Following a dispute between the Venetians and Istrians, one that resulted in the embargo on all trading between Istria and Venice, Margrave Winther, together with the people and the bishops of Istria, promise to cease all hostilities towards the Venetians, not to usurp or occupy the properties of the Patriarchate of Grado or Venetian bishoprics in the region, to regularly take cognizance of and adjudicate the complaints lodged by the Venetians against defaulting debtors from Istria, to abolish all the newly instituted duties and only charge the customary fees of a docking tax and a market fee, and to promptly inform the Venetians in case the king of Italy plans any offensive against them so that they could safely repatriate.
In nomine domini nostri Iesu Christia.
Regnante domino nostro Hugoneb serenissimo rege anno septimoc, Lothariod veroe filio eius in Dei autemf nomine regnante anno secundog, dieh duodecimoi mensis martiij, indictione sextak.
Acto Rivoaltol.
Cum nos Wintheriusm et homines nostrin invasimus res proprietatum de Patriarchatu vestro Gradensio sancti Hermacorep quas in finibus Polaneq et Ystrier habet, et similiter ress palatiit vestri Veneciarum et de episcopatibusu Veneciarum, quas ipse palatiusv et sui episcopatiw in Pola et in omnibus finibus Hystrie habent, et debitax quasy Hystrienses ad Veneticos solvere debebant detinebamus, ut iustitias minime invenire poterant Venetici, et suprapositas eis per civitates imponebamus, etiamz naves eorum comprehendimus et depredavimus, et homicidia in Veneticos fecimus, unde maxima lisaa inter nos et Veneticos adcrevitab.
Propter hocac malum, quodad in Veneticos exercuimus, domnusae Petrus gloriosus dux Veneticorumaf precepit ut nullus Veneticus Ystriamag pergeret nec Ystrienses Venetias advenirent. Hoc videntes nos Wintheriusah marchioai missos direximus ad dominum Marinum patriarchamaj, ut pro Dei omnipotentis amore intermitteret se ad dominum Petrum eminentissimumak ducem, ut paxal cum nobisam et cuman nostro populo esset, et negocia Veneticiao cumap Ystriensibusaq exercerentar, sicut soliti fuerunt facere.
Tunc predictus dominus Marinus patriarcha egregiusas exiit a sua civitate Gradensi venitque ad suum senioremat, domnum Petrum eminentissimum ducem, et admonuitau eum utav, pro Christi amore, pacem faceret et malum pro malo non redderet, sed qui incontraaw legemax factum haberet secundum seriem pacti emendaret. Ad hec monitaay, menteaz domini Petri piissimi et gloriosissimi ducis compuncta condoluit. Unde ipse deniqueba dominus Petrus dux ammonitusbb divina et apostolica precepta et devocione ac promissione Hystriensium esse devotabc per hanc cartam, misericordiabd motusbe et per sanctas Dei ecclesias et pauperibus Christi ad pacem et concordiam sua[m] mente[m]bf reduxit, et omne malum quod contra suos Ystrienses degerunt pro divino amore reliquit.
Ideo ego Winteriusbg marchio, unacum Iohanne episcopo urbis Polanebh et cum ceteris Hystriensiumbi episcopis et cum omni populo Ystriensibj, prona mente et spontanea voluntate promittentes promittimus:
[1] ut amodo et deinceps in nullas proprietatesbk de vestro Patriarchatu Gradensibl sancti Hermagorebm nec de illasbn de vestro palatio nec de cunctas resbo sanctarum ecclesiarum Dei quasbp in vestro episcopatubq Veneciarumbr pertinet in totis finibus Polane et Ystrie, quas ille et Venetici ubicumque habere et possidere visebs sunt in finibus Ystrie, nullo umquam tempore nos in eas intromittere nec in aliquobt occupare debeamus, sed semper in suo statu et in vestra dominationebu manere debeant, ita ut non per nos neque per sumissambv personambw ab aliquo mali patiantur, sed semper ab omnibus nostris, qui sub nostra potestate degunt, defense ipse proprietates et homines vestribx maneant, et vestra dominatioby per vestros fideles in ipsos colonos discurrat.
[2] Simili modo promittimus quodbz omne debitum quod Ystrienses Veneticisca solverecb debeantcc, annuatim iustitias facere debeamuscd.
[3] Itemque promittimus de omnes suprapositasce quecf facte fuerunt, ut in eternum non rememorenturcg, sed secundum antiquam consuetudinem per unamquamque personamch/ci ripatica et tholoneacj solvantur, ita utck amplius eis non imponantur.
[4] Itemquecl promittimus ut nullocm umquamcn tempore cum nostre navesco super vestriscp in contrarium ire non debeamus necq vestri Venetici mala patianturcr, sed omni tempore in pace et caritatecs ab invicem vobiscumct manere debeamus, ut omnem legem et iustitiamcu vestris Veneticis observare promittimus.
[5] Super hec autem pollicemur ut, si iussio regis veneritcv ut contracw Veneticos aliquid mali agaturcx, primitus cum nos potuerimus scire eos faciamus, ut illesi ad suam patriamcy revertantur.
Hec inviolabiliter observare promittimus nos cum nostris successoribus et heredibus ac proheredibuscz.
Quod si quocumque tempore per vim res proprietatum de vestro Patriarchatuda Gradensi sancti Hermagore aut de palatio vestro aut de sanctarum vestrarum ecclesiarumdb/dc Dei aut de vestris fidelibus invadere presumpserimus, incurramusdd in iramde omnipotentis Dei et sanctorumdf eius quorum res invadere presumpserimus, et insuper componere promittimus cum nostris heredibus vobis et in palatio vestro auro fulvo libras centumdg, medietatem cuiquedh forciadi facta fuerit et medietatem palatio regis Italico Regno presidenti, et hec promissionis carta maneat in sua firmitate.
Quamdj vero cartam repromissionis tradidimus scribendam Georgio dyaconodk et notario de civitate Iustinopolisdl.
Acta verodm Rivoaltodn.
(SC)do Signum manusdp dominidq Winteriidr marchionisds, qui hoc fieri rogavit.
(SC)dt Ego Iohannes episcopus Polanedu ecclesie manu meadv subscripsi.
(SC) Ego Firminus episcopus manu meadw subscripsi.
(SC) Signum manus Rocioni de civitate Polanadx ad omnia consentientisdy.
(SC) Signum manus Amantinidz filii Constantiniea consentientiseb.
(SC) Ego Audebertusec locopositus de civitate Iustinopolied manu [mea] subscripsiee.
(SC) Signum manusef Leoniseg filii Passivieh consentientisei.
(SC) Signum manusej Dominiciek locopositoel de Trigesteem consentientis.
(SC) Signum manusen Iohanniseo filii Oliveep de Trigesteeq.
(SC) Signum manus Andreadier scavinoes filii Dominiciet Pepolo de Tergesteeu consentientisev.
(SC) Signum manus Dominici filiiew Olie de castro Mugla consentientisex.ey
(SC) Signum manus Iulianiez de Mugla consentientis.
(SC) Signum manus Veneriifa de Augusto de castro Piranofb consentientis.
(SC) Signum manus Felicisfc filii Ravenni de Piranofd consentientis.
(SC) Signum manus Dominicife scavinoff de Anastasia consentientis.
(SC) Signum manus Maurocenifg filii Mauricenifh de Iustino consentientis.
(SC) Signum manus Iohannisfi de Iustane consentientis.
(SC) Signum manus Andreatifj fratrisfk dominis Iohannis episcopifl consentientis.
(SC) Signum manus Lambertifm cui cognomentofn Populino consentientis.
Ego Georgius dyaconusfo et notarius de civitate Iustinopolifp ex iussione domini Wintheriifq marchionis hanc repromissionis cartam scripsi, complevifr atque firmavi.
De civitate Pola iuret: Rociusfs, Amantinus, Leo filius Passivoft et Iohannes Basiliacusfu.
De Parentio: Leo de Hwalteramofv, Dominicusfw de Iuventino, Odelricusfx, Theodorusfy Tribunusfz.
De Civitate Nova: Leonianus et Iohannes cognatus Formino episcopoga.
De Pirano: Felix scavinus, Andreas Iustulagogb, Crissusgc, Ansaldus.
De civitate Capras: Audiwertusgd locopositus, Andreas Aquabeolus, Dominicus de Anastasia, Petrus de Iananege.
De Mugla: Venerius, Bonciolinusgf, Dominicus de Oliva, Antriusgg.
De Tergestegh: Dominicus locopositus filius Senadrigi, Andreas filius Dominici Pepoligj, Iohannes de Olivogk, Rothicheriusgl.
a) domini nostri Iesu Christi] et cetera T. b) D; Ugone LT. c) 7o D. d) Lotario T. e) TD; om. L. f) seq. no add. L; om. D. g) 2o D. h) om. D. i) XIIo TD. j) mensis martii] TD; mense marcio L. k) 6a D. l) Acto Rivoalto] sic LTD: pro Actum Rivoalti. m) Winhaterius ex corr. D. n) et homines nostri] ex et Iohannes nostri corr. D. o) T; Gradense LD et undique sic. p) Hermachore D. q) Pollanę T. r) Istrie et saepe Istria/Istrienses T; Hystrie et undique Hystria/Histria, Hystrienses/Histrienses D. s) om. D. t) pallatii et saepe sic T. u) ex episcopo in episcopatos et postmodum in episcopatibus corr. al. man. L; episcopatu T; episcopatos D. v) ipse palatius] sic LTD: pro ipsum palatium. w) sic LTD: pro episcopatus. x) debitas D. y) sic LTD: pro que. z) seq. et add. L; seq. de add. D. aa) T; litis L; om. D. ab) accrevit T. ac) quod D. ad) om. D. ae) dominus T. af) Petrus gloriosus dux Veneticorum] subsignavit T. ag) Ystrie L; Histrie D; Istriam T; Ystriam em. Banić. ah) Wiatherius D. ai) Wintherius marchio] subsignavit T. aj) dominum Marinum patriarcham] subsignavit T. ak) subsignavit T. al) pax—esset] pacem—faceret T; pacem—esset D. am) nos D. an) om. D. ao) Veneticorum D. ap) om. D. aq) Ystriense L; Istriensibus T; Histriense D; Ystriensibus em. Banić. ar) T; se exerceret LD. as) patriarcha egregius] inv. TD. at) subsignavit T. au) T; amovit L; amonuit D. av) om. D. aw) qui incontra] quod in qua D. ax) lege D. ay) motiva D. az) sic LTD: pro mens (mens—condoluit). ba) om. D. bb) T; amonitus LD. bc) devotam D. bd) miscericordia iter. L. be) TD; add. in marg. sin. al. man. L. bf) suam mentem] sua mente LTD; suam mentem em. Tafel–Thomas. bg) T; Winiterius L; Wiatherius D. bh) Pollanę T; Polacio D. bi) Istriensibus T; Histriensium D. bj) Ystriense L; Istriensi T; Histriense D; Ystriensi em. Banić. bk) ut amodo—nullas proprietates] om. D. bl) Patriarchatu Gradensi] T; Patriarchato Gradense LD. bm) Hermachore T; Hermacori D. bn) sic LTD: pro illis. bo) cunctas res] sic LTD: pro cunctis rebus. bp) sic LTD: pro que. bq) vestro episcopatu] T; vestros episcopatos LD; fort. pro vestris episcopatibus. br) D; V. T; Venec cum sign. abbr. L. bs) sic LTD: pro visi. bt) TD; aliquot L. bu) vestra dominatione] iure dominationis D. bv) seq. a add. L. bw) sumissam personam] TD; sumissa persona L. bx) T; vestros LD. by) seq. ill canc. D. bz) T; de LD. ca) T; a Veneticos LD; ad Veneticos em. Tafel–Thomas. cb) solum T. cc) D; debent LT. cd) TD; faciamus L. ce) de omnes suprapositas] sic LTD: pro de omnibus suprapositis. cf) T; quas LD. cg) sic LT; removetur D; renoventur em. Cessi. ch) per unamquamque personam] L; pro unaquaque civitate T. ci) sed secundum—unamquamque personam] om. D. cj) tolonea T. ck) quod D. cl) T; iterumque LD. cm) nullo umquam tempore—ire non debeamus] sic LTD: seu ullo umquam tempore—ire non debeamus, seu nullo umquam tempore—ire debeamus. cn) unquam et saepe sic TD. co) cum nostre naves] sic LTD: pro cum nostris navibus. cp) T; vestre LD. cq) T; ut LD. cr) patiaur D. cs) charitate D. ct) om. D. cu) seq. a add. L; seq. ad add. D. cv) T; venerat LD. cw) seq. eos canc. D. cx) T; agant L; agantur D. cy) suam patriam] sua patria D. cz) successoribus—heredibus—proheredibus] successores—heredes—proheredes D. da) vestro Patriarchatu] vestra patria iani D. db) vestrarum ecclesiarum] TD; inv. L. dc) de sanctarum vestrarum ecclesiarum] sic LTD: pro de sanctis vestris ecclesiis. dd) D; incuramus LT. de) T; ira LD. df) T; sanctis LD. dg) C T. dh) cui T. di) subsignavit T; forsa D. dj) hanc T. dk) diacono TD. dl) T; Iustinopolim L; Iustinopolitana D. dm) seq. in add. D. dn) Acta vero Rivoalto] sic LTD: pro Actum vero Rivoalti. do) D; paena omnia signa crucis om. LT. dp) manu et undique sic D. dq) domino L. dr) Winterio L; Winticherii T; Wintherio D; Winterii em. Banić. ds) T; marchioni LD. dt) LD; om. T. du) seq. civitatis canc. T. dv) om. D. dw) om. D. dx) Pola TD. dy) cons cum sign. abbr. et undique sic L; consensi et undique consensi loco consentientis D. dz) T; Amatino L; Amarcono D. ea) filii Constantini] T; filio Constantino LD. eb) consu L. ec) T; Adebertus L; Audbertus D. ed) T; Iustinopolim LD. ee) manu mea subscripsi] consentientis LT; ma(nu) scripsi D; manu mea subscripsi em. Banić. ef) om. T. eg) T; Leoni LD. eh) D; Passivo LT. ei) consensientis et saepe sic T. ej) om. TD. ek) T; Dominico L. el) sic LTD: pro locopositi. em) Triegse T. en) om. T. eo) Io. T; Iohanni LD. ep) seq. req canc. T. eq) Trieste T. er) T; Andreade LD. es) sic LT: pro scavini; stavino D. et) filii Dominici] T; filius Dominico L; filio Dominico D. eu) Trigeste D. ev) om. LT; consensi D; consentientis em. Banić. ew) Dominici filii] T; Dominico filio L. ex) T; consentiens L. ey) (SC)—consentientis] om. D. ez) T; Iuliano LD. fa) T; Venerio LD. fb) Piriano et saepe sic T. fc) T; Felix LD. fd) D; Piriano LT. fe) T; Dominico LD. ff) sic LTD: pro scavini. fg) Mauriceni D. fh) filii Mauriceni] om. T. fi) Io. T; Iohanni LD. fj) Andreadi T. fk) T; fratri LD. fl) dominis Iohannis episcopis] D. Io. epi. cum sign. abbr. T; domno Iohanni episcopo LD. fm) T; Lamberto LD. fn) cognomentis T. fo) diaconus LT. fp) T; Iustinopolim LD. fq) TD; Winberti L. fr) compilavi D. fs) iuret Rocius] Inrertotius D. ft) sic LTD: pro Passivi. fu) Bassiliacus D. fv) Walteramo T; Hwalterano D. fw) T; Dominico LD. fx) Oldricus D. fy) Teodorus ex Teodosius corr. D. fz) seq. de add. T. ga) Formino episcopo] sic L; Formino episcopus T; Firmino episcopo D; pro Formini episcopi. gb) Iustralago D. gc) Chrissus T. gd) Audivertus T; Andivenus D. ge) Iavane D. gf) Bonzolinus T. gg) Oliva, Antrius] T; Oliniancius L; Oliva, Auce D. gh) T; Trigeste L; Trieste D. gi) Sevadri D. gj) Dominici Pepoli] T; Dominico Pepolo LD. gk) TD; Solivo L. gl) Roticherius T.
In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
During the 7th year of reign of our Lord, the most serene King Hugh, and also his son Lothar’s 2nd year of reign in the name of God, on the twelfth day of the month of March, 6th indiction.
Done in Rialto.
Since we, Winther, and our people invaded the properties belonging to your Patriarchate of Grado, dedicated to Saint Hermagoras, those that it has in the territories of Pula and Istria, and similarly the properties of your Venetian palace and of Venetian bishopric(s), those that the very palace and its bishopric(s) have in Pula and throughout the lands of Istria; and we were detaining the repayment of debts that the Istrians ought to repay to the Venetians, so that the Venetians could not be treated justly at all; and we were imposing levies upon them throughout the cities; moreover, we seized and despoiled their ships and committed murder upon the Venetians, wherefrom a most great dispute arose between us and the Venetians.
Due to this harm that we had inflicted upon the Venetians, Lord Peter, the glorious doge of the Venetians, ordered that no Venetian might journey to Istria and that no Istrian might come to Venice. Seeing that, we, Margrave Winther, directed envoys to Lord Marinus the patriarch, so that, for the love of God Almighty, he would intercede with Lord Peter, the most eminent doge, so that there might be peace with us and with our people, and that the Venetians might conduct business with the Istrians, as they had been accustomed to do.
Thereupon, the said excellent Lord Patriarch Marinus departed from his city of Grado and came before his senior, Lord Peter, the most eminent doge, and advised him that, for the love of Christ, he should make peace and not repay evil with evil; rather, [those] who had acted against the law should make amends according to the terms of the agreement.
The remorseful mind of Lord Peter, the most pious and glorious doge, empathized with these words of advice.
So at last, the very Lord Doge Peter, admonished by the divine and apostolic precepts, and by the devotion and the promise of the Istrians to be faithful in accordance with this charter, was moved by mercy and by the holy churches of God and the poor of Christ, so he turned his mind towards peace and concord, and out of divine love he let go every evil that the Istrians inflicted upon his people.
Therefore, I, Margrave Winther, together with John, the bishop of the city of Pula, and with other Istrian bishops and with all the people of Istria, promising with a willing mind and of our own free will, we vow:
[1] that from now on and hereafter we are never to usurp or in any way occupy any properties of your Patriarchate of Grado, dedicated to Saint Hermagoras, or of your palace, or of the entirety of the properties of the holy churches of God that belong to your Venetian bishopric(s) throughout the territories of Pula and Istria, in whatever place throughout the territories of Istria the Patriarchate of Grado and the Venetians seem to have or possess them. Instead, these possessions ought to remain in their state and under your dominion, so that no harm comes to them either from us or from any subjected person; rather, may the very properties and your people always remain protected by all our people who live under our rule. And may your rule be exercised over your coloni by your subjects.
[2] Similarly, we promise that we shall hold court sessions yearly to adjudicate on the matter of all the debts that the Istrians ought to repay to the Venetians.
[3] And we likewise promise regarding all the levies that we imposed, so that they are not recalled for eternity; instead, according to old custom, a docking fee and a market toll ought to be paid by each and every person, so that nothing in addition is to be imposed upon them.
[4] And we likewise promise that we are never to attack your ships with ours lest your Venetians suffer any harm; rather, we are to remain with you in mutual peace and amity at all times, as we promise to observe every law and to treat your Venetians justly.
[5] Moreover, in addition to these we promise that, if the order of the king would be issued to undertake anything harmful against the Venetians, we are to inform them as soon as we are able to, so that they may return to their homeland unharmed.
These we promise to observe inviolably together with our successors and heirs and designated heirs.
But if at any time we should dare to forcefully invade the properties belonging to your Patriarchate of Grado, dedicated to Saint Hermagoras, or to your palace, or to your holy churches of God, or to your faithful subjects, may we incur the wrath of God Almighty and His saints whose properties we have dared to invade. And moreover, we, along with our heirs, promise to pay to you and to your palace one hundred pounds of fine gold, half of which to whomever was wronged and half to the royal palace presiding over the Kingdom of Italy. And may this charter of promise remain in its firmness.
Which charter of promise we, in fact, handed over to George the deacon and notary of the city of Koper to write down.
Done in Rialto.
The handwritten sign of Lord Margrave Winther, who requested this to be done.
I, John, the bishop of the Church of Pula, signed with my own hand.
I, Bishop Firminus, signed with my own hand.
The handwritten sign of Rocio of the city of Pula, who agreed with everything.
The handwritten sign of Amantino, son of Constantine, in agreement.
I Audebert, the locopositus of the city of Koper, signed with [my own] hand.
The handwritten sign of Leo, son of Passivo, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Dominic, the locopositus of Trieste, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of John, son of Oliva of Trieste.
The handwritten sign of Andreadus scabinus, son of Dominic Pepolo of Trieste, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Dominic, son of Olia of the town of Muggia, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Julian of Muggia, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Venerius of August of the town of Piran, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Felix, son of Ravennus of Piran, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Dominic scabinus of Anastasia, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Morosino, son of Morosino of Iustino, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of John of Iustana, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Andreato, brother of Lord Bishop John, in agreement.
The handwritten sign of Lambert, who is called Populino, in agreement.
By the order of Lord Margrave Winther, I, George the deacon and notary of the city of Koper, wrote this charter of promise, completed it, and signed it.
From the city of Pula swear: Rocio, Amantino, Leo, son of Passivo, and John Basiliacus.
From Poreč: Leo of Hwalteramo, Dominic of Iuventino, Ulrich, Theodore Tribunus.
From Novigrad: Leonianus and John, the relative of Bishop Forminus.
From Piran: Felix scabinus, Andrew Iustulago, Crissus, Ansaldus.
From the city of Koper: Locopositus Audiwertus, Andrew Aquabeolus, Dominic of Anastasia, Peter of Ianane.
From Muggia: Venerius, Bonciolinus, Dominic of Oliva, Antrus.
From Trieste: Locopoistus Dominic, son of Senadrus, Andew, son of Dominic Pepolo, John of Olivo, Rothicherius.
[translated by the editor]
“Hiis quoque diebus cum Winitherius marchio Ystrie insolitas exactiones ab hominibus Venecie extorqueret, et incolis in eorum possessionibus degentibus colectas et angarias imponeret, ac Venetis iura petentibus iusticiam denegaret, ideo contra eum et subdictos suos dux saluberimum scancivit edictum, inhibens Venetis ne in Ystriam pergerent et Ystriensibus ne Veneciam accedere auderent, quod tandem dux removit precibus delinitus Marini patriarche Gradensis, qui suplicacione marchionis et populi Ystrie se mediatorem apposuit, promitentibus illis duci Venetos et eorum bona in suo districtu conservare et insolitas exactiones removere, et si iussio regalis advenerit ut contra Venetos aliquid mali agatur, eos previsos reddere ne quid dampni in personis vel rebus suis pati valeant.” – Andrea Dandolo, Chronica per extensum descripta, ed. Ester Pastorello, RIS, ser. 2, 12/1 (Bologna 1958), pp. 171–172.
“Hoc etiam tempore, dum marchio Ystrie ab hominibus Veneciarum exactiones insolitas extorqueret, et datia et angarias imponeret, necnon Venetis iura petentibus iusticiam denegaret, ideo dux edictum sancivit Venetis inhybens gravi sub pena, ne Ystriam pergerent et Ystriensibus ne Venecias accedere audeant ullo modo, quod finaliter dux removit precibus patriarche Gradensis, qui amore supplicationeque dicti marchionis et populi Ystrie se mediatorem apposuit, promitentibus illis excelso duci atque successoribus eius cunctos Venetos in suo districtu custodire et exactiones insolitas removere.” – Venetiarum historia vulgo Petro Iustiniano Iustiniani filio adiudicata, ed. Roberto Cessi and Fanny Bennato (Venice 1964), p. 54.
“In questi zorni Imithereo marchexe di l’Histria vene in discordia con Venitiani, ma per mezo di domino Marin patriarcha di Grado fo fato la paxe con tal conditione che li danni fati una parte a l’altra si dovesseno satisfar et rimaneseno ne la prima amicitia come zà erano.” – Marin Sanudo, Le vite dei dogi, ed. Giovanni Monticolo, RIS, ser. 2, 22/4 (Città di Castello 1900), p. 126.
The hereby edited promissory charter (carta promissionis) issued by Margrave Winther to Doge Pietro II Candiano and the people of Venice is one of the most analyzed documents pertaining to the Istrian Middle Ages. The document presents several interpretative difficulties.
First, who is marchio Wintherius? This individual appears only in this charter, and he is only titled as “margrave” (marchio). This aptly vague title engendered considerable historiographical debate regarding the jurisdictional position of Istria within the early 10th-century Regnum Italicum. Was Istria a distinct margraviate governed by its own margrave, or did it form part of the so-called “Aquileiean march” (mentioned in doc. 952_OMA) together with Friuli, the two regions being governed conjointly by one margrave? The oldest historiography, from De Rubeis to Hasenöhrl (both cited above), argued that Friuli and Istria formed part of one extensive march and that Winther was thus the margrave of Friuli and Istria. Bernardo Benussi (cited above) passionately disagreed with this interpretation as he wanted to see Winther as margrave of Istria and the region “independent” of Friuli. Benussi based his arguments on a letter issued between 905 and 911 by Pope Sergius III to John, the bishop of Pula (edited here as doc. 910_PS), in which he complained against Margrave Albuin who had unlawfully occupied the possessions of the Church of Ravenna in Istria. Since the pope indeed mentions a march of Margrave Albuin in the context of Istria, Benussi used this charter to argue that Istria was already at the beginning of the 10th century a distinct march governed by its own margraves. Since the papal letter only mentions “a margrave Albuin” and “a march”, Benussi’s argumentation must be judged as weak. On the other hand, both Paschini (cited above) and De Vergottini (1974 and esp. 1937, both cited above), took over Hasenöhrl’s interpretation (cited above) and interpreted Winther as margrave of Friuli-Istria. The main argument in favor of this thesis is the fact that in 952, not even thirty years after the promulgation of this Winther’s charter, King Otto I relinquished the “March of Verona and Aquileia” (Marcha Veronensis et Aquiliensis) to his brother Henry, the duke of Bavaria, and this march included Istria as well (cf. doc. 952_OMA). If Istria formed part of the “Aquileian march” in 952, it would make little sense to argue that the situation was different in 933. Subsequent historiography did not reach a consensus: Hlawitschka sees in Winther a margrave of Istria (cited above); Rösch, Krahwinkler, and Härtel all prefer to see in him a margrave of Istria as well (all cited above); Pazienza (cited above) dubs him margrave of Friuli-Istria; I too see in this Wintherius marchio a margrave of “Aquileian march,” that is, of Friuli and Istria.
Nothing is known of Winther’s dynastic origins. Krahwinkler (cited above) identified that the leading name Wintherius in its many variants appears with some frequency in the books of property transfers (libri traditionum) of Reichenau Abbey and of St. Gallen, which would point to the present-day Switzerland and the area south of Lake Constance as the probable region of dynastic origin.
The second point of contention regards the list of signees following the notarial completio. It was already De Rubeis (cited above) who interpreted the phrase “de Parentio” after the personal name “Iohannes Basiliacus” as referring to the city of Poreč and after which the names of the representatives of Poreč ensue. However, both Carli, Romanin, Kandler, Tafel–Thomas and Cessi (and then everyone else who followed Cessi) interpreted the phrase “de Parentio” as a toponymic byname referring to John (Iohannes Basiliacus de Parentio). According to this editorial decision, there would be no representatives of Poreč who would attest to this promise, but there would be eight representatives of Pula (as opposed to the two representatives of Novigrad, four of Piran, four of Koper, four of Muggia and four of Trieste). De Vergottini (1937, cited above) noticed the error and correctly interpreted “de Parentio” to refer to the city of Poreč; thus, there would be four representatives of Pula and four representatives of Poreč. This is the interpretation that is followed in the present critical edition as well.
Also, the phrase “de civitate Capras” refers to Koper and not to Caorle as erroneously interpreted by Rösch (cited above; cf. doc. 977_OI: “tam infra civitatem Iustinopolim quam extra, quę vocatur Capras”).
There is also the question of a “Theodorus Tribunus”. Benussi (2002, cited above), followed Kandler’s edition of the charter and interpreted him as a representative of Pula and a tribune nonetheless (thus Theodorus tribunus), mirroring the especially salient position of civitas Polensis in Istria, the last of the Istrian cities to abandon the Byzantine constitution of tribunes. Cavallari (cited above) follows Benussi. De Vergottini (1937, cited above) offered a more persuasive interpretation: not only does the “Theodorus” in question refer to Poreč and not to Pula, but the word “tribunus” is not used here as a title, but as a byname (thus Theodorus Tribunus). De Vergottini bases this argument on the fact that Theodore is the last representative of Poreč included in the list of signees; if he was indeed the tribune of the city, he would have appeared on the first spot. Since Poreč is governed by a locopositus and the college of scabini already in 991, De Vergottini’s interpretation is to be preferred over Benussi’s (see doc. 991_CW and for the definitions of locopositus and scabini, see also the Editor’s Comments section under doc. 932_PI). As such, Jenko Kovačič (cited above), who followed De Vergottini’s reading of “de Parentio” but Benussi’s reading of “tribunus”, and concluded that “the period of the second half of the 10th and 11th centuries represented a break with the tradition of Byzantine administration” (p. 107), could be amended and the period in question could be moved back to the second half of the 9th century.
Finally, there is the question of a phrase in the article hereby dubbed 3 which is copied differently in Liber Albus (L) than in Codex Trevisaneus (T): L has the phrase “secundum antiquam consuetudinem per unamquamque personam ripatica et tholonea solvantur” (according to old custom, the docking fees and market tolls are to be paid by each and every person); T, however, has the phrase “secundum antiquam consuetudinem pro unaquaque civitate ripatica et tholonea solvantur” (according to old custom, the docking fees and market tolls are to be paid for each and every city). Ms. D, unfortunately, omits this entire phrase. The meaning behind both phrases is essentially the same: the old custom must be respected by which the Venetians only paid the ripaticum and the teloneum, that is, a docking fee and a market toll, and not the unidentified new duties that had been introduced in Istria. Whether the original intent was to highlight that a single person ought to pay only those two duties (as per L) or that in a single town only these two duties must be charged (as per T), the meaning stays the same. However, the subsequent clause might hold the clue to this conundrum: “ita ut amplius eis non imponantur” (so that nothing more is imposed upon them). This “eis” refers to the Venetians, but it makes sense that its immediate antecedent would be featured in the previous clause – the unaquaque persona. For this reason, the critical edition follows L as opposed to T in this specific passage.
The entire article 3 seems to be poorly copied in all surviving manuscript traditions: “Itemque promittimus de omnes suprapositas (!) que facte fuerunt, ut in eternum non rememorentur” is agrammatical. First, “omnes suprapositas” need to be emended into “omnibus suprapositis,” but even then, the sentence seems to be lacking something: “We likewise promise regarding all the impositions which we have introduced, so that they are not to be remembered forever.” Both L and T have rememorentur, D has the agrammatical and nonsensical removetur. Cessi emended the verb rememorentur into renoventur, Romanin into innoventur, which would work – “so that they are not to be ever restored/renewed”. I have opted for less “invasive” emendations by following manuscripts LT, reading “de omnibus suprapositis”, and leaving the verb rememorentur. In any case, and whichever emendation one chooses to follow, the meaning of the sentence is clear: the Istrians promised to abolish all the newly introduced fees and to charge to each person/in each city only the customary duties, that is, the ripaticum and the teloneum.
Generally, the language of the charter is a horrendous version of medieval Latin, but since the document survives only in later copies, which are in turn based on copies and not on the 10th-century original, it is impossible to infer the original language of the charter and the extent to which it was originally contaminated with the volgare of the day. Therefore, the reconstructive critical edition hereby published does not aim to fulfil this impossible goal but rather aims to reconstruct the text in its grammatically most correct rendition, which is usually found in T. How much the copyist of T emended the text from the Codex Egnatii cannot be known, but if Diplovataccio indeed based his edition on the same Codex Egnatii, then the copyist of T was indeed heavily emending the copied text. For example, it is most probable that George the Deacon, the scribe of both this charter and of the 932 pact between Koper and Doge Pietro II Candiano (doc. 932_PI), originally wrote the names of the witnesses in the ablative case instead of the correct genitive case (signum manus Amatino filio Costantino, as copied in L and in D), whereas T has the names usually (but not everywhere) in the correct genitive case (signum manus Amantini filii Constantini). If both T and D stem from the nowadays lost Codex Egnatii, then the copyist of T is guilty of numerous such “corrections”.
Many passages are, however, agrammatical in all the surviving copies. Ipse palatius instead of ipsum palatium is just one example of many similar phrases. There is also a case of double negation: “promittimus ut nullo umquam tempore cum nostre naves super vestris in contrarium ire non debeamus, ne vestri Venetici mala patiantur”. There is the sentence “Ad hec monita, mente domini Petri piissimi et gloriosissimi ducis compuncta condoluit” where either “mente” should stand in the nominative as the subject of the sentence, or the phrase in genitive “Petri piissimi et gloriosissimi ducis” should stand in the nominative with the “mente compuncta” functioning as ablative absolute. Based on the style of the sentence, and the fact that the scribe used the ablative for many nouns that should have stood in other cases, the passage was emended so that “mente” is read as “mens”.
As for the contents of the charter, the document opens with an invocatio followed by a datatio chronica featuring the years of reign of current Kings of Italy, Hugh of Provance (7th year) and his son Lothar II of Arles (2nd year), the day and the month (March 12), and the indiction year (6th). The seventh year of Hugh’s reign and the second year of Lothar II’s reign give either 932 or 933, whereas the 6th indiction corresponds to the year 933, thus all the dating elements concord with each other, leaving no question regarding the dating of the charter. The opening protocol ends with a datatio topica given in contaminated Latin, Acto Rivoalto instead of Actum Rivoalti.
Arenga is missing and the document’s corpus starts with a lengthy narratio that can be broken down into three parts. First, Margrave Winther, together with the people and the bishops of Istria, acknowledge their many crimes committed against the Venetians, action which resulted in a great dispute between Venice and Istria. Then the focus shifts to Venice and how Doge Pietro II Candiano reacted to these crimes, by forbidding the entry of Istrians into Venetian territories and the entry of Venetians into Istria, essentially imposing an embargo on all trade between Venice and Istrian communities. Finally, seeing all these detrimental effects, Margrave Winther journeyed to Marinus, the patriarch of Grado, and asked him to intercede on his behalf with the doge and help the two parties reach an amicable accord, ending the hostilities. It was at this point that the principal articles of the hereby edited pact were already hammered out as Patriarch Marinus approached the doge with the promise made by the Istrians “per hanc cartam”, that is, according to this charter. The doge agreed and thus green-lit the enactment of the pact. The marked Venetian supremacy in the interaction is clearly noticeable already at this point in the document.
The dispositio follows, listing a total of five articles that Margrave Winther together with the Istrian people and bishops solemnly promised to Venice. First, they will never again invade and seize the properties of Venetians or of Venetian churches, especially of the Patriarchate of Grado, in Istria. Instead, the Istrians will defend these properties, and the Venetian people and clergy will be allowed to freely enjoy them. Moreover, the Venetians are given the right to govern their coloni in Istria by way of their own delegated officials. Second, they promised that at least once a year the governor of Istria would have to take cognizance of and adjudicate the complaints lodged by the Venetians against defaulting debtors from Istria, which was obviously a serious problem which Margrave Winther had ignored ignored, as mentioned in the narratio. Third is the article on the newly imposed fees as discussed above. Fourth, the Istrians are never to attack Venetian ships, but always live in concord and friendship with the Venetians and respect their laws. The fifth and final article was interpreted as “high treason” (cf. De Vergottini 1965, cited above) towards the Regnum Italicum: if the margrave (or presumably Istrians too) would come to know that the king is preparing any sort of offensive against the Venetians, as soon as they acquire this knowledge they ought to report it to the Venetians and make sure that they repatriate safely before the outbreak of any hostility. A similar clause was introduced in the 944 pact signed between Venice and Aquileian Patriarch Lupus (doc. 944_PAV) and in the 1206 pact signed between the Venetians and Aquileian Patriarch Wolfger (doc. 1206_VW, article 5).
Afterwards comes a clausula praeceptiva (Hec inviolabiliter—heredibus ac proheredibus) followed by a sanctio spiritualis – the wrath of God and of the saint whose possession was wronged – and a sanctio temporalis – a hundred pounds of fine (or yellow) gold, half of which to whomever suffered the wrongdoing and the other half to the treasury of the incumbent king of Italy.
The corroboratio (Quam vero—civitate Iustinopolis) is followed by another datatio topica, again written in contaminated Latin (Acta vero Rivoalto instead of Actum vero Rivoalti).
The subscriptiones follow, done by the handwritten signs of witnesses (16) and the signatures of those witnesses who could write (3 of them: bishop John of Pula, Bishop Firminus of Novigrad, and locopositus Audebert of Koper), for a total of nineteen signees.
Following the subscriptiones is the completio of the scribe, tabellio George the Deacon of Koper (Ego Georgius—atque firmavi), followed by yet another set of witnesses who swore to uphold the pact: four from Pula, four from Poreč, two from Novigrad, four from Piran, four from Koper, four from Muggia, and four from Trieste.
The treaty between Margrave Winther and Venice must be placed in the general context of Veneto-Aquileian relations in the 10th century. Namely, the vexata quaestio of the metropolitan jurisdiction over the Istrian bishoprics was at the time still not resolved, and both the patriarchs of Grado and of Aquileia did not cease to press their claims. The patriarchs of Aquileia pressed their case violently, invading Grado several times between the 9th and the 11th century. As the treaty between Patriarch Lupus and Venice from 944 attests, the invasion against the properties of the Patriarchate of Grado was directed from Friuli as well (cf. doc. 944_PAV). The second quarter of the 10th century was thus a period of violent negotiations between the patriarchs of Aquileia and the Church of Grado and the treaties of 933 and 944 show that it was Venice that eventually emerged victorious. Placing an embargo on trade with Venice was enough to force Margrave Winther and the Istrians to capitulate and symbolically bend the knee by issuing this charter of promise to the Venetians. Though they won this battle, Venice and the Patriarchate of Grado eventually lost the war for the metropolitan jurisdiction over Istrian bishoprics (see Josip Banić–Sebastiano Blancato, “The Agreement between the Patriarchate of Grado and the Patriarchate of Aquileia Regarding the Metropolitan Jurisdiction over Istrian Bishoprics (24th of July, 1180): New Critical Edition of the Charter”, Zgodovinski časopis 77/1–2 (2023): 8–13 for an overview of the conflict). Still, the economy of Istrian coastal communities was highly dependent upon Venice and the constant circulation of Venetian traders already in the 10th century, as this charter shows, and this dependency only deepened in the centuries to come.
I wholeheartedly thank my dear friend and colleague Vedran Sulovsky for his kind and generous help with the reading and translation of this document.
The publication of the facsimiles of L (Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Pacta e aggregati, Liber Albus, fol. 263v–265v) and T (Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Pacta e aggregati, Codex Trevisaneus, fol. 90r–91r) is granted free of charge by Archivio di Stato di Venezia by way of the “simplified procedure” of publishing archival facsimiles (La circolare della Direzione generale archivi n. 39 del 29 settembre 2017: procedura semplificata: pubblicazioni online che perseguano finalità scientifiche o pedagogiche, non beneficino di inserzioni pubblicitarie o commerciali e non siano soggette ad accesso a pagamento).
Photos by Archivio di Stato di Venezia.
The digital facsimiles remain under the exclusive copyright of Archivio di Stato di Venezia.