1153_PP

The present charter is key to understanding the events that led to the pledging of oaths of fealty to Venice by Pula, Rovinj, Poreč, Novigrad and Umag sometime between 1150 and 1152 (most probably 1150), as per doc. 1150_FV.

Namely, Andrea Dandolo, writing in mid-14th century, narrated how Istrian communities “rebelled” against Venice by committing various acts of piracy and how Doge Domenico Morosini dispatched a mighty fleet of fifty ships, commandeered by his eponymous son and Marino Gradenigo, that soon brought the rebellious Pula to heel and, as spoils of war, returned triumphantly to Venice with five new oaths of fealty and allegiance to Venice promised by the five coastal communities of Istria (see doc. 1150_FV and the “Medieval Recollections” section).

The hereby edited document corroborates this narrative. Namely, by issuing this charter, the clergy and the citizens of Pula formally acknowledged that the damage they suffered from the military operations directed against them by the Venetian fleet of fifty ships was all due to their fault (“nostra culpa”). Therefore, they officially renounced all their claims for further restitutions and recompense, swearing by this charter that the entire dispute was finally ended. This is the meaning behind the phrase “finem facimus firmum” – the noun finis to be understood as “agreement, settlement”.

Moreover, the people of Pula acknowledged that the Venetians treated their captives fairly, “like Christians and friends”, how they eventually returned their ecclesiastic and their own goods which Venice had seized, and how they protected them from their enemies. Most importantly, the people of Pula stated that they were treated as Venetians and that they might freely trade (in Venetian jurisdictions) without paying any dues or suffering any harm. This particular sentence is clumsily written and most probably features a scribal error: “[Q]uoniam quia Venetici sumus et negociamur libere omnia sine aliqua dacione et violencia.” Kandler edited the sentence “quum quam Venetici sumus” and indeed, the emendation “Quoniam quam Venetici sumus” makes more sense if read as “Since we are as/like Venetians.” Without emendations, the sentence would literally translate to “Since because we are Venetians we trade freely in all things free from any duties and safe from any violence.” The emended reading is to be preferred here.

The bishop who corroborated the document is the successor of Bishop Wernher who swore his oath in 1150. This bishop “R.” is Rudolph, the same bishop of Pula who appears in several documents issued in 1154 regarding the monastery of St. Andrew and who signed the documents as “Rodulphus Polensis episcopus” (parchments nos. 328, 329, 330, 331 and 333 of the series Pergamene delle corporazioni religiose of Archivio di Stato di Ravenna, soon to be edited here as well).

From among the secular signees, one finds many of the same men who confirmed the oath of fealty to Venice back in 1145 and in 1150.

The hereby presented reading of the charter differs from the one proposed by Benussi (and subsequently taken over by De Vergottini) and by Darovec. According to Benussi (2002, cited above), the people of Pula simply renewed their oath of fealty in 1153 because Venice treated them very friendly and protected them. I argue against this because this is not the crux of the 1153 document which is essentially a charter of settlement whereby the people and the clergy of Pula swear that the dispute that ultimately ended in warfare is over and renounce all their claims for further recompense and restitutions.

According to Darovec (cited above), the 1153 charter is proof that war was not waged in 1150 but only later, in 1153, and it ended with the promulgation of this charter. This interpretation is very unlikely, especially bearing in mind the contents of the 1150 oaths of fealty pledged by the five Istrian communities. Instead, the 1153 charter ought to be read as the final settlement of the dispute that started in 1150 and the events narrated in the document thus refer to the events of war waged in 1150, when the oath of fealty was pledged as a consequence of Pula’s military defeat.

Taken together with the oaths of fealty pledged in 1150 and with Andrea Dandolo’s narrative account, this document corroborates the traditional interpretation of Doge Domenico Morosini’s undertaking in Istria: the coastal cities of Istria, Pula especially, acted inimically towards the Venetians and contrary to the oath of fealty pledged by Pula in 1145; what precise actions were decoded as “hostile” by the Venetians cannot be inferred, but the anti-Venetian attitude was surely stirred by the pro-imperial sentiment that was aroused in Istria following the personal visit of King Conrad III in the spring of 1149 (see doc. 1149_CP); the response of Doge Domenico Morosini was swift and efficient as he dispatched a mighty armada of fifty ships that attacked Pula and forced the city into obedience and into pledging another oath of fealty; during this attack, as the hereby edited document testifies, the Venetians captured hostages and seized the goods of the people and the clergy of Pula; following the triumph in Pula, the armada journeyed northward and received the oaths of fealty and a number of symbolic tributes from Rovinj, Poreč, Novigrad and Umag – all coastal communities that needed “reminding” that they owe their allegiance not only to the Empire, but to the doge and the Commune of Venice as well.