Emperor Otto II confirms the jurisdictions of the bishops of Poreč and grants them immunities.
In nomine sancte et individue Trinitatis.a
‡Otto‡b divina favente clementia Romanorum imperatorc augustus.
Si ecclesiarum Dei curam gerimus easque dilatare studuerimus, nostri Imperiid fastigiume augmentari minime ambigimusf.
Quocircag omnium sancte Dei Ecclesie fidelium nostrorumque presentium sciliceth et futurorum noverit universitas qualiter, interventu ac peticione nostri dilecti presbiteri Dudonis ac Andree diaconii nostri benivoli capellanij, Adam sancte Parentine ecclesie antistesk nostram adiissel clementiam, postulansm quatenus nosn proo Dei amore nostreque anime remedio, nostra preceptali auctoritatep omnia predia sue ecclesie que antea a nostris antecessoribusq imperatoribus [et]r regibus pro suarum animarum remedio prefate ecclesie donaverunts, qua in basilica sancti beatum corpus Mauri requiescit, sive que ab aliquibus Deo devotis fidelibus data sunt vel quet danda erunt, confirmare et corroborare dignaremur.
Cuius dignis postulationibus auresu nostre pietatis inclinantes pretaxate ecclesiae predia nominative:
 Turrim, que est supra piscationemv None,
 et illam de Cervaria,
 etw castrum Pisinum,
 ⟨quod a regibus seu ab Ugone largitum est, videlicet Ruvignumx,
 quantum ad Episcopatum sanctey Parentine ecclesie donatum est a nostris antecessoribus, videlicet in loco qui dicitur Duo Castella et Vallesz,⟩
cum omnibus pertinentiis suis iuste et legaliter ad predictum Episcopatum pertinentibus necnon villis, terris, campisa', vineis, pratis, aquis aquarumque decursibus, piscationibusb', molendinis, venationibus, montibus, planiciebus, vallibusc', cum omnibus rebus mobilibusd' et immobilibuse' que dici etf' nominari possuntg', ⟨seu in quocumque loco prenominatus Episcopatus terram habet,h'⟩ per hoc nostrum preceptum confirmamus eidem episcopo Adam suisque successoribus et corroboramus.
Precipientes denique iubemus, ut nullus dux, patriarcha, archiepiscopus, episcopus, marchio, comes, vicecomes nullaque Regni nostri magna vel parvai' persona pretaxatumj' presulem suosque successores de omnibus predictis rebus molestarek' temptet nec ad ullal' placita hominibus supra terram sanctem' Parentine ecclesie residentibus, qui ab episcopo reclamationem habent, sine advocato episcopi nullam contrarietatem faciantn' nec invicteo' ducantur nisi ante presentiamp' presulis sine legali iuditio, sed liceat eidem presuli suisque successoribus quiete etq' pacifice cuncta sua predia tenere et firmiter possidere, omnium hominum contradictione penitus remota.
Si quisr' igitur huius nostre pagine violator fuerit, quod minime credimus, sciats' se compositurum auri boni libras mille, medietatem camere nostre et medietatem prefatot' presuli suisque successoribus.
Quodu', ut verius credatur diligentiusquev' abw' omnibus observetur, hanc paginam propria manu corroborantes sigillix' nostriy' impressione inferius eandem iussimus insigniri.
Signum domini Ottonisz' secundia'' serenissimi imperatoris et invictissimi (SM) augustib''.
Adelbertusc'' cancellarius advicem Petri episcopi et archicancelarii recognovi et scripsi.
Data VII nonas iuniid'' anno Dominice incarnationis DCCCCLXXXIII, indictione XI, regni vero domini secundi Ottonisz' XXVI, imperii vero eius XIIIe''.
a) In nomine—individue Trinitatis] om. D. b) Otho D. c) inmperator C. d) Inperii C. e) fastigum C. f) anbigimus C. g) ex quo circha corr. B. h) silicet C. i) dyaconi B. j) papellani C. k) ex antistitis corr. B. l) sic BCD: pro adiit. m) postulant C. n) quatenus nos] CD; nos quatenus B. o) CD; om. B. p) ex autoritate corr. B. q) predecessoribus CD. r) om. BCD; em. Banic. s) sic BCD: pro donata erant. t) om. CD. u) ex aueres corr. B. v) piscatione C. w) om. C. x) Ruvinum C; Rubinum D. y) CD; sive B. z) C; Vaues cum sign. abbr. supra ultimam syllabam B et ex corr.; Sanctus Vincentius D. a') canpis C. b') piscationibus, molendinis] molendinis, piscationibus inv. CD. c') CD; vallis B. d') mobillibus C. e') immobillibus C; imobilibus D. f') vel CD. g') nominari possunt] numerari possint D. h') seu in—terram habet] subsignavit B. i') magna vel parva] parva vel magna inv. D. j') ex pretasatum corr. C. k') molestaret C. l') D; nulla B; ussa C. m') CD; eidem B. n') CD; facient B. o') sic B: pro invite, sicut em. Sickel; in iure CD. p') presentia C. q') CD; om B. r') CD; qui B. s') ex corr. B. t') prefacto C. u') CD; quo B. v') CD; dilligentisque B. w') CD; ob B. x') CD; sigillum B. y') CD; om. B. z') Otthonis B; Othonis D. a'') CD; om. B. b'') augustini C. c'') CD; Adalbertus B. d'') VII nonas iunii] sic BCD: sive pro IIII nonas iunii sive pro VII idus iunii. e'') sic BCD: pro XVI.
King Rudolph I's 1291 confirmation charter to the Bishopric of Poreč - soon to be edited here.
The charter is only preserved in later copies, the oldest of which are the three featured in the late 15th- or early16th-century Liber iurium episcopalium I of the Bishopric of Poreč (on which see Jenko Kovačić, cited above). Thus, the potential for possible later interpolations is extremely high, especially bearing in mind the numerous attempts of the bishops of Poreč to assert their jurisdictions over the territories disputed by Venice, the counts of Gorizia, and the patriarchs of Aquileia (and their numerous retainers).
The charter has some problematic internal features, namely its dating elements. First, there is no such thing as "VII die pridie nonas iunii". One solution, proposed already by the editors of the Monumenta Germaniae historica, was that the correct date should be "VII idus iunii" which would concord with the 7th of June, the day when Emperor Otto II was indeed in Verona. Thus, the "VII nonas iunii" is customarily interpreted as a scribal error, most probably of the original composer of the charter, the one dubbed "It. K" by Sickel (otherwise known for his sloppiness), an error that was repeated in all the other subsequent copies. Another option is that the "nonas iunii" part of the date was actually written correctly, but that the day was originally "IIII" instead of "VII", an easy mistake to make as both numbers involve the same amount of minims. Otto II was indeed in Verona both on the 2nd and on the 7th of June, so both options remain possible.
Another problem is the fact that the dating elements do not concur with themselves: the year 983 anno Domini indeed concurs with the 11th indiction, but the years of Otto II's reign concur with the years 984 (26th of his kingship, crowned king in May of 961) and 980 (13th of his emperorship, crowned co-emperor in December of 967). The correct years should be 25th of his kingship and the 16th year of his emperorship. However, the Italian chancellery, responsible for the issuing of this charter as well, had begun dating the year 982 with the 25th year of kingship and continued with this practice; thus, all the charters issued by Otto II's Italian chancellery in 983 are dated with the 26th year of his kingship and the 16th year of his emperorship. The easiest way to solve the discordant dating elements is to presuppose a scribal error in the writing of the year of emperorship: XIII was written instead of XVI, indeed an easy mistake to make as the number in question involves the writing of the same number of minims.
The final problem is the list of territories featured as having been donated to the Bishopric of Poreč by the Italian kings and the predecessors of Emperor Otto II. Namely, no royal or imperial diploma for the Bishopric of Poreč survives prior to this one from 983. Moreover, the phrase "quod a regibus seu ab Ugone largitum est, videlicet Ruvignum quantum ad Episcopatum sancte Parentine ecclesie donatum est a nostris antecessoribus, videlicet in loco qui dicitur Duo Castella et Valles" is not only clumsily styled, but it also fits very awkwardly the enumeration of localities; the sentence could indeed work perfectly well without it:
"Cuius dignis postulationibus aures nostre pietatis inclinantes pretaxate Ecclesiae predia nominative: Montana, Rosarium... et castrum Pisinum, Medelanum, cum omnibus pertinentiis suis iuste et legaliter ad predictum episcopatum pertinentibus nec non villis, terris... per hoc nostrum preceptum confirmamus eidem episcopo Adam suisque successoribus et corroboramus."
It should also be stressed that the exemplar hereby dubbed D has "Sanctus Vincentius", that is Savičenta (another town that the bishops of Poreč would later claim as their possession in temporalibus) instead of Bale in this very phrase, showing that the interpolated part was unstable enough to be "emended" as needed.
Finally, a look at the Mapped Toponyms field shows that the possessions enumerated before the clumsy phrase ("videlicet Ruvignum... Duo Castella et Valles") form a relatively compact territory stretching from Červar and Tar to the north of Poreč, then moving towards Motovun and embracing fort Nigrinjan (between Tar and Vižinada) plus the two localities in the present-day Vižinada (Ružar and Medelin, both places no longer exist today), and finally Pazin in central Istria as the easternmost territory of the Diocese of Poreč.
Thus, the most logical conclusion seems to be that Otto II's original confirmation charter was indeed interpolated with the "quod a regibus seu ab Ugone largitum est, videlicet Ruvignum... Duo Castella et Valles" phrase as a response to the centuries-long quarrel between the bishops of Poreč and patriarchs of Aquileia over this disputed territory.
The struggle for this territory had begun in the 10th century, but numerous forgeries created both by the bishops of Poreč as well as by the patriarchs of Aquileia make fixing the exact chronology of the fateful conflict almost impossible to ascertain.
The documents that form part of this story arc are the following:
1) Charlemagne's donation charter to the patriarch's of Aquileia from 803 (forgery made by the patriarchs of Aquileia – see the document here);
2) Donation charter of Patriarch Rodoald to the bishop of Poreč from 965 (forgery made by the bishops of Poreč – see the document here);
3) Confirmation charter and the grant of immunity of Emperor Otto II to the bishop of Poreč from 983 (this document);
4) Confirmation of Charlemagne's 803 charter by Emperor Otto III to the patriarch of Aquileia from 996 (authentic charter, but confirming a forgery – see the document here);
5) Sergius IV's papal confirmation of 1010 issued in favor of the bishops of Poreč (authentic papal charter – see the document here);
6) King Henry IV's highly dubious confirmation charter of 1077(?) to the Bishopric of Poreč, confirming Otto II' 983 charter (problematic charter, most probably a forgery – see the document here);
7) King Henry IV's donation charter to the Patriarchate of Aquileia, bestowing upon the patriarchs the regalian rights over the Bishopric of Poreč with the right to appoint and invest its bishops (authentic royal charter – see the document here);
8) Alexander III's papal confirmation of 1177 issued in favor of the bishops of Poreč (authentic papal charter, confirming the bishop's spiritual jurisdiction over the disputed territory, but not secular – see the document here).
In the end, it must be stressed that there is no historical record of the bishops of Poreč practicing their secular jurisdictions over Rovinj, Dvigrad or Bale.
Another very likely interpolation is the line "seu in quocumque loco prenominatus Episcopatus terram habet" in the pertinence clause as nothing similar is found in other charters composed by It.K and his predecessor It.I and the line truly emerges as a unicum in the context of Otto II's chancellery. Since this charter was used in the late 13th century to prove the lordship of the bishops of Poreč over both the city of Poreč and the neighboring Vrsar - both localities not mentioned in this charter -, the line could have been subsequently added in order to implicitly confirm the episcopal lordship over these two possessions as well.
According to Margetić (cited above), even "castrum Pisinum" would be a later interpolation because Pazin, together with Pićan, was purportedly donated by Otto III to the Patriarchate of Aquileia (a donation confirmed by Henry II, see it edited here). While it is quite possible that the line is indeed a later addition as the charter only speaks of predia, not of castra, Aquileian jurisdiction over Pazin is highly questionable, and later sources confirm that it was the bishops of Poreč who were investing the counts of Gorizia, and later even the (arch)dukes of Austria, with jurisdictions in temporalibus over Pazin.
Notwithstanding the subsequent interpolations, the core of the charter must be judged as authentic, primarily based on the style of the charter that betrays It.K as its composer. Both the "adiisse" instead of "adiit" and "donaverunt" instead of "donata erunt" in the narratio as well as the jumbled and agrammatical clauses in the clausula prohibitiva (nec ad ulla—legali iuditio) most probably stem from It.K's incompetence and sloppiness; he made similar errors in the charter issued to the Chapter of Verona during the same period (MGH DD O II, doc. 305) and he used the same "template" for this charter to the Bishopric of Poreč as he did for the charter issued to the Patriarchate of Aquileia a few days later (MGH DD O II, doc. 304, soon to be edited here as well).