Era
Vol. 3: A 1077 usque ad 1209
Date
December of 1145
Place
Regestum

The people of the Commune of Pula swear fealty to Doge Pietro Polani and to the Commune of Venice, promising military aid in the form of arming one galley per every fifteen Venetian galleys during Venetian military campaigns, to support the Venetian military efforts in the Adriatic, in the zone between Dubrovnik, Venice, and Ancona, and to defend Venice if they see hostile ships approaching their city, exempting the Venetians from all the dues and tolls in their city except the harbor tax (portaticus), guaranteeing safety and judicial autonomy in disputes between Venetians and the citizens of Pula, gifting the doge and the Commune of Venice with a house by the city’s gates, and agreeing to swear the same promise of fealty to every new doge upon his consecration; the doge and the Commune of Venice agree to defend the Commune of Pula against their enemies and to treat the citizens of Pula as their own citizens in Venice.

Source
The pact survives in two charters, one most probably being an imitative copy of the other:
A = Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Miscellanea atti ducali e diplomatici, busta 5, doc. A/1; the ink is brownish and slightly faded, the parchment is circa 45 centimeters long and damaged at the bottom-left corner.
A' = Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Miscellanea atti ducali e diplomatici, busta 5, doc. A/1bis; the ink is black and unfaded, the charter is circa 34 centimeters long and perfectly preserved.
These two charters can be viewed either as two original exemplars of the pact (as per Luigi Lanfranchi, Codice diplomatico veneziano, doc. 1162), or as one being an imitative copy of the other. The charter hereby dubbed A' omits “Ursus iudex” from the list of signees; this, together with the fact that the ink in A is more faded and that the charter is damaged at the bottom-left edge, leads to the conclusion that A' is an imitative copy of A.
From A' stem all the other copies in Archivio di Stato di Venezia: Miscellanea atti diplomatici e privati, busta 2, doc. 65; a simple copy that was once a part of a register, based on the handwriting, most probably from the 14th century; Pacta e aggregati, Pactorum Liber IV, 126r–126v; 14th-century simple copy.
Previous Editions
Pietro Kandler (ed.), Codice diplomatico istriano, 2nd ed. (Trieste 1986), doc. 136, pp. 268–269; based on the transcription of A' done by Vincenzo Joppi.
FIM Edition
The edition is based solely on A and A', ignoring the later copies which were all, to varying degrees, emended by the copyists. The division into paragraphs and the numbering of the articles are introduced by the editor.
Transcription

In nomine Domini nostri.

Anno eiusdem Salvatoris nostri millesimo C XL V mense decembris, in Pola.

Nos quidem populus Polisanus de civitate et omni commitatua a maiore usque ad minore[m]b, qui ad iusiurandum faciendum aptus est ab hodierno in antea usque imperpetuum integram fidelitatem supra sancta Dei ęvangelia iuramus Deo et beato Marco apostolo et evangelistaec ac domino Petro Polano duci Venecie sive tocius Venetię Communi, ita quod:

[1] Eis veram et integram fidelitatem conservabimus sicut una de Venecie civitatibus, in ‡omni‡ tempore pacis et werre que eis acciderit.

[2] Quocumque enim tempore facere eis contingeritd navigium quindecim galearum, tunc nos de quindecim galeis unam galeam cum omni suo apparatu de nostris propriis expensis in servitio Venetię parare et dare debemus. Si vero a quindecim galeis usque ad centum vel eo amplius, ampliorem vel minorem numerum navium fecerint apparatum, nos non amplius quam videlicet de quindecim unam galeam in eorum servitio dare debemus. Nos autem, si prefatam galeam non habuerimus, tunc ipsi unam de suis galeis nobis dabunt, quam et nos cum omnibus necessariis in servitio Venetię mittere debemus.

[3] Verum a Ragusio usque Venetięe et exinde usque Anconam, si ipsi Venecie aliqua werra increverit, unde dominus dux cum suo Communi contra suos inimicos irę voluerit et illuc per se vel per suum missum expeditionem suam direxerit, postquam nobis sicut uni de suis civitatibus mandando notificaverit, tunc nos, velut temporis spacium nobis permiserit, subbito vel diutius nostrum apparatum facere oportuerit, ita nos cum omni Communi prompto animo ac mente fideli in suum servitium venire et esse debemus.

[4] Quod si forte aliqua navis corsalium aut aliorum hominum volentium malum inferre Venetię intraverit ipsum mare a Pola usque Venetie, quam totius sciverimus contra illos nostras naves parare debemus, eos insequendo et adversando quantum poterimus ac de illis domino duci et Venecie Communi renuntiare curabimus.

[5] Homines vero Venecie et in Pola et in omni nostro tenumento ita ipsi cum omnibus suis rebus securi esse debent sicut in propria Venecia.

[6] De dationibus civitatis, videlicet maiaticum et pro unaquaque porta civitatis starium unum de vino, quod soliti fuerant ipsi Venetici persolvere, omnia eis decetero pretermittimus et in omne nostrum tenumentum, tam in civitatem quam extra civitatem, sine omni datione preter portaticum ire et redire debent.

[7] Quod si litigium vel alicuius rationis exaccio inter Polisanum et Veneticumf accreverit, videlicet Veneticus si Polisanum appellaverit, iuxta rectam consuetudinem Polisani de eo Veneticus iusticiam recipiat; eodemque modo Polisanus, si Veneticum requisiverit, secundum rectum sue curie de Venetico ipseg iusticiam recipiat.

[8] Verumtamen in eadem nostra civitate domino nostro duci et omni Venecie Communi honorabilem mansionem positam iuxta portam civitatis prope portum, que porta Sanctę Marie de Monasterio dicitur, ab hodierno die in antea damus ac propter sui dominii inditium transactamus, ut in ea, si suish placuerit, hospitetur ipse dominus noster dux vel quicumque ei placuerit.

[9] Predictam vero fidelitatem ita pleniter imperpetuum observare debemus domino nostro duci et universo Venecie Communi et cunctis ducibus, qui per tempora post eum successuri sunt, et in ingressu uniuscuiusquei ducis ipsam ei fidelitatem renovare velut unaqueque Venecie civitas facere consuevit et omnia sicut supra dictum est in perpetuum conservare debemus.

Nos autem Petrus Polanus Dei gratia dux Venecie, Dalmacie atque Chroacie cum nostro Communi Venecie sub sacramento securitatis stabilimus Polisanos nostros fideles manutenere et adiuvare contra eorum inimicos qui eos et Polam eorum civitatem obsederint per terram vel per aquam. Si enim aliquando aliqua gens super eos veniens eorum civitatem navigio obsederint, tunc nos cum nostro navigio eis succurrere ac nostra auxilia prebere debemus ad eorum inimicos debellandos et ab eis expellendos. Si vero a terra obsidionem eis posuerint, tunc eis cum centum hominibus succurrere debemus aut cum galea aut cum platis, prout oportunumj nobis fuerit. Ipsi quoque Polisani in Venecia ita salvi et securi esse debent cum omnibus suis rebus velut ipsi Venetici.

Henricus comes, Pencius locopositus, Andreas de locoposito, Ursus, Petrus Sclavus, Polianus Odiberti filius, Andreas Malavolta, Adam, Arpus de Tribblo, Otto de Rantolfo, Odiberto filius domini Andreek, Iohannesl Masaro iudex, Ursus iudexm, Artuhiccus iudex et universus populus hoc sacramenton firmavit.

Critical apparatus

a) comitatu cum sign. abbr. sup. primam syllabam AA'.  bsic minore AA'.  c) evangelistę A'.  d) contingitur A'.  esic AA'; Veneciis em. Kandler.  f) Venetum A'.  g) ipsę A'.  h) ss cum sign. abbr AA': pro sibi, sicut ed. Kandler.  i) universus cuiusque A'.  j) portunum A'.  k) Andreę A'.  lA'; lac. A.  m) Ursus iudex] om. A'.  n) populus hoc sacramento] A'; lac. A.

Medieval Recollections

“Eodem anno [ducis Petri Polani anno XVIo], urbis Pole municipes duci fideles esse, et erga eius emulos a Ragusio supra de XV galeis unam et ab inde infra pro hominum rata mictere, et Venetos inmunes habere, et duci illuc aplicanti obsequiosa servicia exibere similiter promiserunt.” – Andrea Dandolo, Chronica per extensum descripta, ed. Ester Pastorello, RIS, ser. 2, 12/1 (Bologna 1958), p. 241.

Selected Bibliography
Bernardo Benussi, Nel Medio Evo: Pagine di storia istriana (Poreč 1897), pp. 649–656.
Giovanni de Vergottini, Lineamenti storici della costituzione politica dell’Istria durante il Medio Evo, 2nd ed. (Trieste 1974), pp. 50, 67–68, 70.
Bernardo Benussi, Povijest Pule: u svijetlu municipalnih ustanova do 1918. godine, trans. Tatjana Peruško (Pula 2002), pp. 129–132 (interpretation bordering on pure fiction).
Giovanni de Vergottini, “L’Impero e la ‘fidelitas’ delle città istriane verso Venezia,” Atti e memorie della Società istriana di archeologia e storia patria 53 (1949), pp. 88–92.
Guido Posar-Guiliano, “Origini del dominio di Venezia nell’Istria,” La porta orientale 10 (1940): pp. 228–233 (nugatory).
Gerhard Rösch, Venezia e l'impero 962-1250. I rapporti politici, commerciali e di traffico nel periodo imperiale germanico, trans. Carla Vinci-Orlando (Rome 1985), pp. 162–164.
Gerhard Rösch, “Lo sviluppo mercantile,” in Storia di Venezia dalle origini alla caduta della Serenissima, vol. 2: L’età del comune, ed. Giorgio Cracco and Gherardo Ortalli (Rome 1995), online.
Andrea Castagnetti, “Il primo comune,” in Storia di Venezia dalle origini alla caduta della Serenissima, vol. 2: L’età del comune, ed. Giorgio Cracco and Gherardo Ortalli (Rome 1995), online.
Egidio Ivetic, Storia dell’Adriatico: Un mare e la sua civiltà (Bologna 2019), p. 137.
Ermanno Orlando, “Polani, Pietro,” in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 84 (Rome 2015), online.
Darko Darovec, “I giuramenti di fidelitas delle città istriane nel XIIº secolo,” in Atti del convegno internazionale Venezia e il suo Stato da mar / Venice and its Stato da Mar Venezia / Venice, 9-11 marzo / March 2017, ed. Rita Tolomeo and Bruno Crevato-Selvaggi (Rome 2018), p. 28–30, 35–49.
Daniele Morossi, Political and Economic Relations between Venice, Byzantium, and Southern Italy (1081–1197), PhD dissertation (Leeds 2018), pp. 110, 115, 150.
Ana Jenko Kovačič, Mesto in škof v Istri v srednjem veku, PhD dissertation (Ljubljana 2022), pp. 112–113.
Editor's Notes

The treaty with Pula hereby edited stems from the same context as the treaty with Fano, signed in 1141, and the treaty with Koper, signed on the same December of 1145 (doc. 1145_PI). For the context, see also the “Editor’s Comments” section in doc 1145_PI.

First, contrary to the claims of traditional Istrian historiography (cf. the accounts of Benussi, cited above) and just as in the case of Koper’s treaty with Doge Polani and Venice (see doc. 1145_PI), there are no evidence that the treaty hereby edited emerged as a result of any sort of hostilities between Venice and Pula during the period (cf. Darovec, cited above, who corrects the age-old interpretation).

The articles of the treaty with Pula show marked similarity to those of the treaty with Koper, but with important differences. Both communities had to swear fealty to the doge and the Commune of Venice (article 1 in both treaties). Moreover, both communities promised to aid the Venetian military efforts by arming one galley if Venice dispatches fifteen or more (article 2 in both treaties). In Koper’s treaty, the wording is such that it leaves no doubt that this community ought to arm just one galley, even if Venice dispatches more than fifteen galleys. In Pula’s treaty, however, the passage is awkwardly styled (Si vero a quindecim galeis usque ad centum vel eo amplius, ampliorem vel minorem numerum navium fecerint apparatum, nos non amplius quam videlicet de quindecim unam galeam in eorum servitio dare debemus). This could be interpreted as “one galley per each fifteen galleys”, meaning that Pula would have to arm two galleys if Venice would dispatch thirty, and this is how Bernardo Benussi read the document (cited above). However, the same passage can also be read differently: regardless of the greater number of galleys, anywhere from fifteen to a hundred, the people of Pula are to support the endeavor as if there are no more than fifteen galleys from which they must arm only one. This second reading is more probable, that is, that both Koper and Venice were required to arm a single galley for any greater Venetian military endeavor, one that would require fifteen or more war galleys. Thus, the obligations of Koper and Pula towards Venice were identical regarding this military support.

Both Koper and Pula then promised to personally assist in any Venetian military campaigns in the Adriatic, in the zone from Venice to the line Ancona–Ragusa. This is a special clause in both treaties, and it is to be understood in addition to the arming of one per fifteen galleys (article 3 in both treaties).

Both Koper and Pula promised the safety of all the Venetians in their cities and districts (article 4 in Koper’s and 5 in Pula’s treaty), and both cities promised to pledge these oaths of fealties to all the Venetian doges to come (article 5 in Koper’s and 9 in Pula’s treaty).

Koper promised to adhere to the same ducal laws and regulations on the grain trade as all the other Venetian cities, something which Pula did not do (article 6 of Koper’s treaty). Instead, the people of Pula promised additional military aid, so that if they spotted a hostile ship approaching Venice, they would sail out against it and notify Venice of the impending danger as soon as possible (article 4 of Pula’s treaty). Moreover, the people of Pula exempted the Venetians from all the dues in their city except the portaticus, that is, the town-gate toll (article 6 of Pula’s treaty). Koper had already exempted the Venetians from the duties on commerce and transportation (teloneum) in their city in 977 (see doc. 977_PI).

Article 7 of Pula’s treaty mirrors the last clause of article 4 of Koper’s treaty, but only partially. In Koper’s treaty, it is only said that Venetians suing Capodistrians are to receive justice according to the laws of Koper. It is implied that Capodistrians suing Venetians would receive justice according to Venetian laws, or at least in mixed tribunals as per the 977 treaty (article 4 of doc. 977_PI). In Pula’s treaty this is spelled out: a Venetian suing a citizen of Pula is to receive justice according to the custom of Pula; a citizen of Pula suing a Venetian receives justice according to the laws of Venice (article 7, although the wording is clumsy and awkward).

Finally, the people of Pula gifted the doge with a fine house by the city’s gate in which a representative of Venice, or even the doge himself, could reside (article 8). This would be the house of a Venetian representative administering justice more Veneto.

In Koper’s treaty, the doge and the Commune of Venice made no promises to the Istrian city; in Pula’s case this was different – the doge promised military protection on sea and military aid on land, in addition to guaranteeing the safety of all the citizens of Pula in Venice and their treatment as Venetian citizens. This was no small gain for Pula.

The treaty has traditionally been viewed as the Venetian de facto subjection of Pula and the rise of Venice in the Adriatic at the detriment of the two largest and most powerful Istrian cities, Koper and Pula. This interpretation is not entirely consonant with the primary sources. More than anything, the treaties with Fano, Koper, and Pula had the principal aim of securing the safety of the North Adriatic basin, a “highway” that was to be under the supervision and the supreme protection of Venice. The communities that pledged fealty to Venice acknowledged that protection and agreed to cooperate in exchange for privileged Venetian treatment. There was, however, more than just the supervision of the Adriatic.

Both Koper and Pula abolished a number of fees for the Venetians, making them privileged “foreigners” in their cities. Both Istrian cities, however, could count on similar benefits in Venice and Venetian territories, that is, the Dogado, where the citizens of Koper and Pula would be treated the same as Venetians. Both Istrian cities, however, had to offer more.

Koper went a step further than Pula when it promised to observe the Venetian regulations on grain trade, but Pula promised additional military-defensive support and even gifted a house to serve as the residence of the delegated Venetian official. Taken together, the pacts surely benefited Venice the most, but it was also Venice that was investing the most resources in the security of the Adriatic, a security direly needed for Venetian traders. We cannot, therefore, talk of “subjection” of Pula or Koper to Venice, but the 1145 treaties surely opened wide the door for further Venetian intervention in the region and planted a seed from which the true subjections of Istrian communities would spring in the late 13th and early 14th centuries.

The document presents one considerable interpretative difficulty: who is Henricus comes and is Pula a distinct county during this period?

Traditional Istrian historiography gave two different answers: according to Benussi, this Henry would be a progeny of House Gorizia and “the most prominent person in the city” (2002, cited above). New research on the genealogy of House Gorizia completely invalidates this old thesis. According to De Vergottini, this Henry would be a count of Pula whose family background could not be ascertained. Most recently, Jenko Kovačič (cited above) interpreted comes Henricus as “the most important and prominent representative of the city.” According to traditional historiography, Pula would constitute a proper county during this period with its own count; according to Jenko Kovačič, the term “commitatus” mentioned in the 1145 pact simply refers to the territories adjacent and subjected to the city, that is, the city’s district. While Jenko Kovačič’s interpretation of “commitatus” is preferable and consonant with Italian historiography, it still does not solve completely the background of Henricus comes – what is he the count of?

Since the treaty mentions the locopositus of Pula, that is, the regional count’s/margrave’s appointed representative, it could very well be argued that this Henry was a count of Istria, just like Sigehard was back in 977 (see doc. 977_PI). This would mean that the pact was approved by the count of Istria, an official representative of the Empire, governing the region in the name of the ruling margrave of Istria, who was at this time Engelbert III Spanheim (margrave of Istria from 1124 to 1173). Moreover, a “Henricus filius Wecelini comitis Aquilegensis ecclesie” is mentioned in a document issued on May 26, 1174, by Pope Alexander III to the provostry of St. Stephan of Aquileia, as one of the benefactors who at some undefined point in the past donated properties to the provostry (cf. Anja Thaller, “Die älteren Urkunden der Propstei S. Stefano zu Aquileia,” Archiv Für Diplomatik, 52 (2006): p. 136). This Wezelin could be the count of Istria from the first period of Aquileian dominion over the region, the one that lasted from 1077 to 1079, and his son Henry mentioned in the document could be the “Henricus comes” from the 1145 treaty, although the chronology would be a bit stretched (the two generations spanning over a period of circa eighty years). In any case, I would rather see a count of Istria than a count of Pula or even just a prominent citizen of Pula in this “Henricus comes”.

How to Cite
First citation: Josip Banić (ed.), Fontes Istrie medievalis, vol. 3: A 1077 usque ad 1209, doc. 1145_PP, fontesistrie.eu/1145_PP (last access: date).
Subsequent citations: FIM, 3: doc. 1145_PP.
Facsimile
Image Source and Info

The publication of the facsimiles of A and A' (Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Miscellanea atti ducali e diplomatici, busta 5, doc. A/1 and doc. A/1bis) are 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 the editor.

The digital facsimiles remain under the exclusive copyright of Archivio di Stato di Venezia.