Arduin of Ivrea . Nevertheless, the Doge's relationship with Byzantium was more important, for which he saved his eldest son, who however fell victim to an epidemic along with his family. His brother Otto was to become "the youngest doge in Venetian history" at the age of 16. His father moved to a remote corner of the palace and even separated from his wife in his last two years.

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. 140 f., 148–152, 155 –157, 162, 164–167, 168 (marriage of his son in Constantinople), 169 f. ( Digitized version ).
• Ester Pastorello (Ed.): Andrea Dandolo, Chronica per extensum descripta aa. 460-1280 dC , (= Rerum Italicarum Scriptores XII, 1), Nicola Zanichelli, Bologna 1938, pp. 193–203, 206, 361. ( digitized, pp. 192 f. )

Legislative sources

• Riccardo Predelli (Ed.): I libri commemorali della Repubblica di Venezia. Regesti , Vol. I, Venice 1876, p. 165.

literature

• Giuseppe Gullino: Orseolo, Pietro II , in: Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, Vol. 79, 2013, pp. 588-590 (forms the basis for the performing part).
• Luigi Andrea Berto: Segreti a Venezia nell'Alto Medioevo. La visita di Ottone III e il "codice segreto" della "Istoria Veneticorum" di Giovanni Diacono , in: José Meirinhos, Celia Lopez, João Rebalde (eds.): Secrets and Discovery in the Middle Ages. Proceedings of the 5th European Congress of the Federation Internationale Des Instituts D'Etudes Medievales (Porto, 24 to 29 June 2013) , Brepols, 2018, pp. 213–222.
• Dorit Raines: L'invention du mythe aristocratique. L'image de soi du patriciat vénitien au temps de la Sérénissime , Venice 2006, pp. 43, 45, 88, 373, 431, 559.
• Luigi Andrea Berto: La guerra e la violenza nella Istoria Veneticorum di Giovanni Diacono , in: Studi Veneziani XLII (2001) 15–19, 21 f., 24–31, 33, 41.
• Harald Keller : The Art Landscapes of Italy [1960] , Frankfurt am Main 1983, p. 31.
• Peter Bartl: Orseolo, Pietro (II.) , In: Biographisches Lexikon zur Geschichte Südosteuropas , Vol. 3, Munich 1979, p. 361 f.
• Andrea Da Mosto : I Dogi di Venezia nella vita pubblica e privata , Milan 1960, pp. 38-44.

Web links

Commons : Pietro II Orseolo  - Collection of images, videos and audio files

Remarks

1. ^ Gerhard Rösch : Orseolo, Petrus II. In: Lexikon des Mittelalters (LexMA). Volume 6, Artemis & Winkler, Munich / Zurich 1993, ISBN 3-7608-8906-9 , Sp. 1477.
2. ^ Günther W. Morath: The Maximianskathedra von Ravenna. A masterpiece of Christian-ancient relief art (= Freiburg theological studies 54), Herder, Freiburg 1940, p. 8 f.
3. ↑ Jadran Ferluga : 2. Maximianus . In: Lexicon of the Middle Ages (LexMA). Volume 6, Artemis & Winkler, Munich / Zurich 1993, ISBN 3-7608-8906-9 , column 419 f.
4. ↑ [action = show & tx_hisodat_sources [controller] = Sources & cHash = 0bbd9766a8e4d00a1b68ccc016531ecc # rinav Regest] of the Pactum July 19, 992, issued in Mühlhausen (RI II, 3 n. 1066) = Johann Friedrich Böhmer : Regesta24ii. , II: Regesta24ii. , II: Regesta24ii. , II: Regesta24ii , 3: The regests of the empire under Otto III. , Johann Friedrich Böhmer , Mathilde Uhlirz (arrangement), Vienna et al. 1956, part 3.
5. ^ Gherardo Ortalli : Venezia dalle origini a Pietro II Orseolo , in: Storia d'Italia , Vol. 1, Turin 1980, p. 418 f.
6. ^ Salvatore Cosentino (ed. And transl.): Leone VI. La guerra navale (Naumachia ovvero Tactica, XIX), in: Antonio Carile , Salvatore Cosentino (eds.): Storia della marineria bizantina , Lo Scarabeo, Bologna 2004, pp. 289–305, here: p. 294.
7. ^ Stefan Weinfurter : Heinrich II. (1002-1024). Rulers at the End of Times , Regensburg 1999, p. 232.
8. ↑ Robert Holtzmann (Ed.): Scriptores rerum Germanicarum, Nova series 9: The Chronicle of Bishop Thietmar von Merseburg and their Korveier revision (Thietmari Merseburgensis episcopi Chronicon) Berlin 1935, pp. 280–283 ( Monumenta Germaniae Historica , digitized version )
9. ↑ The fleet set out on August 10th, at Sankt Laurentius, which could have been the year 1002 or 1003 ( Istoria Veneticorum , ed. Zanichelli 1999, IV, 66).
10. ^ Roberto Pesce (Ed.): Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo. Origini - 1362 , Centro di Studi Medievali e Rinascimentali "Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna", Venice 2010, p. 47 f.
11. ↑ Pietro Marcello : Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia in the translation of Lodovico Domenichi, Marcolini, 1558, pp 45-47 ( digitized ).
12. ↑ 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. 78-88, but only a few lines on the Dogat ( online ).
13. ↑ Heinrich Kellner : Chronica that is Warhaffte actual and short description, all life in Venice , Frankfurt 1574, p. 18r – 19r ( digitized, p. 18r ).
14. ↑ 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, pp. 157-163 ( digitized version ).
15. ↑ Jacob von Sandrart : Kurtze and increased description of the origin / recording / areas / and government of the world famous Republick Venice , Nuremberg 1687, pp. 27-29. ( Digital copy, p. 27 ).
16. ↑ Johann Huebner : Kurtze questions from the Politische Historia Biß to the exit of the Seventeen Seculi continuiret, and provided with a useful introduction to The Beginners and Complete Register , Part 3, new edition, Gleditsch and Son 1714, p. 583 ( digitized version of the 1714 , digitized, 1700 ). On Venice from p. 567, on the Doges from p. 573.
17. ↑ Johann Friedrich LeBret : State history of the Republic of Venice, from its origins 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 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. 232–251. ( Digitized version ).
18. ↑ Samuele Romanin : Storia documentata di Venezia , 10 vols., Pietro Naratovich, Venice 1853–1861 (2nd edition 1912–1921, reprint Venice 1972), vol. 1, Venice 1853, pp. 267–292, here: p. 267 ( digitized version ).
19. ↑ 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. 335–357, on Pietro II. Orseolo pp. 357–425 ( digitized version ).
20. ^ Pietro Pinton: La storia di Venezia di AF Gfrörer , in: Archivio Veneto 25.2 (1883) 288-313 ( digitized version ) and 26 (1883) 330-365, here: pp. 341-353 ( digitized version ).
21. ↑ Francesco Zanotto: Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia , Vol. 4, Venice 1861, pp. 60–65, here: p. 60 ( digitized version ).
22. ↑ "Da Pietro Orseolo II / che con senno e fortuna resse la Repubblica Veneta / dall'anno DCCCCLXXXXI al MIX / Il Comune / decretò nominarsi questo Bacino d'approdo / che la società per l'areazione fece scavare nel / MDCCCLXIX" and " Riverito dai Cesari d'oriente e d'occidente / francò ed estese i commerci de Veneziani / Pirati e genti slave debellò guadagnò la Dalmazia / rotè i Saraceni ridiedi Bari a Bisanzio / Il tempio di S. Marco il Palazio ducale accressè e ornò / ​​tanto e più fece per la Patria iniziatore di sua grandezza / Pietro Orseolo II ”.
23. ^ Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna : Storia dei Dogi di Venezia , Vol. 1, Venice 1867, o. P.
24. ↑ Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , 3 vol., Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, pp. 126–142.
25. ^ John Julius Norwich : A History of Venice , Penguin, London 2003.

predecessor	Office	successor
Tribuno Memmo	Doge of Venice 991–1009	Ottone Orseolo