Pietro III Candiano

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Pietro III Candiano , in the more recent sources Petrus Candianus († around 959/960 in Venice ), was her 21st doge according to the traditional, state-controlled historiography of the Republic of Venice . He ruled from 942 to 959. Under him, in 944, for the second time in Venetian history, the means of the trade blockade were used to implement political goals, but also two large-scale naval operations to master Slavic piracy in the Adriatic . Venice was also able to exploit the splintered balance of power in northern Italy in favor of its economic development, and it has been there sinceLet Charlemagne confirm existing privileges .

His son and fellow dog Peter (IV.) Tried to overthrow the old doge, but he was banished. He found support from King Berengar II of Italy and, with the help of Ravenna , captured Venetian ships. Eventually, although the congregation swore after his exile that he would never be accepted as a Doge, he was elected to this lifelong office after his father's death.

family

Petrus was the offspring of the powerful Candiano family, which eventually replaced the Particiaco doge with him. Like them, the Candiano worked towards the establishment of a hereditary monarchy.

Petrus, also Pietro or Piero in Venetian, was the son of the former Doge Petrus II (r. 931 / 932–939) and grandson of Petrus I Candianus (r. 887). A Richilde is named as his wife, of whom nothing else has come down to us. Peter III had four or five sons, of whom the eldest, also called Peter , was initially a fellow dog and in 959 his successor in the Doge office. In addition to his son and successor, other sons are known, namely Dominicus, Bishop of Torcello , then Stephanus, finally Vitale called Ugo, or Hugo. The chronicle of Andrea Dandolo from the 14th century names a fifth son , namely another Vitale , who was Doge only briefly, namely as the successor of Pietro Orseolo , from September 1, 978 to October 979.

As it has been customary for some time, Peter III. first sent to Constantinople as the son of the reigning Doge, his father . This was related to the fact that in theory the Venetian lagoon was still part of the Byzantine Empire . As usual, he received a generous amount of presents and accordingly returned “cum maximis donis”. However, it is doubted that , as the chronicler Johannes Diaconus claims , he received the high court title of Protospatharius , which otherwise had also long since become customary . A so-called carta promissionis by the Patriarch of Aquileia , Lupus , dated March 13, 944, speaks against this, in which this title does not appear. It is also not clear whether he was made a fellow doge.

The Doge's Office

Choice, external conflict

Peter III was elected Doge by the People's Assembly around 942, replacing his Particiaco predecessor. The preceding chain of changes in the Doge's office between these two families indicates a balance of power, rather than politically different orientations. One of the main internal means has traditionally been family policy.

Trade was now so central to Venice that the Doge's main task had to be to keep the trade routes, especially the Adriatic , free of obstacles. In addition, however, the situation in Italy became more and more important. Externally, military, especially marine, strength were just as important as the trade blockade, which was still very young for Venice and was first used barely a decade ago. In 944 the Doge imposed a sea blockade in support of the Patriarch of Grado - the second in Venetian history after that of 933/34 - against his competitor, the Patriarch of Aquileia .

Byzantine pluteus with eagle from the 10th century, fragment of a balcony that once hung on the facade of the Ca 'd'Oro , Galleria Franchetti

But there were also significant changes in relation to Constantinople. The traditional trip there, which should have taken place according to his choice, did not materialize. It was only taken up again under Tribuno Memmo (979-992). It has long been debated whether this was caused by a turn to Italy, and thus to the Roman-German Empire , or a conscious turning away from Byzantium. After all, the Doges remained without the usual Byzantine court titles until Pietro Orseolo (II.) (998-1007).

Patriarchates of Aquileia and Grado

Similar to how his father had carried out a first (well-known) trade blockade against Istria and Friuli to the margrave "Winthero" , so did Petrus III. against the Patriarch of Aquileia. Where there had already been conflicts in the organization of the church, economic motives soon dominated. It was important that the Venetian Grado controlled access to the hinterland via the Natissa, which, however, was ruled by the patriarch. There had been conflicts here before. On January 13, 880, such a dispute between Doge Ursus and Patriarch Walpertus was ended by a contractual agreement. Another source of conflict was the use of the forests in Friuli by the Gradensians, which had already been regulated in the time of Lothar I. The "magna discordia" between the Patriarch and the Doge came about in the first years of the latter's government, when the Patriarch's gunmen provoked an argument in Grado. As in Istria, Marinus, the Patriarch of Grado, acted again as a mediator. He got the Doge to restore "pacem et ... amicitiam" after envoys from Lupus failed to do so. With the promissionis carta of March 13, 944, the Patriarch of Aquileia, his entire clergy and his "people" recognized all stipulations that governed the relationship between the kingdom and the ducat, but especially not to commit any more acts of violence in the area of ​​the ducat, on the contrary, to report acts of violence by others to the Doge. This secured trade in the north as far as Bavaria .

Narentan Wars, King Berengar II.

The conditions on the Adriatic were even more complicated, because another very old trouble spot were the pirates there, especially the Narentans . Their attacks had increased again after the collapse of neighboring Croatia . According to Johannes Diaconus , 33 ships sailed towards Neretva , to the river after which the seafarers there got their name "Narentaner". This military action in 948 probably served to intimidate the residents there so far that they recognized the contracts that guaranteed the safety of seafaring in the Adriatic. By means of a second fleet expedition - the first one was unsuccessful - Venice provisionally achieved its goals.

In 951 the Doge, like its predecessors, received a number of trade privileges from King Berengar II (King from 950 to 961), which were even extended. The text has not survived, which gave rise to doubts about the actual conclusion of such a contract, but also to speculation about its content.

Dynasty plans (?), Increasing influence of the two empires, rebellion of the son

It is unclear why Peter III. resumed the custom, abandoned in the late 9th century, of raising a son to be a fellow doge. When this happened, and whether a dynastic idea was in the foreground, is controversial. This can only be proven in 958, when the Doge "una cum" Petrus "itemque duce filo meo", awarded some salt pans of the Doge's Palace.

The appointment of the son Dominicus (Domenico) as Bishop of Torcello may have been part of a network of relationships that must have extended to mainland Italy and that was typical of Venice with its use of church institutions. From Countess Anna, the widow of Count Wido, son of Count Bertald of Reggio Emilia , the Doge acquired property in Conche and Fogolana in the Padua area in March 944, close to the border with the Venetian Chioggia , but already on the other side of the border. The name of the Doge's wife, Richilde, about whom nothing else is known, suggests an origin from the empire.

Pietro's son intrigued against his father and worked to usurp sole rule in Venice. This shaped the last years of the Doge's reign. A first violent attempt failed in the spring-summer of 959 due to the solidarity of the “maior pars populi”, whereby the father's “misericordia” in turn prevented the execution of his son, which the said “majority of the people” demanded. The banishment could not be averted, however. Clerics and laypeople as well as the entire people tried to prevent the rebel from becoming a doge, whether the father was alive or already dead. Behind this, in addition to family conflicts, possibly linked to the different characters, there were primarily political changes, such as Margherita Giuliana Bertolini accepts within the traditional interpretation. These massive changes emanated from the Kingdom of Italy, which until then had been characterized by a high level of power fragmentation and uninterrupted fighting. In the eyes of the majority of Venetians, real estate and political interests threatened to drag the city too deeply into the local conflicts instead of concentrating on the so successful overseas trade. This in turn was probably due to the fact that both Byzantium and the Roman-German Empire regained stronger influence in Italy. The latter had obtained legitimation for reaching out to Italy under King Otto I at the latest through his marriage to Adelheid , the escaped Queen of Italy. Otto left his son-in-law Konrad the Red in Italy, who convinced Berengar in 952 to come to the Augsburg Reichstag as his king's vassal . He and his son then received the Kingdom of Italy, but had to cede the Margraviate of Verona and the Duchy of Friuli to the Duchy of Bavaria as a royal fief. Petrus III survived the exile of his son. only by two and a half months. Accordingly, he died in the summer or autumn of 959. The place of his burial is not known. Overall, the reactions to the rebellion show that at that time, with the appropriate qualifications, it would almost have been a matter of course that the son would follow his father in the Doge's office.

reception

For the Venice of the 14th century was the interpretation that one of the rule of Candiano and especially Pietros III. gave, of the highest symbolic importance. The focus of the Chronicle of Doge Andrea Dandolo represents in perfect form the views of the political leadership bodies, which were long established in his time and which have steered the writing of history especially since this Doge. His work was repeatedly used as a template by later chroniclers and historians. The focus was always on the questions of the political independence between the recovering empires, the military intervention in an era that was interpreted as chaotic, then the law from its own roots, i.e. the derivation and legitimation of their claim to territorial and maritime domination. During this time, Venice was forced to act very independently in a politically powerful environment, as both the Roman-German Empire and Byzantium regained their rights and interests in Italy with increasing intensity. The highlighting of the role of the Candiano family, which gave Venice a strong expansion boost, played an essential role. In addition, she was one of those families who pushed their claim to a kind of hereditary monarchy the furthest, a type of rule that at the time of Andrea Dandolo in no way matched the interests of the mid-14th century ruling families, but especially not could be brought more in line with the state of constitutional development. The balance between the ambitious and dominant families was one of the most important goals, the disempowerment of the Doge, who was gladly assigned representative tasks, but no independent decisions, another whose realization was comparatively far advanced in Dandolo's time.

Italy and the Adriatic region around 1000

The oldest vernacular chronicle, the Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo from the late 14th century, depicts the events, like Andrea Dandolo, on a level that has long been known by individuals, especially the Doges. However, the actual ones remain Decision-making processes rather indistinct, even if historians tried to read changes from the finest nuances. This chronicle, which reports on "Piero Candian, çioue Sanudo" in somewhat more detail, establishes an identity between the Candiano and the later Sanudo in the first sentence. Pietro III sent according to this chronicle "nave XXXIII", ie 33 ships, against the Narentans , a fleet which Piero did not command himself, as the Doges had done so far, unless their sons (and fellow Doges) had taken over. The fleet leaders ("capetanei") were therefore Piero Rosello and Orso Badoer. The ships were called "gombarie" at the time. This fleet of large ships forced the pirates to stop looting Venetian merchant ships. “Facto tucto el Colfo seguro”, after “the entire Gulf had been made safe by them”, they returned to Venice with great joy. With the 'golf' the upper Adriatic was meant. The Doge, the chronicle continues, had raised his son of the same name to be a fellow doge. But this "desprexiando ogne amagistramento del pare" - despising all government activities of the father -, "levò in grandissima arogantia" - rose with the greatest arrogance - and even tried to kill his father, who was already old, with the help of a small group was standing. The people wanted to have the son executed, but the father could not 'bear' it. Eventually the son was banished for life and he was never allowed to become a doge. But soon he returned to the Gulf and hijacked six ships, whereupon the father died of pain "et melenconia".

In Pietro Marcello's count is "Candiano doge XX." In 1502, in his work later translated into Volgare under the title Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia , he set the date of assuming power in 941. Because of his "insolente natura", his son was initially chased away. But over the years it matured and was brought back to its old dignity by the people. During this time, the Narentans developed such intense piracy that 'the state of the Venetians appeared to be besieged'. 33 large ships, the said "Gombarie", which were led by Orso Badoer and Pietro Orseolo, were used against this piracy. Already on the rumor of an approaching navy, the pirates disappeared and asked for peace, which was granted to them, on condition that they pay for all damage. During this time the contract with the Patriarch of Aquileia was renewed and Candiano took his son "per compagno". But the latter refused his father's advice, committed treason, and an open battle between the “cittadini” almost broke out in the middle of the city. The doge himself stopped them. After the exile and the said oath of the clergy and the people, the son of the Dog went to Ravenna to meet Guido, the son of Berengario. From the latter he received six ships and captured some Venetian ships on the banks of Ravenna. Thereupon the old doge died of pain in the 10th year of his reign.

The chronicle of Gian Giacomo Caroldo , the Historie venete dal principio della città fino all'anno 1382 , knows the 21st Doge as "eccelso Messer Pietro Candiano terzo di questo nome". Under him, so the chronicle, the conflict with Lupo, the Patriarch of Aquileia, was settled, with Marino, Bishop of Grado, mediating. The patriarch swore the inviolability of the borders of the Venetian ducat, as the "patti", the pacta concluded since Charlemagne , assured. In the sixth year of his rule, XXXIIJ drove gombarie against the Narentans; Fleet leaders were "Orso Badoaro et Pietro Rosolo". Another company was directed against these "Schiavoni", but this time they were disarmed. Under Peter III. Dominico Tradonico was elected Bishop of Olivolo, "prima Capellano di San Marco et Cancelliero del Duce", so first chaplain of San Marco and Chancellor of the Doge. He brought with him the relics of John the Baptist from Provence, which were brought to the "Chiesa di San Gioanni Bragola", today San Zan Degolà . Of the Doge's two sons, one was Dominico, Bishop of Torcello, and the other Pietro. This brought the people to the fact that he was raised to a fellow doge ( consorte del Ducato ). Refusing to obey, he rebelled against his father until the followers of the two Doges got into a scuffle on the “ Piazza di Rialto ” (“vennero insieme alle mani”). The majority were on the father's side and wanted to tear the son to pieces, but the father, full of compassion, asked the people not to kill him. In order to give in at least partially to the anger of the people, the son was banished from Venice. The clergy and the people swore that neither before nor after the old Doge's death would they ever accept him as his successor. Pietro was forced to leave Venice, but through the mediation of "Georgio Diacono et di Gregorio Chierico" and twelve servants he found refuge at "Hunulcone Marchese", son of King Berengar, where he was received with honor. This introduced him to the court of Berengar and wanted to take him with him for the fight against the Mark Spoleto . Then, to take revenge on Venice, he turned to Ravenna, where he captured seven Venetian ships with six armed ships on the Po di Primaro , which were loaded with goods on their way to Fano . The old and sick doge died over it.

In the Chronica published in 1574 that is Warhaffte actual and short description, all the lives of the Frankfurt lawyer Heinrich Kellner in Venice , who based on Pietro Marcello made the Venetian chronicle known in the German-speaking area, is "Candian the Twentieth Hertzog". Although this was "chased away" "for the sake of his arrogance", he had "also changed his knowledge and customs with the jars", whereupon he was resumed "with great goodwill of the people". At this time "the Narentines troubled the sea so much with Raberey / that it was the same / as if Venice were besieged." Therefore 33 "Gombarie" -like ships were sent against them, led by "Orsus Badoer and Peter Orseolus". The pirates asked for a contractual arrangement, but Venice demanded compensation for the damage caused. There was also a renewal of the peace agreement with Aquileia. “In deß Candian named his son Peter as an assistant or coadiutorn”, but the son despised his father's advice and “rides a number of bad boys into a riot or riot against their place.” Doge and “Raht” opposed this, “and little is missing / that the citizens had given one another a battle in the middle of the town ”. The Doge's authority was able to calm the rebels, however, the son was "shocked and expelled from the regiment". People, clergy and “the princes of the place” put down an “Eydt”, “that they never let this rebel come to the Hertzogthumb…” Peter went to “Guidone / Berengarii (who was in Lombardia) Son “, Which provided him with six ships for a pirate voyage against the Venetians. In fact, he took Venetian ships "by the river around Ravenna / which (as they say) annoyed the father so much / that he / from excessive pain and Hertzenleidt" died soon after, after he had ruled for 11 years.

In the translation of Alessandro Maria Vianolis Historia Veneta , which appeared in Nuremberg in 1686 under the title Der Venetianischen Herthaben Leben / Government, und Die Die / Von dem Ersten Paulutio Anafesto an / bis on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , the Doge, im In contrast to Marcello, “Petrus III. Candianus, The 21st Hertzog ”. Vianoli is of the opinion that the supreme duty of a prince to “the land and subjects” is “to practice and handle the most useful things / which cause damage / to let them get undone” (p. 132). The Doge did the latter by resolving to "completely exterminate the Narentans / and to bring back its calm and complete safety from the sea". To this end, he equipped 33 ships - in order to "at the same time keep the commoners from idling" - that attacked the Narentans, which prompted "the utterly despondent Narentines" to "plead" for peace. In contrast to this rather detailed description, the author laconically says: “At the same time the peace with the Patriarch of Aquileia was renewed again.” He again describes in more detail how the Doge took his son of the same name “as an assistant”, “the at such honors he became so arrogant and daring ”that he not only despised the advice of his father, but also began to“ incite and incite ”to stir up“ bad fellows ”against his father and city. There was almost a battle in the middle of the city. The doge himself had his son arrested and handed over to the judges in order to stop the fighting at the last moment. He could get the judges to soften their death sentence, but his son was to be banished and never allowed to become a doge. This was made public swear by the whole congregation. The son went to "Count Guidone von der Marc, who at the same time was king of the Lombard / and the Kayser Berengarii son". This provided him ships with which he attacked rich merchant ships of the Venetians. That "hurt the father so much / that he soon afterwards suffered from excessive heartache / when he heard this evil newspaper / said goodbye to this temporal life". Influential men ensured that no new doge was elected, but that the son was recalled.

In 1687 Jacob von Sandrart wrote in his work Kurtze and increased description of the origin / recording / territories / and government of the world-famous republic of Venice that Pietro II. Accepted his son, the third of his name, “as a secondary regent”. He ruled badly at first, but with increasing age "became much more modest and behaved well". He, in turn, took his son of the same name "next to him in the government", but "he behaved so badly / that the whole people got into an uproar / so that this son was chased out of the city". The expellee, whose return was to be prevented by an oath, switched to "stealing the sea" and "did so much damage to the Venetian merchants / that his father died of grief over it." Volck was so little respected [...] only for the sake of his lucid ancestors / who did so much service to the Republicq / accepted back to their (XXI.) Hertzog. "Pietro (IV.) Was called back despite all precautions, what the author with based on the merits of the family.

Johann Friedrich LeBret , who published his four-volume State History of the Republic of Venice from 1769 , knew about the Candiano: “This mighty house produced great minds. They loved war, and their whole upbringing was bellicose. ”And about Peter III:“ In his youth he indulged in the heat of his temperament and fell into the usual debauchery of such spirits [...] and he abandoned himself to the opulence without reserve ". This only changed with the assumption of office: "The ambition brought about the change in him which was necessary in the possession of a throne." This had serious consequences at a time when Byzantium left it to the Venetians to fight piracy . “The Venetians, as a trading nation, were most exposed to their roaming” and “the Doge's heat found here an object to show his vivacity. Because the nation feared that it would see this shit itself in the Venetian waters: so the Doge hurriedly had three and thirty galleys armed ”(p. 197). But this first venture failed, and only before a second, similarly large fleet had the Narentans flee back "to their main port" and ask for a contract renewal. Only with the collapse of Croatia should it be possible to "eradicate predatory nests". A treaty renewal succeeded with Berengar, ie the renewal of the old privileges that had been confirmed and expanded again and again since Charlemagne. LeBret indicates that Adelheid's flight and King Otto I's Italian expedition would see Venice on the wrong side. For the old Doge, however, his son and fellow dog of the same name became a particular problem, “a source of biting annoyance for the father.” The supporters of father and son “came together in the public square of Rialto to decide the matter through a skirmish . ”But the father's crowd was much larger, they“ seized the son, they tied him, they wanted to sacrifice him to the vengeance and fury of the heated mob. ”But the father“ bathed for him; and the people were softened by such a touching example of a dismayed father. ”Lifelong banishment followed. The exile traveled to Ravenna with a priest Gregorius and a deacon George along with twelve servants. King Berengar II asked “the young man” to “take part” in a campaign against the Mark Spoleto, then the king allowed him “to take revenge on the Venetians”. In the "Haven of Primaro" he captured seven Venetian merchants on the way to Fano, and "cut the team down". The appointment of this pirate as the successor of the old Doge, which happened despite the opposing oath, prompted the author to investigate which errors had crept into the Venetian church and state constitution (pp. 199–215).

For Samuele Romanin , who depicted this epoch in 1853 in the first of ten volumes of his Storia documentata di Venezia , who depicts very detailed depictions and is embedded in the historical context of the neighboring territories , the first thing to do was to depict the confrontation with Aquileia. As with the father against the margrave "Wintkero" shortly before, a trade ban was enough to force the patriarch to give in. On March 13, 944, the vanquished swore that he would never again violate the rights of the Bishop of Grado and those of Venice. But in the sixth year of his reign, Pietro III. arranges to take action against the Narentans, who disrupted the trade too much. Romanin quotes from a handwriting of a certain "cronista Marco", who reports on the victory over the pirate "Gajolo". Romanin suspects that the kidnapping of the fiancées who had gathered at Olivolo, today's Castello, took place in this context, the famous "Rapimento delle spose veneziane", an event that occurred partly in the time of Pietro II Candiano, partly in those of Pietro Tradonico was assigned. The history of the Festa delle Marie , which was celebrated in memory of this event until the Chioggia War , i.e. until 1379, is completely unclear in its history, as Romanin states, who explains the course of the Festa on seven pages (p. 234 -240). In 951, the Doge's envoys went to the court of Berengar II, who had been king since December 15, 950, whereby Romanin conceded in a footnote (p. 241, note 3) that the corresponding document had the year 953 as the date. However, he considers this to be a mistake, because at that time King Otto I already dominated. In his opinion, the 'other princes' only succeeded in interfering in Italy because of discord (“intestine discordie”), party envy and domestic disputes ("Dissidii") and interests prevailed. Otto came to Pavia, married Adelheid and was crowned King of Italy in 952. But Berengar managed to come back to power after Otto had crossed the Alps to the north. This bad example had an effect on Venice itself. The author briefly outlines the equally dramatic scenes in Venice, from the son's attempted rebellion to his capture, his father's petitions and exile. After the father's death, things were seen in Venice without precedent. So the son, despite the oath, which provided for the banishment for life and which was never to return to his office, was raised to the rank of doge. According to the author, attempts were made to appease the divine anger through prayers, processions, charitable gifts, and the construction or restoration of churches. Accordingly, ' San Simeone was made at the expense of the Brandossi, Beriosi and Ghise families; San Baseggio the Baseggi and Acotanti; Santa Maria Zobenigo to those of the Zobenighi, Barbarighi, Semitecoli etc. ' built or rebuilt. The old Doge, embittered by so much calamity, died over it after 17 years of reign in 959.

August Friedrich Gfrörer († 1861) assumes in his history of Venice from its founding to 1084 , which was only published eleven years after his death , that Byzantium still exercised the greatest influence in the lagoon, which is reflected in many details. Even from the fact that “neither Peter Badoario nor Peter Candiano III” sent the sons to Constantinople, one could conclude that the relationship of dependency had loosened, because both doges were there earlier “as envoys or scourges of their fathers” been. For Gfrörer, the fact that Dandolo only reports about two of the three sons (Johannes Diaconus even only about one) is a silent indication that the third son was in Constantinople as an ambassador or hostage at that time . The author discovers Berengar II, on the one hand, who is trying to shake Venice with the help of the rebellious son of the Dog, and on the other hand, a new party that has emerged within Venice that has demanded participation in power, as other powers that have now strongly influenced Venice's politics. But Gfrörer first names the document with which the dispute between Grado and Aquileia was decided in favor of Venice and Grados, then the war with the Narentans. After him, 34 ships (not 33) were sent out under Orso Badoario and Peter Rusolo, but they returned “without having achieved anything”. Then the second fleet follows, also not under the command of the Doge, which can show successes. But, according to Gfrörer, the fact that for the first time a fleet was not led by the Doge or at least fellow Doges indicates that "his hands were tied". Then he comes up with the Italian influences. “By deed of May 7th, 948, Berengar renewed the old Carolingian treaty of 810”; it drew a new border line of Veneto and the king "finally granted that the Venetians should henceforth only pay the 40th pfennig (of the value of the goods which they imported into Italy)" (p. 252). In doing so, Gfrörer vaguely indicates that “a power had arisen in Zealand” that ensured that highly self-serving agreements, such as the exemption of the Doge's personal trade, as enforced in 883 by Giovanni II Particiaco , never occur again. The fact that “clergy and people” spoke out against Peter (IV.) And banished him for life, Gfrörer also gives a different interpretation. He compares them with similar events in Rome or with the Pataria in Milan. According to Gfrörer, Berengar helped the young fellow doge into his office, for this reason also concluded the agreement of 948, which was advantageous for Venice, and finally supported the exiled fellow doge against his father: “King Berengar reckoned through the division he had in the lap of the ducal house instigated to shatter the rich and sea-powerful neighboring country, and thereby subordinate it step by step to his sovereignty ”(p. 255 f.). For Gfrörer, at the same time, initially as a supporter of the old Doge, a new party in the city was stirring that demanded participation rights. According to Johannes Diaconus, Gfrörer closes the time of Peter III. from, the Doge lived after the son's expulsion "only two months and a fortnight"; on the other hand, Andrea Dandolo reports that he still lived the period mentioned “after his son was chosen”. Gfrörer suspects that Dandolo used Johannes and wanted to turn the “ejectio” into an “electio”, but then replaced it with “creatio”, which seemed clearer to him. According to Gfrörer, the old Doge was still alive in early 960, more veneto in late 959. He traces the process back to a lost doge list that both chroniclers are said to have used. Johannes Diaconus changed the term, but Dandolo kept it, with which Gfrörer tries to explain why the younger source should be more reliable than the one that is so much closer in time.

Pietro Pinton, who translated and annotated Gfrörer's work in the Archivio Veneto in the annual volumes XII to XVI, corrected his idea of ​​an overly strong influence of Byzantium. His own account did not appear until 1883, also in the Archivio Veneto. In doing so, he holds against Gfrörer that he apparently does not know Romanin because he presents the decisive document to the dispute with Aquileia too briefly and incompletely. The fact that the Doge did not lead the two fleets against the Narentans himself is an occasion for Gfrörer to “imagine mysterious obstacles without saying anything concrete”. In addition, no new boundary for the Venetian ducat was drawn in the contract with Berengar, as Gfrörer claims, and Pietro III. as an ally in the struggle against the feudal powers of northern Italy was of no value. In addition, the search for a new ally for Berengar would have given him the opportunity, like Charles the Fat and Giovanni II Particiaco in 883, to exempt him from personal trade. In addition, Gfrörer deduces from the mere fact of later support for the rebellious son that Berengar had been in league with him for years. On the contrary, the young rebel was only introduced to the king by his son Wido, as Johannes Diaconus reports ("Is autem, qui patria pulsus fuerat ..., ad Hwidonem marchionem, Berengarii regis filium, pervenit. Qui cum devote suscipiens, patri Berengario regi presentavit . "). Just to support his argument, he puts the elevation to co-doge and exile in the year 959, while Pinton, due to events in between, such as the campaign against Spoleto or the pirate acts of the son of the Dog, assumes three or four years must have been between the events. Pinton assumes the time around 957 for the "eviction". Henry Simonsfeld has already answered the question about the time of the father's death, viewed from a source-critical point of view, whether the Muratori edition had adopted a wrong term - a "creationem" appeared instead of "ejectionem" - had already been answered by Henry Simonsfeld . But Gfrörer, who repeatedly insisted on being able to interpret the language of the sources, ignored this and made further technical mistakes.

In 1861, Francesco Zanotto, who in his Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia gave considerably more influence to the people's assembly, reported that the Doge had been appointed by the will of the people. After only a year, the new doge had to protect the rights of the Bishop of Grado, because the Patriarch of Aquileia tried to seize Grados. Venice responded with a trade ban, with Zanotto particularly emphasizing the commodity salt. With reference to the Chronicle of Johannes Deacon, "la Sagornina", as it was still called at that time, the campaign against the Narentans took place in the 6th year of his reign; Orso Badoaro and "Pietro Rusolo od Orseolo" received the command. After Zanotto the fleet went not only to the Neretva, but also to Ragusa . From the fact that the fleet returned with no results while the second was successful, Zanotto deduces that the second fleet 'maybe' received a more experienced command. The Doge obtained a renewal of the 'old treaties' from the new King Berengar II. In the 14th year of his reign, the Doge took his son to be a “compagno” without the consent of the “nazione”. 'But he soon had to regret it bitterly'. The son soon attacked the Doge's Palace. But the people rose against him, and only the father's petitions prevented his killing. Then the author describes the alliance with Berengar and Wido, the war against Spoleto and the pirate acts. Finally, he adds the plague, which 'made the city a grave, as it were' and the pain caused by the son. Both killed the old doge. Without naming Romanin's name, he contradicts (p. 49, note 4) Romanin's claim that the churches mentioned were under Pietro III. Candiano emerged.

In the first volume of his Storia dei Dogi di Venezia , published in 1867, Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna also mentions “Pietro Candiano III” as the 21st Doge, who immediately successfully imposed a trade ban on the aggressive Patriarch of Aquileia. In the eighth year of his reign, Liutprand, legate of King Lothar of Italy to the Byzantine Emperor, came to Rialto. A Venetian ship brought him to Constantinople. With Lothar's successor, the old treaties were renewed and the boundaries of Eraclea , Equilio di Caprula, Chioggia and those of other cities were established. Venice only had to pay minor taxes. The fleet against the 'Slavs and Croats' consisted of 23 instead of 33 ships, also went to Ragusa with him, while the second, successful one possibly received a new command with him. However, it was with him the doge's wish to make his son a fellow Doge, to which the people gave their consent. At Cicogna, too, the old doge died of grief over the path his son took, which hijacked Venetian ships. The year of death 959 for Pietro III. was already established.

Heinrich Kretschmayr states: “With the Dogate of Petrus Candianus (Pietro Candiano) III. begin almost forty years of uninterrupted rule by the Candian house. ”Although he also accepts a trade blockade, the document of March 13, 944 avoids“ an express admission of economic weakness, as the Istrians did ”. With this, the author indicates that the trade blockade was only inferred because this remedy had already been used against Istria and Friuli in 933, and because the "echo of the Treaty of 933" was "evident". The author interprets the “bride robbery” as a reminder of a Slavic attack, which followed a year later, “946 (?)”, An “attempted vengeance” against the Narentans. After the second successful attempt, a contract of unknown content was concluded. Venice may have paid tribute, in any case its colonies in the cities on the Dalmatian coast, about the origins of which, as Kretschmayr notes, nothing is known about. “There is no news about the Doge's later years.” Only the quarrel between father and son is described. According to the author, the episcopate and the nobility feared the conflict with their son, “probably also influenced by a party inclined towards them”, and broke their oath never to elect their son as doge. Instead, "[he] was solemnly overtaken in Ravenna with 300 ships and called back to the palatium" (p. 109).

For John Julius Norwich in his History of Venice , in which the Candiani exclusively dominate Venice's history for 44 years, it was the third (Candiano) who "sailed twice against the Narenta pirates who had killed his grandfather and forced them to their knees". Otherwise, Norwich was only newsworthy about the argument with his son. After him, Peter III. his son in 946, the fourth year of his reign, as fellow doge. Norwich believes that it is more likely that the conflict was not a bad character, but rather solid political conflicts. The conflict led to "open warfare broke out in the streets of the city". As a mercenary, the son fought under the banners of the "Guy, Marquis of Ivrea, who in 950 was crowned King of Italy". Then he became a corsair, "blocking no less than seven of the Republic's galleys at the mouth of the Po." "The old doge bore his son's shame as long as he could", but the outbreak of a "terrible epidemic of plague", who met the city in 959 "finally broke his spirit" and he died.

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, p. 137 ( digitized version ).
  • Ester Pastorello (Ed.): Andrea Dandolo, Chronica per extensum descripta aa. 460-1280 dC , (= Rerum Italicarum Scriptores XII, 1), Nicola Zanichelli, Bologna 1938, p. 173 f. ( Digitized, p. 172 f. )

Legislative sources, letters

  • Roberto Cessi (Ed.): Documenti relativi alla storia di Venezia anteriori al Mille , 2 vol., Vol. II, Padua 1942, n. 37, p. 59 f., N. 38, p. 61 f., N. 40, p. 671 f.
  • Roberto Cessi: Pacta Veneta , Vol. II: Dal "Pactum Lotharii" al "Foedus Octonis" , in: Le origini del ducato veneziano , Naples 1951, pp. 268, 305.
  • Luigi Schiaparelli (ed.): I diplomi italiani di Ugo e Lotario, di Berengario II e di Adalberto , Rome 1924, XXXVIII, p. 378.
  • Luigi Lanfranchi (ed.): S. Giovanni Evangelista di Torcello , Venice 1958, p. 159.
  • Luigi Lanfranchi (Ed.): S. Giorgio Maggiore , Vol. II: Documenti 982-1159 , Venice 1968, n. 6, pp. 35-37, n. 7, pp. 37-39, n. II, p. 45-48.
  • Andrea Gloria (Ed.): Codice diplomatico padovano dal secolo sesto a tutto l'undicesimo , II, 2, Venice 1877, n. 37, p. 57 f. ( Digitized version )

literature

  • Margherita Giuliana Bertolini: Candiano, Pietro , in: Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, Vol. 17, 1974, pp. 761–764 (represents the basis of the presentation)

Remarks

  1. ↑ On this relationship cf. Roberto Cessi : Venezia ducale , vol. I, n. 5, p. 338.
  2. ^ Carlo Guido Mor : L'età feudale , Vol. I, Milan 1952, p. 222 and Roberto Cessi : Politica, economia e religione , in: Storia di Venezia , Vol. II, Venice 1958, p. 206.
  3. ^ Roberto Cessi : Politica, economia e religione , in: Storia di Venezia , Vol. II, Venice 1958, pp. 206 f.
  4. ^ Robert Cessi: Politica, economia e religione , in: Storia di Venezia , Vol. II, Venice 1958, p. 207.
  5. ↑ Ernesto Sestan : La conquista veneziana della Dalmazia , in: La Venezia del Mille , Florenz 1965, p. 93.
  6. ^ Eduard Hlawitschka : Franconia, Alemanni, Bavaria and Burgunder in Northern Italy , Freiburg im Breisgau 1960, p. 154.
  7. ^ Roberto Pesce (Ed.): Cronica di Venexia detta di Enrico Dandolo. Origini - 1362 , Centro di Studi Medievali e Rinascimentali "Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna", Venice 2010, p. 43.
  8. ↑ Pietro Marcello : Vite de'prencipi di Vinegia in the translation of Lodovico Domenichi, Marcolini, 1558, pp 33-35 ( digitized ).
  9. ↑ 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. 69 f. ( online ).
  10. ↑ Heinrich Kellner : Chronica that is Warhaffte actual and short description, all life in Venice , Frankfurt 1574, p. 13v – 14r ( digitized, p. 13v ).
  11. ↑ Alessandro Maria Vianoli : Der Venetianischen Herthaben life / government, and dying / from the first Paulutio Anafesto to / bit on the now-ruling Marcum Antonium Justiniani , Nuremberg 1686, pp. 131-137, translation ( digitized ).
  12. ↑ Jacob von Sandrart : Kurtze and increased description of the origin / recording / areas / and government of the world famous Republick Venice , Nuremberg 1687, p. 24 f. ( Digital copy, p. 24 ).
  13. ↑ 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 another , 4 vols., Johann Friedrich Hartknoch , Riga and Leipzig 1769–1777, Vol. 1, Leipzig and Riga 1769, pp. 196–199. ( Digitized version ).
  14. ^ 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. 233–245, here: p. 233 ( digitized version ).
  15. ↑ August Friedrich Gfrörer : History of Venice from its foundation to the year 1084. Edited from his estate, supplemented and continued by Dr. JB Weiß , Graz 1872, p. 250 ( digitized version ).
  16. ↑ Pietro Pinton: La storia di Venezia di AF Gfrörer , in: Archivio Veneto 25.2 (1883) 288-313, here: pp. 308-313 (part 2) ( digitized version ).
  17. ↑ Francesco Zanotto: Il Palazzo ducale di Venezia , Vol. 4, Venice 1861, pp. 47-49. ( Digitized version ).
  18. ^ Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna : Storia dei Dogi di Venezia , Vol. 1, Venice 1867, o. P.
  19. ^ Heinrich Kretschmayr : History of Venice , 3 vol., Vol. 1, Gotha 1905, p. 108 f.
  20. ^ John Julius Norwich : A History of Venice , Penguin, London 2003.
predecessor Office successor
Pietro Badoer Doge of Venice
942–959 		Pietro IV Candiano
personal data
SURNAME Candiano, Pietro III.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Doge of Venice
DATE OF BIRTH 9th century or 10th century
DATE OF DEATH around 960