1027_KA

Era
Vol. 2: A 804 usque ad 1077
Date
May 19, 1027
Place
Regestum

The ruling of the royal court, chaired by Emperor Conrad II and his son Henry in San Zeno in Verona, by which the duke of Carinthia, Adalbero of Eppenstein, is forced to renounce his claims to exact fodrum - a levy in kind for the upkeep of the royal retinue during the king's stay in Italy - from the subjects of the Church of Aquileia. By official decree of the imperial court, the Church of Aquileia is to be free from this levy to the dukes of Carinthia.

Source
The original is lost; the text survives in several later copies:
C = Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Consultori in iure, ms. 345: Privileggi antichi d’Acquileia, fasc. 4, fol. 19r-v; an incomplete simple copy from mid-15th century, containing roughly half of the text.
D = Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Consultori in iure, ms. 366/2: Pertinentia Patriarcatui Aquileiensi et patriae Foriiulii; fol. 19r-v; late-15th-century simple copy.
E = Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Consultori in iure, ms. 366/4: Tractatus Iacobi Gordini Marianensis sancte ecclesie Aquileyensis humilis archidiaconi magnifico et clarissimo domino Hieronymo Vendramino patrię Foroiulii pręsidi integerrimo, fol. 19v–20r; a copy authenticated by notary Franciscus de Lugo on June 5, 1493 and under the following heading: Dominus Conradus imperator unacum filio suo Henrico et procerum suorum conventu in contradictorio iudicio decernit contra ducem Carinthie, cuius dominus comes Goricie se palatinum dicit, et unde insurgere etiam videtur, quod nec ipse dux nec marchio vel comes alius vel heredes eorum de cortis, castris, villis, massariciis Aquileiensis ecclesie aliquid dicere vel inquietare presumant de penas adiscit irritans contrafactum. This De Lugo’s copy is, in turn, based on a copy and not on the nowadays lost original.
E’ = Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Consultori in iure, ms. 366/6, fol. 26v–27r; a copy of E, officially presented to Venice between 1493 and 1496.
F = Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Consultori in iure, ms. 366/7: 1193 e susseguenti: Privilegi ed investiture feudali di Enrico e Federico imperatori de Romani a favor del patriarca di Aquileia con altre investiture feudali del conte di Gorizia a favor del detto patriarca, fol. 11r-12v; late-15th/early-16th century simple copy based on D under the following heading added on the right margin: Sententia lata in curia Coradi imperatoris et Henrici eius filii in Verona contra Adalbertum ducem Carinthię in villis et castris Patriarchatus angaria et per angaria defendendo Popone patriarcha et fuit sententiatum liberas esse Acquilegiensi ecclesie anno eiusdem Coradi imperatoris in Italia primo.
R = Venice, Biblioteca Marciana di Venezia, ms. Lat. IX, 125 (= 3278), fol. 52r–53r; 18th-century simple copy done by Bernardo Maria De Rubeis, copied ex registro quod est penes magnificos dominos locumtenentes in castro Utini, however, that copy was either E or one stemming from E; De Rubeis’s copy features liberal emendations, scribal errors/omissions, and the following heading: Duces Karinthiae, de quo titulum sibi obtendit dominus comes Goritiae, non possunt habere angarias in bonis s. Aquileiensi ecclesię.
Previous Editions
Harry Bresslau (ed.), Conradi II diplomata / Die Urkunden Konrads II., Monumenta Germaniae historica, Diplomata regum et imperatorum Germaniae, vol. 4 (Hannover – Leipzig 1909), doc. 92, pp. 125–127; based on DER.
Cesare Manaresi (ed.), I placiti del Regnum Italiae, vol. 3/1, Fonti per la storia d’Italia 97 (Rome 1960), doc. 326, pp. 11–15; based on DE, principally following E.
FIM Edition
All the surviving copies are defective in certain parts and aspects, and all seem to stem not from the original, but from the nowadays lost copy/copies of the original that were already somewhat “emended”. The following is therefore a collated edition based on CDE; E’ is ignored as it is merely a copy of E; F is ignored as it is based on D; R is ignored as it is a defective copy based on E; differences from Bresslau’s edition (who did not consult C), are reported in the critical apparatus.
Transcription

In nomine Dominia.

Dum in Veronenseb Comitatuc in laubiad sancti Zenonis solarii et in iudicio resideret dominus Conraduse gratia Deif imperator augustus unacum filio suo Henrico ad faciendas singulis hominibus iusticias et ad deliberandasg intentiones, aderanth cum eis Popoi archiepiscopus Treverensisj et Ucellinusk episcopusl Trasburgensism et Bruno Augustensisn et Megnardus de Podeybrumo, Wermundusp episcopusq Constantiensisr, Wuldericuss Tridentinus et Roceriust Tarvisanusu, Albuinusv Bellunensis et Rigizo Feltrensis et Helmengerusw Cenetensis sanctorum Dei episcopi, Ugo marchio, Agizardusx comes et Popo comes et Arduinus comes, Megenardusy comes, Orekcerioz comes1, lohannesaa comes, Magifredusab comes et Regimbaldusac comes, Bevo, Rafaldusad, Ingelramae, Arpo, Bernardus, Albericusaf, Remego, Iscledoag, Rozzoah et Naldipsiai, Arnaldus iudices sacri palatii, Acilinusaj de Turre et Ubertoak germani, Luitfredusal et Papo et Gualterus germani, Hermerardusam, Arduinus, Regenaldusan filius cuiusdam Leonisao, Azo, Glopoap germani, lohannes etaq Paganusar germani filiiqueas Valpertiat, Vulfradus filius Agichardi, Valpertus et Alderinusau germani etav filiiaw Odelriciax/ay, Azoaz filius Varienti2 et reliqui.

Ibique in eorum veniens presentia dominus Popo patriarcha Aquileiensisba ecclesie pariter cum Walpertobb suo eiusdemque ecclesie advocato etbc ex alia parte dominus Adalperobd dux de Carinthiabe unacum comite Wecellinobf advocato suo quibg et walpotobh/3 vocatur.

Ibi cum coniuncti essent et altercationesbi interbj se haberent, dicebat Adalperobk dux cum eodem Wecellinobl advocato suo, quod de curtis et castellis seu villis et de omnibus, tam servis quam liberis, ipsi sancte Aquileiensi ecclesiebm pertinentibus et suprabn eiusdem ecclesie pertinentiasbo habitantibus ex parte ipsius ducatus fodrumbp et angariabq seu publicum servitium, id est panem et vinum, carnes et annonambr et alias angarias et functiones publicas, sibi dare deberentbs.

Ad hecbt respondit dominus Popo patriarcha et advocatus eius Walpertusbu, hoc verum non esse, quod de curtis et de omnibus supra dictis rebusbv fodrum aut quicquam horum que predixerat darebw deberentbx ducibus vel marchionibus aut comitibus, scultasiis vel decanis sive saltariis.

Tunc veniens supra dictus Walpertusby advocatus ibique perbz iudicium iudicum cum quatuor sacramentalibus, quorum nomina Varientus4, Ubertus et Tubertus necnon et Cono ipsius sancteca Aquileiensis ecclesie milites, qui ita iuraverunt de curtiscb et de castris, villis et de omnibus supracc ipsius sancte Aquileiensis ecclesie pertinentiis habitantibuscd, tam per servos quam per liberos, quodce nequecf ducibus nequecg marchionibus nec comitibus necch scultasiis, decanis nequeci saltariis per legem nec fodrumcj nec functionesck nec quicquam de supra dictis rebus pertinerecl nec ullam pignorationemcm facere ibidem deberent.cn

Et retulitco ipse dominus patriarcha cum Walpertocp advocato suo: “Quod habemus et detinemus ex parte sancte Marie et sancti Hermacorecq Aquileiensis ecclesie cortescr, castella, villas, massariciascs et omnia in omnibus cum in ipsius ecclesie pertinentiis habitantibus. Et si quilibet homo adversum nos et adversum Aquileiensem ecclesiam inde aliquid dicere vult, parati sumus inde stare in rationect cum eo et legitimecu finire. Et quod plus est, querimus, [ut]cv dicat dominus Adalperocw dux unacumcx comite Wecellino advocato suo, si de cortiscy sive castelliscz vel de villis aut de aliis sancte Aquileiensis ecclesieda iuribusdb aut per fodrum aut per ullum superius dictum gaforiumdc ulterius diceredd aut quicquam inquietare vult an non.”

Ad hec responderuntde Adalpero dux et comes Wecellinus5 eius advocatus: “Quod dignum et iustum est, dicimus et firmiter laudamus, quoddf de cortis, castris, casis, massariciis et de sancte Mariedg sanctiquedh Hermacore pertinentiis et in ipsis pertinentiis habitantibus, tam de servis quam de liberis, nec nobis nec aliis ducibus nec marchionibus nec comitibus nequedi scultasiisdj neque decanis neque saltariisdk per legem pertinetdl quicquam, sed omnia in omnibus Aquileiensis ecclesie sunt propria.”

Insuper hocdm in illodn loco et in eodem iudicio obligavit se ipse Adalpero dux cum Wecellino comite advocato suo contra dominum Poponem patriarcham et Walpertumdo advocatum suum vel contradp omnes Aquileiensis ecclesie partesdq compositurum sancte Mariedr sanctoque Hermacore centum libras optimi auri, et collaudavit ut totidem componerent heredes et proheredes et posteri eius, si unquam contra Poponem patriarcham vel contra quemquamds alium aliquid dicere vel inquietare presumpserint de his prenominatis rebus, et deinde taciti et contenti permaneant omni tempore. Et si alique summisse persone contra hoc ire temptaverintdt, totidem componant tacitique permaneant.

Cum hoc ita diffinitumdu est, iustum foredv omnibus supra scriptis auditoribus visum est; iudicaverunt quoque, utdw iuxta eiusdem domini Poponis patriarche et Walperti Aquileiensis ecclesie advocati necnondx Adalperonis ducis vel Wecellini comitis eius Ducatus advocati professionem et manifestationem amodo in antea dominus patriarcha cum Walpertody advocato suo ipsas cortes cum casis et castris seu villis et massariciis et cum omnibus in eiusdem ecclesie pertinentiis habitantibus, tam liberis quam servis, cum fodro et cum omni prescripto de partedz Adalperonis ducis et comitis Wecellini advocati sui sine omni inquisitione habere et detinere deberet; et ipse Adalpero dux cum Wecellino comite advocato suo promiserunt se omni tempore exinde tacitos et contentos permanere.

Taliterea hec causa finita est et qualiter acta est, presens noticia optime demonstrat.

Ego quidem Arnolduseb notarius et iudex sacri palatii iussione supra dictiec imperatoris et iudicum admonitione hanc cartulam scripsi et interfui anno eiusdem dominied Conradiee gratia Dei imperatoris augusti in Italia primo, in XIIII kalendas iunii, indictione decimaef.

Apparato critico

aseq. amen add. C.  b) Veronensi C.  c) comittatu C.  d) laustia C; lambia D.  e) Coradus CD; Chonradus R et sic ed. Bresslau.  f) gratia Dei] inv. C.  g) debellandas C; liberandas D.  h) aderana C.  i) Pepo D.  j) Travensis D.  k) Anselinus C; Verchinus D.  ladd. sup. l. E.  m) Traburgensis C.  n) Augustens C; Angustensis D.  o) de Pondenbrum C.  p) Vittermundus C.  qseq. c canc. C.  r) Megnardus—Constantiensis] om. D.  s) Voderichus C; Wdelricus E.  t) Roterus C; Rogerius D.  u) Trivisanus C; Tervisinus D.  v) Albuitius D.  w) Helmengorus E.  xR et sic ed. Bresslau; Azigardus C; Agicandus D; Azizardus E.  y) Menedardus C.  z) Orercerio C; Haenrico D.  aaex Iohamnes corr. C; Ioannes DE et ed. Bresslau et undique sic loco Iohannes.  ab) Megifredus D.  ac) Regimbardus C; Regnibaldus D.  ad) Bevo, Rafaldus] Beneraldus C; Bevirafaldus D.  ae) Ingelis C; Hingelramus D.  afom. C.  ag) Ischledo D.  ah) Rozo C; Rezo D.  ai) et Naldipsi] om. D.  aj) Aelmus C.  ak) Huberte D.  al) Lutifredus C; Linifredus D.  am) Hemarardus C; Hemerardus E.  an) Reginaldus D.  ao) Zenoni C.  ap) Clipo C; Gloppo D.  aq) de D.  arCE; Pagandalus D; Paganolus R et sic ed. Bresslau.  as) et filii CE.  at) Aderliti C.  au) Aldinus D.  avom. D.  aw) Valperti—filii] om. E.  ax) Volderici D.  ay) Vulfradus—Oderlici] om. C.  az) Aço E.  ba) Aquilleiensis et saepe sic C; Acquilegiensis et saepe sic D.  bb) Wodalperto C; Walberto D.  bcadd. sup. l. E.  bd) Adalpertus C; Adalperto D.  be) Carintia C; Charintia D.  bf) Vezelino et undique sic C; Vecelino D.  bgseq. etiam add. C.  bh) Valperto C; valporo D.  bi) alterantens C.  bjex intererem corr. C.  bk) Adalperto C.  bl) Vercelino et saepe sic D.  bm) Aquileiensi ecclesie] inv. CD.  bn) super C.  bo) pertinentiis D.  bpC; fotrum et undique sic DE.  bq) angariam C.  br) anonam D.  bs) deberetur CE.  bt) hoc E.  bu) Valpertus C.  bvom. C.  bw) dari C.  bx) deberetur DE.  by) Wulpertus D.  bzom. D.  ca) an cum sign. abbr. D.  cb) cortis D.  cc) super C.  cd) habitarum C.  ce) et C.  cf) nec D.  cg) nec D.  chom. D.  ci) nec D.  cj) forum D.  ck) sanctiones D.  clseq. vel canc. C.  cm) pignerationem E.  cn) Quod Patriarchatus Aquileiensis sit liber et immunis ab omni angaria seu factione solvenda domino Adalperto duci Carintię add. al. man. in marg. dex. D.  coC; respondit D; rettulit E et ed. Bresslau.  cp) Walpaco D.  cq) Hermachore et saepe sic E.  cr) curtes C.  cs) masarinas C.  ct) rationem D.  cu) legittime E et ed. Bresslau.  cvom. codd.; em. Banić iuxta formularium Langobardicum.  cw) Adalpertus C; Adalperto et saepe sic E.  cx) fura cum C.  cy) curtis C.  cz) castris CE.  da) Aquileiensis ecclesie] inv. C.  db) viris CE.  dc) garofrium C; ex garoforium corr. E.  dddes. C.  de) respondit D.  df) que D.  dg) memorie D.  dh) sancti D.  di) nec D.  dj) saltariis D.  dk) sculdariis D.  dl) pertinere D.  dm) hec D.  dnom. R et Bresslau.  do) Valpertum D.  dp) circa E.  dq) panis D.  dr) sancte Marie] om. D.  ds) quenquam E.  dt) temptaverit D.  du) difinitum D.  dv) fere D.  dwom. D.  dxseq. et add. E.  dy) Wulperto D.  dz) pane D.  ea) qualiter D.  eb) Arnellus D.  ec) scripti D.  edom. D.  ee) Coradi D.  ef) Xma D.


1) According to Heinz Dopsch (1997: p. 20, cited below), this is a contaminated form of Otakerio of which Ozi is a standard hypocoristic. This Ottokar/Ozi would then be equated with Patriarch Poppo's brother, Count Ozi of Cordenons.
2) This "Azzo the son of Werihen" is most probably the son of Werihen III, who appears later in the text as one of the four oath-helpers supporting Patriarch Poppo. According to Meyer and Dopsch (2002, cited below), Azzo would be Werihen's son from his first marriage to an unknown woman and the brother of Adalger and Werihen IV, the future count of Friuli (appearing as such only once, in 1052).
3) "Walpoto" comes from German "Gewaltbote" = missus domini regis. Essentially, this means that Wezelin was a count and the administrator of the royal demesne in Carinthia. See Heinz Dopsch, "Gewaltbote und Pfalzgraf in Kärnten," Carinthia I 165 (1975): pp. 125–151.
4) This Werihen is traditionally equated with the eponymous count of Friuli and Istria, who married Williburga of Sempt-Ebersberg in his second marriage and with whom she had two daughters: Liutgard, the future abbess of Geisenfeld Abbey, and Hademoud, the future wife of Count Poppo II of Weimar and the mother of Ulrich I, the future margrave of Carniola and Istria. On Werihen III, see Meyer and Dopsch 2002: 338–347; on Werihen's daughters and Margrave Ulrich I's ancestry, see Josip Banić, "Marchionatus Istrie origo mythosque Wodalrici marchionis: (Re)interpreting the Genesis of the March of Istria and the Socio-Genealogical Background of its First Margraves (c. 1060 – c. 1100)," in Mens acris in corpore commodo: Festschrift in Honour of the 70th Birthday of Ivan Matejčić, ed. Marijan Bradanović and Miljenko Jurković (Zagreb – Motovun 2021), pp. 191–199.
5) This "Count Wezelin", waltpoto in Carinthia and the advocate of Duke Adalbero, is traditionally equated with the eponymous count of Istria, who appears in primary sources in 1014 as vicecomes and whose son Constantine signed a document in 1030 as "filius Ecilii comitis." On all of this, see Josip Banić, "The Mystery of Merania: A New Solution to Old Problems (Holy Roman Empire and the Kingdom of Croatia-Dalmatia during the Investiture Controversy) (Part 2)," Zgodovinski časopis 75/1-2 (2021): pp. 44–45.

Translation

In the name of the Lord.

When Lord Conrad, by the grace of God august emperor, together with his son Henry presided in court in the lodge of the gallery of San Zeno in the County of Verona to administer justice to individuals and to decide claims, present with them were Poppo, archbishop of Trier, Wezelin, bishop of Strasbourg, Bruno of Augsburg, Maynard of Paderborn, Vermund, bishop of Constance, Ulrich of Trento, Roger of Treviso, Albuin of Belluno, Rigizo of Feltre, Helminger of  Ceneda – bishops of the saints of God –, Margrave Hugh, Count Agizard, Count Poppo, Count Arduin, Count Maynard, Count Ottokar, Count John, Count Magifred and Count Regimbald, Bevo, Rafald, Ingelram, Arpo, Bernard, Alberic, Remego, Iscledo, Rozzo, Naldipsi and Arnald – judges of the sacred palace – Acilin de Turre and Hubert, brothers; Luitfred, Poppo, and Walter, brothers; Hermerard, Arduin,  Regenald, son of a certain Leo; Azo and Glopo, brothers; John and Pagano, brothers and sons of Walpert; Wulfrad, son of Agichard; Walpert and Alderin, brothers, and sons of Ulrich; Azzo, son of Werihen, and the rest.

Thereupon arrived before their presence Lord Poppo, patriarch of Aquileia, with Walpert, his advocate of the same Church, and on the other side Lord Adalbero, duke of Carinthia, together with Count Wezelin, his advocate, who is also called waltpot.

As they were meeting there and making claims on both sides, Duke Adalbero with his advocate Wezelin was saying that, by way of his ducal authority, he should be given fodrum and angaria or public service, that is, bread and wine, meat and grain, and other services and public duties from the estates and castles or villages and from all the dependents, both servile as well as free, belonging to the holy Church of Aquileia and from the inhabitants in charge of the appurtenances of the same Church.

To this Lord Patriarch Poppo and his advocate Walpert replied that it was not true that they owed fodrum, or anything of those things which he had mentioned before, from the estates and all the above items to dukes or margraves or counts, to sculdasii or decani or saltarii.1

Then, by the judgment of the judges, the aforesaid advocate Walpert approached with four oath-helpers – Werihen, Hubert, Tubert, and Cono, knights2 of the Church of Aquileia – who so swore concerning the estates, castles, villages, and all of the aforesaid appurtenances of the holy Church of Aquileia, the inhabitants, both servile as well as free, that neither fodrum nor duties nor any of the other things said above ought to be paid to dukes, margraves, counts, sculdasii, decani or to saltarii by law, nor might they distrain anything there.3

And the lord patriarch with his advocate Walpert replied: “We have and hold, on the part of St. Mary and St. Hermagoras of the Church of Aquileia, estates, castles, villages, and homesteads and everything including the inhabitants belonging to the same Church. And if anyone wishes to say anything against us and against the Church of Aquileia, we are prepared to stand in court with them and reach a legal resolution. And what is more, we ask that Lord Duke Adalbero together with Count Wezelin his advocate state whether he wishes to say anything further or contest anything or not regarding the estates or castles or villages or other rights of the holy Church of Aquileia either regarding fodrum or any aforesaid procurement of victuals.”

To this Duke Adalbero and his advocate Count Wezelin replied: “We say and wholly approve what is worthy and just, that concerning the estates, castles, dwellings, households, and appurtenances of St. Mary and St. Hermagoras and the inhabitants belonging to them, both servile as well as free, nothing legally belongs either to us or to other dukes or margraves or counts or sculdasii or decani or saltarii, but that everything in entirety is the property of the Church of Aquileia.”

Moreover, here in this place and at the same court of law, Duke Adalbero with his advocate Count Wezelin obliged himself to pay a hundred pounds of best gold to Lord Patriarch Poppo and to Walpert, his advocate, or to the officials of the Church of Aquileia, dedicated to St. Mary and St. Hermagoras, and he acknowledged that his heirs, successors, and offspring should pay the same if they ever presume to bring a suit or to challenge the claim of Patriarch Poppo or of anyone else concerning the aforementioned matters and that they should waive the claim and remain content for all time. And if any accomplices try to go against this, they should pay the same amount and waive the claim.

When this was so decided, it seemed to be just to all the above- written auditors; they also judged that after the acknowledgement and evidence of Lord Patriarch Poppo and of Walpert, advocate of the Church of Aquileia, and also of Duke Adalbero and Count Wezelin, advocate of his Duchy, henceforth in the future the lord patriarch with his advocate Walpert should have and hold the same estates with dwellings, castles, villages, and households, and with all those inhabitants, both free as well as unfree, pertaining to the same Church, with fodrum and everything that was ruled regarding the part of Duke Adalbero and his advocate, Count Wezelin, without any inquiries; and the very Duke Adalbero with his advocate, Count Wezelin, promised that they would henceforth waive the claim and remain content for all time.

Thus was the case finished, and the present record excellently demonstrates how it was carried out.

I, Arnold, notary and judge of the sacred palace, have written this charter by command of the aforesaid emperor and by order of the judges, and I was present in the first year of the same Lord Conrad, by the grace of God august emperor in Italy, on the fourteenth day before the Kalends of June, tenth indiction.

[trans. based on Boyd H. Hill Jr., Medieval Monarchy in Action: The German Empire from Henry I to Henry IV (London–New York 1972), pp. 202–205 and modified, where deemed necessary, by the editor]


1) Sculdasii, decani, and saltarii are all essentially lower ranking officials in charge of justice administration and the maintenance of public order. Boyd translated them very awkwardly as "local judges", "police officials", and "manorial bailiffs" respectively. I have decided to leave them in their original Latin form as the terms could and were used interchangeably for a variety of local officials with various, locally determined jurisdictional flavors.
2) Milites should not be automatically translated as "knights", as the term miles had a variety of meanings during this specific period. Boyd translated it here as "armed retainers"; I have opted for a more aesthetically pleasing translation, if somewhat inaccurate.
3) The phrase in the original is pignorationem facere, with the meaning of forcibly confiscating property by way of pledge until the fodrum is paid.

Selected Bibliography
Pio Paschini, “Vicende del Friuli durante il dominio della casa imperiale di Franconia,” Memorie storiche forogiuliesi 9 (1913): pp. 21–22.
Heinrich Schmidinger, Patriarch und Landesherr: Die weltliche Herrschaft der Patriarchen von Aquileia bis zum Ende der Staufer (Graz-Cologne 1954), pp. 45–46, 55–56.
Paolo Cammarosano, “L’alto medioevo: Verso la formazione regionale,” in Storia della società friulana: Il medioevo, ed. Paolo Cammarosano (Tavagnacco 1988), p. 82.
Gerald Gänser, “Die Mark als Weg zur Macht am Beispiel der "Eppensteiner" (2. Teil),” Zeitschrift des Historischen Vereines für Steiermark 85 (1994) pp. 111–112.
Heinz Dopsch, “Il patriarca Poppone di Aquileia (1019–1042): L’origine, la famiglia e la posizione di principe della Chiesa,” in Poppone: L’età d’oro del patriarcato di Aquileia, ed. Silvia Blason Scarel (Rome 1997), pp. 20, 29–30
Peter Štih, Villa quae Sclavorum lingua vocatur Goriza: Studie über zwei Urkunden Kaiser Ottos 3. aus dem Jahre 1001 für den Patriarchen Johannes von Aquileia und den Grafen Werihen von Friaul (DD. O. 3. 402 und 412) (Nova Gorica 1999), pp. 108–111.
Heinz Dopsch and Therese Meyer, “Von Bayern nach Friaul: Zur Herkunft der Grafen von Görz und ihren Anfängen in Kärnten und Friaul, Krain und Istrien,” Zeitschrift für bayerische Landesgeschichte 65/2 (2002): p. 340 and ff for the genealogy of Count Werihen of Friuli.
Herwig Wolfram, Conrad II, 990–1039: Emperor of Three Kingdoms, trans. Denise A. Kaiser (University Park 2006), pp. 84, 110–111.
Elisabetta Scarton, “Il Patriarcato di Aquileia: Una storia ‘sbagliata’,” in Cultura in Friuli III, ed. Matteo Venier and Gabriele Zanello (Udine 2017), p. 624.
Editor's Notes

The present charter incited much attention in historiography and sparked much debate.

First, there is the question of the precise object of the dispute between the Carinthian Duke Adalbero of Eppenstein and the Aquileian Patriarch Poppo: did the duke demand both the fodrum as well as other contributions and public services, including fees in “bread, wine, meat and grain and other services and public duties”, or was the dispute entirely about the fodrum, a levy that merely included the aforesaid services and contributions in kind? According to Dopsch (1997, cited above), the dispute revolved solely around fodrum and on the specific type of this levy, the so-called “private fodrum”, one exacted by “dukes, margraves, emissaries and royal officials who, as representatives of the king, could claim it as deriving from the royal fodrum” (Dopsch 1997, p. 30). Namely, the royal fodrum in Regnum Italiae was paid to the king’s treasury only during the monarch’s stay in Italy as a tribute meant for the upkeep of the regal retinue. The Church of Aquileia was not freed from this tax, argues Dopsch, but only of the fodrum paid to the ducal retinue or the retinue of any other royal official. As a matter of fact, the Church of Aquileia already received an imperial privilege granting precisely this exemption from private fodrum and it came in the form of Emperor Henry II’s charter issued to the very Patriarch Poppo in 1020 (MGH DD H II, doc. 426, soon to be edited here as well). Thus, concludes Dopsch, the Veronese placitum of 1027 did not usher in anything new nor did it elevate the Patriarchate of Aquileia in any form – it merely enforced the old rights and existing privileges of the patriarchs of Aquileia. Old interpretations of “the elevation” of patriarchs to the rank of “imperial princes” “directly subordinated to the crown” (cf. Paschini and Schmidinger, cited above), should thus be wholly abandoned.

Moreover, Duke Adalbero of Eppenstein, who would later indeed become an enemy of Emperor Conrad II, was at this time still enjoying the monarch’s goodwill, and the 1027 verdict, although pronounced against his claims, did not do much to harm either him, his duchy or his standing within the Empire. As Wolfram (cited above, pp. 84–85) accentuated, Duke Adalbero Eppenstein continued to enjoy the king’s favor until at least the fall of 1028, the hostility being catalyzed by the duke’s pacts with the bordering regions of Croatia and Hungary in 1031. Adalbero was officially deposed as duke of Carinthia only on May 18, 1035.

Finally, there is the question of comes Wecellinus, the ducal advocate and waltpot. Older historiography equated this count with the count of Friuli and Istria who appears in the sources as Werihen/Werigand between 990 and 1028; this interpretation was even followed by Wolfram (cited above, p. 111), who refers to him as “Wezelin-Werigand, a royal emissary who had served as a count in both Friuli and Istria.” That this cannot be the case was demonstrated by Dopsch and Meyer (2002, cited above), who showed that Werihen appears as one of the four invited compurgators and that his son Azzo is also among the distinguished witnesses of the judicial ceremony. Since he cannot be the same man as Werihen, the count of Friuli and Istria, he can be identified with Wezil who appeared first as viscount in Istria in 1014 and then, again in Istria, as father of a certain Constantine in 1030, this time with the title of a count (“signum manus Constantini filii Ecilii comitis”) (Banić, Mystery of Merania, cited above, pp. 44–45). Wezelin would then take over the county of Istria from Werihen sometime between 1014, when he was still a viscount, and 1027, when he appeared as count in this judicial assembly in San Zeno in Verona.

How to Cite
First citation: Josip Banić (ed.), Fontes Istrie medievalis, vol. 2: A 804 usque ad 1077, doc. 1027_KA, fontesistrie.eu/1027_KA (last access: date).
Subsequent citations: FIM, 2: doc. 1027_KA.
Facsimile
Image Source and Info

The publication of the facsimiles of D (Venice, Archivio di Stato di Venezia, Consultori in iure, ms. 366/2: Pertinentia Patriarcatui Aquileiensi et patriae Foriiulii; fol. 19r-v) 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 the editor.

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