K. F<
V
^ MARCO SANUDO
CONQUEROR OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
BY
JOHN KNIGHT FOTHERINGHAM
M.A., D.Litt.
FELLOW OF MAGDALEN COLLEGE, OXFORD
READER IN ANCIENT HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF LONDON
LATE BRASSEY STUDENT
ASSISTED BY
LAURENCE FREDERIC RUSHBROOK WILLIAMS
B.Litt., B.A.
FELLOW OF ALL SOULS COLLEGE, OXFORD
RESEARCH PROFESSOR OF MODERN INDIAN HISTORY IN THE
UNIVERSITY OF ALLAHABAD
OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
1915
OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS
LONDON EDINBURGH GLASGOW NEW YORK
TORONTO MELBOURNE BOMBAY
HUMPHREY MILFORD, M.A.
PUBLISHER TO THE UNIVERSITY
PREFACE
The present work professes to be not history, but historical research. It is intended primarily for those who may have occasion to write on some subject on which it throws light, and the author will be well satisfied if it is used without being read through by such students. No attempt has been made at proportion, and the amount of space devoted to different parts of the subject is determined solely by the character and quantity of the evidence and the discussions to which it gives rise.
For the benefit of historical students and the biblio- graphers who may guide them, I have thought it advisable to enumerate in this preface the subjects on which I have attempted to throw light. These include the origins of the Venetian families of Candiano and Sanudo, and, incidentally, the legend of the foundation of Venice and of Heraclea, and the topography of the neighbourhood of Ravenna ; the relations of Guglielmo and Raynerio of Montferrat to the court of Con- stantinople and the nature of their fief or fiefs at Thessalonica ; the policy of Venice in promoting the election of Baldwin as emperor and in negotiating the treaty of Adrianople with Boniface of Montferrat ; the relations of the Venetian colony at Constantinople to the mother-city, and the policy adopted by Venice for conquests to be made either by the city or by its citizens ; the attempts made by Genoa to secure a foothold in Romania ; the conquest and organization of the Archipelago ; the different Venetian, Genoese, and Naxiote expeditions to Crete during the career of Marco Sanudo, and, of course, the whole career of Marco Sanudo himself. One of the excerpts contained in the appendix is from a Cronica Antica di Venetia
iv PREFACE
(pp. 109, no infra), belonging to the fourteenth century, and may conceivably be of interest to students of the Venetian dialect. A large part of the matter contained in the present work was published in a form intended for a wider class of readers in the English Historical Review, xxv (1910), pp. 26-57.
I also hope that my references to published works and manuscripts may be of use to those who do not find my own contributions of special value. Care has been taken to make these references, which do not extend beyond the year 191 1, exact and readily identifiable. The absence of certain well- known works is deliberate.
This work has grown out of a study begun in 1906 under the terms of a Brassey Studentship, and my thanks are due to Lord Hythe for the foundation of this studentship, which not only suggested the study, but contributed materially to meeting the expenses. I have also to thank the British Treasury for a grant administered through King's College, London, and the Delegates of the Press for the generous terms on which they have consented to publish this work. More personal thanks are due to Mr. William Miller, author of The Latins in the Levant, and of many learned articles on portions of that subject, who suggested the Duchy of the Archipelago as a suitable scheme, and to whom I owe advice on authorities and numerous suggestions, together with permission to repro- duce from his copy the excerpt from Sauger's Histoire de l'Archipel, which will be found on pp. 113-25. I also owe thanks to Madame della Rocca of Naxos, for permission to make extracts from Grimaldi's 'Io-ropia rfjs Nd£ov, a selection from which is printed on pp. 122-5 of this work, to Cav. Gerola, Keeper of the National Museum at Ravenna, for lending me for reproduction Berti's map of the environs of Ravenna, and to Dr. Headlam, late Principal of King's College, London, for the gift of a copy of Hopf's Chroniques Greco- Romanes. I have also to thank Dr. Gerland for kind answers to inquiries, Miss Gimingham, late of St. Hilda's Hall, Oxford,
PREFACE v
for assistance in the preparation of Appendix II, and numerous friends in Naxos, among whom I may specify Mr. Chrysanthus Sommaripa, Madame Antonio Sommaripa, and Mr. Roch Barozzi, for much assistance kindly given during my visit to Naxos.
The last chapter was originally written by Professor Williams, from material which I had collected. It was revised by me, and I am fully responsible for the opinions expressed in the chapter in its present form. Professor Williams has also assisted me in the transcription and decipherment of extracts from autho- rities. With the exception of the excerpts from Grimaldi, these have all been verified by comparison with photographs.
Last but not least, I must record my indebtedness to my wife, who has shared my journeys and performed a large share of the clerical work involved in the preparation of this volume, and who is specially responsible for the index, which, in a book not intended to be read as a whole, is the part on which the utility of the rest depends.
J. K. FOTHERINGHAM. July 7, 1915.
CONTENTS
PAGE
I. The House of Sanudo i
II. Venice and the Fourth Crusade . .16
III. Boniface and the Treaty of Adrianople . 26
IV. The Struggle with Genoa 39
V. The Conquest of the Archipelago . . .56
VI. Marco Sanudo and Crete 81
Appendix I. Extracts from Authorities . . 104
Appendix II. List of Works to which reference is made 125
MAPS
PAGE
Ravenna and Environs vii
NAXOS viii
Crete 134
10 Miies
~*7>ra.
RAVENNA AND ENVIRONS
N A X O S
CHAPTER I THE HOUSE OF SANUDO
The family of Sanudo has been rendered illustrious by two eminent men of letters, as well as by the long line of the Dukes of the Archipelago. But even before the days of those members of the family whose names are to be found in every history of Venice, the Sanudi had achieved an honourable position in that city. The highest authority for the pedigree of his house ought to be the famous Marino Sanudo Torsello, best known for his Secreta fidelium crucis, but also author of a work written about 1328 and preserved in an Italian translation under the title of Istoria del Regno di Romania.1 All that can be gleaned from him concerning the ancestry of the conqueror of the Archipelago is that he was ' Fiol de Miser Marco Sanudo Costantinopolitani \2 A prouder pedigree appears for the first time in the Chronicle of Andrea Dandolo,3 where a list is given of the families descended from tribunes and primates of the city of Heraclea who settled in Malamocco, Rialto, Torcello, and the neighbouring islands after the destruction of Heraclea about 810. The third family in this list is thus entitled: 1 Candiani, qui hodie secundum plurimos Sanuti vocati sunt.' There would be nothing strange in the change of name, but the phrase ' secundum plurimos ' suggests that the genealogy was questioned in Dandolo's day, unless the sentence merely means that Sanudo had become the commoner designation of the family. Another chronicle of the latter half of the fourteenth century 4 states this descent without qualification, and calls all the Candiano doges by the alternative name of ' Sanutus \ Afterwards this is the accepted story, and the Sanudi rank among the ' case vecchie ' which are supposed to be descended from the ancient tribunes.
It is difficult in the light of the limited evidence before us to determine whether this genealogy is true or false. Marino Sanudo is making no attempt to trace the origins of his family, and it is therefore impossible to press his silence. Only one list
1 Printed in Hopfs Chroniques Greco-Romanes (1873), pp. 99-170.
2 Ibid., p. 99.
3 Muratori, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, xii (1728), 156.
4 Cod. Venet. Marc. Lat. x. 36a and x. 237.
P 2961 B
3 THE HOUSE OF SANUDO
of Venetian families older than that in Dandolo has been pre- served to us ; this is to be found in that curious patchwork known as the Chronicle of Altino.1 Here it is true that the Candiani are mentioned without any words to identify them with the Sanudi, whose name nowhere appears, but the refer- ences come in a part of the chronicle which was composed in the ninth or tenth century, when the family of Candiano still bore its ancient name. Happily there are many documents, some of them with numerous signatures, in which the names of Venetian families may be traced. The last Candiano whom I have been able to trace under that name is Stefano, who is mentioned in a document of April 1087.2 The first Sanudo who bears that name in a contemporary document appears to be Giovanni, who is one of the signatories to the Patto di Cittanova in 1009.3 But the name Sanudo is of comparatively rare occurrence before the middle of the twelfth century, when the family appears to rank with the noblest of Venice ; and it is interesting to observe that soon after the position of the family is established, a certain Candianus Sanutus appears among the eleven electors who chose the doge Sebastiano Ziani in 1173.4 Another elector of the same year, Orio Mastropiero, afterwards doge, appears to bear as a Christian name the older surname of his family.5 If we may explain the Christian name Candiano on the same principle, it would follow that the belief that the Sanudi were descended from the Candiani was at least as old as the twelfth century,, and made its appearance as soon as the Sanudi rose to dis- tinction in the state. We should hardly have expected a trace of this belief in the scanty references to the Sanudi before the middle of the twelfth century, and the pedigree may therefore be regarded as resting upon as good evidence as the nature of our sources permits. If it is true, there was an eclipse in the fortunes of the family, which fades under its old name at the beginning of the eleventh century, after giving five doges to Venice and two patriarchs to Grado. The decline of the Can- diani in Venetian politics can easily be explained by the failure of their attempt to establish a dynastic government, and the new name under which the family rose once more to influence may indicate that the Sanudi belonged to a collateral branch of the family.
For the origin of the Candiani we must turn once more to the
1 Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores, xiv (1883), pp. 28, 35.
2 Cornelius, Ecclesiae Venetae, iii (1749), p. 62.
3 Romanin, Storia di Venezia, i (1853), p. 390.
4 The names are to be found in the Ambrosian MS. of Andrea Dandolo, Muratori, R.I.S. xii. 298.
. 6 See Hodgson, Early History of Venice (1901), p. 3312.
THE HOUSE OF SANUDO 3
Chronicle of Altino, on which later accounts of the origin of Venetian families are based. Here we have three references to the subject, the first and most important of which is to be found in a list of the patriarchs of Grado,1 where we read : ' Can- dianus patriarcha, qui fuit nacione Candiana nomine, proximus Rimani civitate, vixit an. 5.' The second reference is in a list of bishops of Olivolo,2 where we read : ' Iohannes, qui fuit nacione suorum parentum de Candiana parte, filius Magni Candiani, habitatore in Rivoalto. Iste fundavit in Dorsoduro ecclesia ad honorem sancti Raphaelis archangeli ; qui vixit et sedit an. [5]/ The third reference is in a list of families entitled ' Nomina tribunorum et civium Venetiquorum qui exierunt de Nova Civi- tate et Exulo'.3 The second family in this list is thus described : 'Candiani de Candiana parte venerunt ; tribuni ante fuerunt, similiter benivoli omnes, sed protervi in bello et de personis magni.'
The problem here is to locate the ' nacio Candiana ' or ' Can- diana pars', from which the family is said to have come. The name ' Rimani ' in the first reference is one which is frequently found for the ancient Ariminum, the modern Rimini. Candianus was elected patriarch by the party owing allegiance to the emperor in opposition to the Abbot John, consecrated by the Lombard party at old Aquileia, and his patriarchate is variously dated as 607-12 or 610-15. There is happily preserved to us a contemporary letter of the Patriarch John to the Lombard king, Agilulf.4 Here we find the name of the patriarch of Grado written at full length, ' Candidianus '. The language used about him is far from complimentary. He is called ' Candidianus inutilis', and it is stated that because of the enormity of his guilt he had been forbidden, under an anathema by the Patriarch Severus, to seek any higher rank in the Church. He is described as 'adulterium Matri Ecclesiae improbe ingerens', and finally the Patriarch John entreats King Agilulf that ' when the unhappy Candidianus shall have passed from this world into everlasting punishment ' he will do his best to prevent any other wrongful ordination from being performed at Grado. This hope was destined to disappointment. The patriarchs of Grado are repre- sented at the present day by the Patriarch of Venice, while their rivals at Aquileia, after moving their seat to Udine, were finally deprived of the patriarchal dignity in 1750. But the archbishop's palace at Udine is still known as the Patriarcato, and the arch- bishop himself, though shorn of the proud title of his predecessors, is still independent of the Patriarch of Venice.
1 p. 17. 2 Ibid., p. 22. 3 Ibid., p. 28.
4 In C. Troya, Storia d' Italia del Medio-evo, iv, parte i, Codice Diplomatico Longobardo (1852), pp. 561, 562.
B 2
4 THE HOUSE OF SANUDO
The spelling ' Candidianus ' is also found in Paulus Diaconus,1 and Dandolo's paraphrase 2 of the not over-grammatical notice in the Chronicle of Altino may be of value. Here we find ' Candianus novae Aquilegiae Patriarchatum obtinuit Anno Domini DCX. Hie natione Ariminensis3 de Vico Candiano a Provincialibus Episcopis, Clero et Populo in Grado electus, et confirmatus est huius Ecclesiae Patriarcha \ This definitely confirms the easiest interpretation of the Chronicle of Altino, and bids us look in the neighbourhood of Rimini for a ' nacio Candiana' or 'vicus Candianus '.
Abundant evidence of the former use of place-names derived from Candidianus is found in the district immediately to the south of Ravenna, which is not far from Rimini. In the Getica of Jordanes4 we read that Alaric in his expedition of the year 400 or 401 'nullo penitus obsistente lApontem applicavit Candidiani, qui tertio miliario ab urbe aberat regia Ravennate '. The name is found again in the Chronicle of Cassiodorus,5 where we read under the year 491, 'Hoc cons. Odovacar cum Erulis egressus Ravenna nocturnis horis ad pontem Candidiani a dn nostro rege Theoderico memorabili certamine superatur/ and in the same connexion in the Liber Pontificalis of Agnellus : 6 ' Cum istius temporibus, postquam pons Apolenaris Ravenna cuncrematus est nocte in pasca 4. Nonas Aprilis, iuxta Strovilia Peucodis non longe ab urbe Ravenna applicitus Theodoricus fuisset cum hostibus suis in canpo qui vocatur Candiani, postquam duabus vicibus Odovacer superavit, qui illo tempore regnum Ravennae obtinebat : tunc exiit Odovacer ad praedictum canpum cum exercitu suo, et superatus est tertio, et ante faciem Theodorici terga dedit, et infra civitatem se clausit.'
The position of the pons and campus Candidiani is established by the distance from Ravenna as given by Jordanes, and by the fact that the Anonymus Valesii, the Chronicle of 641, and the Fasti Vindobonenses Priores, all doubtless based on the Con- sularia Italica, give the name Pineta (compare the Strovilia Peucodis of Agnellus) to the site of Theodoric's camp and the scene of his battle with Odoacer, thus clearly defining it as in the famous pine-forest of Ravenna. It is possible that the pons Candidiani of Cassiodorus is identical with the pons Apolenaris of
1 Historia Langobardorum, iv. 33, in M. G. H., Script. Rerum Langobard. et Ital. saec. vi-ix (1878), p. 127.
2 109.
3 So the Codex Marcianus Zanetti 400. See Simonsfeld in Neues Archiv fur deutsche Geschichtskunde, xviii (1892), p. 337.
4 M. G. H., Auct. Antiq. v. i (1882), p. 96.
5 M.G. H., Auct. Antiq. xi, Chron. Min. ii (1893), p. 159.
6 M. G. H., Scriptores Rerum Langobard. et Ital. saec. vi-ix (1878), p. 303.
THE HOUSE OF SANUDO 5
Agnellus. There was, as will be seen, a bridge which would answer both descriptions.
In a speech which Agnellus1 puts into the mouth of Duke George of Ravenna, about 709, we find a reference to a portus Candiani expressed as follows : ' Coloni decumani speculentur iuxta portus Candiani' The same portus is mentioned again in a document of the year Q67,2 where the Emperor Otto I grants the monastery of Saint Severus at Classe the right of pasture and fishing over the island in the emperor's demesne between the river Padarenus and the ' Candiani portus \ A spurious docu- ment belonging to the end of the thirteenth or beginning of the fourteenth century, but dated 1029,3 professes to confirm this grant. This time the grant is of the island in demesne from the Badalenus to the Candianus with rights of pasturage, fishing, and hunting. It will be observed that instead of the genitive 'Candiani ' we here have the ' Candianus ' itself referred to, apparently in the same sense as the ' portus Candiani ' of Otto I's grant. In a lease of the year 11254 tne abbot of S. Apollinare in Classe grants to the abbot of S. Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna a meadow lying beside the river which is called Candiani, having for its boundaries, (1) the Candiani, (3) the public road which leads ' from the said bridge ',5 (3) a hospice and ditch, (4) another ditch which comes from the Candiani to the ditch of the hospice. Here we seem to have the genitive Candiani employed as the name both of a river and of a bridge. In a document of 12106 the 1 flumen Candianum seu Bidentum ' is mentioned as a river which inundates the island on which stands the church of Santa Maria in Porto Fuori, and in a document of 1223 7 we rea^ °f tne 'flumen Candianum' as forming part of the boundary of this island.
In a map prefixed to Ginanni's Istoria delle Pinete Ravennati (1774) there is shown a large Valle Candiana, beginning about four miles south of Ravenna and one mile south of Classe Fuori, and extending over a distance of four or five miles to the south- west. To the north-east of this is a canal called ' Candiano ', and at the nearest point on the coast, a little south of the mouth of the Fiumi uniti, is a ' Torre del Candiano ', while, in a north-westerly direction from the tower, and roughly parallel to the coast, there is shown a former watercourse, called ' Orma
1 Ibid., p. 370.
2 M.G. H., Diplomatum i, Ottonis I Diplomata (1884), p. 477.
3 M.G. H., Diplomatum iv, Konrad II (1909), p. 398.
4 Regesta Chartarum Italiae, iii (1907), p. 56.
5 No bridge has been mentioned in this document. 'The said bridge' must therefore be the ' pons Candiani '.
6 Bohmer, Acta Imperii Selecta (1870), p. 221.
7 Muratori, Antiquitates Italicae, ii (1739), 67 A.
6 THE HOUSE OF SANUDO
del Candianaccio '. An even more valuable map is that affixed to Giuliano Berti's article Antichi Porti militare e commerciale in the Giornale del Genio Civile, 1879.1 From this it would appear that the Ronco and the Montone anciently discharged into a large lagoon which had its outlet in a river or canal called the Candianus, flowing into the Portus Caesaris of Classe. An ancient lighthouse is marked on the south side of the harbour mouth, and a tower on the site of the modern church of Santa Maria in Porto at the north side of the harbour mouth,2 while 'Prata Candiana' extend on each side of the Candianus between the Pinetum and the sea. A marble bridge is shown where the Via Caesarea superior crosses the Candia- nus a little to the south-east of the church of S. Apollinare in Classe. This map seems clearly to explain the nomenclature of the writers and documents cited above, and makes it clear that the name Candianus was well imprinted on the local topography. The custodian of the National Museum at Ravenna informs me that till twenty-six years ago there was on the east wall of Ravenna to the south of the present railway station a gate called the Porta del Candiano, and I have myself noticed that the street leading east from this gate is still called the Via al Candiano.
Nothing is more striking in this nomenclature than the per- sistent use of the genitive ' Candidiani ', ' Candiani ', or ' del Candiano', for the bridge, plain, harbour, tower, and gate, and in the earliest document in which the river is named, for the river as well. It would, therefore, appear that Candidianus was originally a personal name, perhaps of an official under whom the canal was cut, and, as will be seen later, Candidianus is a name of not infrequent occurrence in the neighbourhood. Hodgkin3 expressed the opinion that the bridge was named after Candidianus, the famous general of Galla Placidia, but the passage quoted from Jordanes suggests that both the bridge and the name were of earlier date.
In addition to the district indicated above there are at least two other neighbourhoods in Italy where the name Candiana or Candiano is found. In a papyrus fragment preserved in the Vatican, ascribed to the sixth century and supposed to be part of a register of coloni living in Paduan territory and paying dues to the Archbishop of Ravenna, mention is made of a ' colonia Candidiana '.
1 The most important part of this map is reproduced in the present work.
2 I find in Headlam's Venetia and Northern Italy (1908), pp. 209, 210, the statement that part of the campanile of this church was once the lighthouse of the Roman harbour.
3 Italy and her Invaders, i (1892), p. 831 T.
THE HOUSE OF SANUDO 7
This document has been published by Doni,1 by Marini,2 and by Gloria.3 Of these three editions Marini's appears to be the most accurate. The column in which the reference occurs is entitled ' Terr. Patavino ', and among other similar entries occurs * col. Candidiana que iacet in sentib. per Reparatum et Justinum Col.' This line is, however, crossed out, and at the foot of the column there is added in another hand 'col. Candidiana qui nuper ordenata est ut post quinquennio possit aliquid praestare item e .. .'. Apparently the particular colonia had received a tem- porary remission of its dues. Brunacci 4 held that the title was erroneously supplied by a later hand and that the places named were really in the territory of Ravenna. It would be interesting to know the reasons which induced Brunacci to adopt this view, which accords well with the identifications suggested above. Gori, the editor of Doni's work, suggests the identification of the l col. Candidiana ' with Candiana, a few miles south of Piove in the territory of Padua, which appears to be next mentioned in 1097, when a monastery of St. Michael was founded there.5 This identification is regarded as possible by Marini and Gloria. If this is the place referred to in the document quoted above, it is not unlikely that it took its name from the Ravennate family of Candidianus, who may have presented it to their archbishop. Candiana is situated on the ancient Via Popillia, which connected Padua with Adria.G
The third quarter in which we may look for a name resem- bling Candiano is in the Marches, where on the Flaminian road between Cagli and Scheggia there stands a village called Cantiano. Mittarelli7 quotes Ferrarius for the statement that this place was more properly called Candianum. It is the same as the ancient Luceoli, and was the scene of the slaughter of the exarch Eleutherius in 619.8 Saint Peter Damian in his life of Saint Romuald 9 mentions in this neighbourhood a river Candilianus, for which his commentator supplies the alternative names, Can-
1 Inscript. antiquae (1731), pp. 492-5.
2 Papiri diplomatic! (1805), N. cxxxvii, pp. 203, 204, 369-72.
3 Deputazione Veneta di Storia Patria, ia serie, Documenti ii, Codice Diplomatico Padovano (1877), pp. 1, 2.
4 Storia Eccles. di Padova, MS. (in the Museo Civico, Padua), p. 34, cited by Gloria.
5 Deputazione Veneta di Storia Patria, ia serie, Documenti ii, Codice Diplomatico Padovano, pp. 344, 348, 349.
6 See Pinton in Bollettino della Societa Geografica Italiana, Serie 3, vol. 7 (1894), p. 896.
7 Annales Camaldulenses Ordinis S. Benedicti, i (1755), p. 198.
8 Liber Pontificalis, M. G. H., Gestorum Pontificum Romanorum, i (1898), p. 168 ; and Consularia Italica, M. G. H., Auct. Antiq., vol. ix, Chronica Minora, i (1892), p. 339.
9 xliii ; Migne, Patrologia Latina, cxiiv (1853), 991.
8 THE HOUSE OF SANUDO
dianus, Cantius, and Cantianus. But I know of no evidence to connect this neighbourhood with the family name of Candiano. In any case the passage quoted from the Altino Chronicle, which teaches us to look in the neighbourhood of Rimini for the ' nacio Candiana ', agrees best with the first of the three districts in which the name is found.
Candidianus is not infrequently found as a personal name in the fourth and fifth centuries. At all events I have succeeded in tracing five persons bearing the name, of earlier date than the patriarch of Grado, and one who bore the feminine form of it, Candiana. There was the natural son of the Emperor Galerius. executed by Licinius in 313, and there was a Christian lady who died in 339, and whose sepulchral inscription is, or was, to be seen in the pavement of the church of S. Apollinare at Rome.1
There is also the Presbyter Candidianus who carried letters between Paulinus and Victricius in 404 2 and between Paulinus and Augustine in 42 i.3 None of these can be associated with the neighbourhood of Ravenna, but the case is otherwise with the distinguished general whose career lies in the time when Ravenna was the Roman capital. He is recorded to have brought about the marriage between Ataulf and Galla Placidia in 414, and to have assisted in placing Valentinian III on the throne in 424, after which he waged a successful military cam- paign, capturing several cities in North Italy, and finally in 431 presided as Comes Domesticorum at the Council of Ephesus, where he vainly exerted his influence on the side of Nestorius. There is also a Candidianus, a native of Caesena, resident at Ravenna, to whom Sidonius Apollinaris addresses a letter* about 467-9. Another Candidianus, mentioned on one of the Vatican papyri,5 belonging to the year 539 or 546, is described as VL or ' Vir laudabilis ', and must therefore have been a 1 curialis ' or ' decurio ' of Ravenna, to which the document belongs. It would, therefore, appear that the family occupied a position of importance at Ravenna for several generations. Whether the Patriarch Candidianus was related to any of his three last-mentioned namesakes it is impossible to say, but there can be no doubt about the origin of the name. It is, perhaps,
1 Rossi, Inscriptiones Christianae Romae, i (1857), p. 44.
2 Paulinus, Epistola yj in Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, xxix(i894), p. 317.
3 Augustine, De Cura pro Mortuis Gerenda, xviii. 23, in Migne, P. L. xl (1861), 610.
4 C. Sollius Apollinaris Sidonius, i. 8, ed. P. Mohr (1895), p. 18.
6 Pap. Lat. 14. See H. Marucchi, Bibl. Vaticana, Monumenta Papyracea Latina (1895), pp. 17, 18, and Marini, Papiri Diplomatici, pp. 172-4, 329- 36.
THE HOUSE OF SANUDO 9
a little strange that the Chronicle of Altino should use the phrase ' proximus Rimani ', when the places named after Candi- dianus were really much nearer to the more important city of Ravenna, but it will be noticed that one at least of the early Candidiani was a native of Caesena, which lies nearer to Rimini than to Ravenna, and it is possible that the description 'proximus Rimani ' may refer to the neighbourhood of Caesena. It is probable that the Candidianus who afterwards became patriarch had been brought to Grado by the Patriarch Severus,who came from Ravenna.
The second reference1 made by the Chronicle of Altino to the origin of the Candiani is a little peculiar. Johannes Candianus, Bishop of Olivolo, ought, according to the chronology given in the chronicle, to have occupied this see from 86a to 86j. His name is, however, absent from all the lists of bishops given by John the Deacon and Andrea Dandolo, and it is therefore doubtful whether such a bishop existed. But the reference to his origin is at least evidence of an early tradition about the home of the Candiani, and has a value of its own apart from the question of the bishop's existence. The ' Candiana pars', to which reference is here made, is perhaps the same as the 'nacio Candiana' near Rimini, but it is also possible that it refers to a later home of the family.
On this some light may be thrown by the third reference l quoted from the Chronicle of Altino, which distinctly recognizes either Heraclea or Jesolo as the place from which the Candiani had migrated to Rialto ; in another list 2 in the same chronicle, the Candiani are distinctly stated to have migrated from Heraclea. But the list in which the third reference occurs derives the different Venetian families,not from other Venetian islands from which they may have migrated to Rialto, but from places on the mainland, in which they are supposed to have dwelt before their original migration to the Venetian islands. Thus the Particiaci, who stand first in the list, are described as coming from Pavia, the Mazoyli from Este, and the Barbolani from Parma. We may, therefore, assert with confidence that the ' Candiana pars ', from which the Candiani are here described as coming, is to be found, like the ' nacio Candiana ', in the neighbourhood of Rimini, and not in that of Heraclea.
There are, however, a number of later chronicles in which Candiana appears as the original name of Heraclea, which, as has just been seen, was the home of the Candiani before they settled in Rialto. This city is now commonly identified with a place a little to the north of the modern course of the Piave.
2 P. 35-
io THE HOUSE OF SANUDO
seven kilometres from the village of Ceggia, and a like distance from Grisolera.1
The earliest chronicle in which this city is given the name Candiana appears to be one ending in the year 1428, represented by the Marcian manuscript It. vii. 798, which is catalogued as belonging to the fourteenth century. Here2 we read that the first settlers in the lagoons founded Cavorle (Caorle), and ' unaltra cita che se chiama Candiana, emo se chiama Cita Nuoua \ The same chronicle tells the story of King Janus of Padua and also of the three tribunes, Alberto Falier, Tornado Candian, and Zan Duodo, sent from Padua to found Rialto in the year 421. It is not improbable that the statement about the name Candiana is derived from the current statements about the origin of the family of Candiano, which, as has been seen, is frequently derived, first in the Chronicle of Altino, originally from Candiana nacio or pars,and sub- sequently from Civitas Nova. The reference to Tornado Candian shows that the author of this story used sources which glorified the family of Candiano. It is interesting to observe that one of the oldest of the numerous treatises, entitled 'Origine delle famiglie nobili venete ', found in the fifteenth-century Marcian manuscript, It. vii. 954, derives the Candiani from Janus, King of Padua, which, according to it, was formerly called Chandian.3 Molmenti 4 asserts, I know not on what authority, that the Candiani were of Lombard origin. This view conflicts with that stated above, and is certainly not borne out by the Christian names in use in the family.
Of the history of the Candiani at Heraclea we know nothing for certain beyond the chronicler's statement that they were tribunes,5 and that they gave the name of 'lido de Candiano'
1 Kretschmayr, Geschichte von Venedig, i (1905), p. 31 ; Molmenti, Venice, The Middle Ages (1906), Part I (English Translation), p. n ; both these writers appear to be following Filiasi, Memorie de' Veneti, iii (181 1), pp. 62-9. The spot is marked Cittk nuova on the 1 : 200,000 map of Italy, to. 13 (Venezia). Gfrbrer in Archivio Veneto, xii (1876), p. 25, identifies Heraclea with Cortellazzo, apparently because John the Deacon, Fonti per la storia d' Italia, Cronache veneziane, ed. G. Monticolo (i [1890], p. 64), names it between Caorle and Jesolo. Signor Monticolo (loc. cit.) identifies Heraclea with Melidissa, which I have not been able to find on any modern map.
2 p. 109 infra.
3 ' Sanudi che prima era chiamadi Chandiani questi desexe de Janus re de Pattauia ditta Chandian per la qual desexa fono chiamatti Chandian.'
4 p. 21.
5 There is a statement made by several chroniclers, which I have not found in any earlier than the chronicle ending in 1475, preserved in a sixteenth-century MS. (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 51), that Ortodoxio Ipato, Piero Candiam, and Michiel Partizipazio were sent on an embassy to Pope John IV (640-2) in order to obtain his authority for the election of a doge. This is of course a mere fiction.
THE HOUSE OF SANUDO u
to one or more of the lidi belonging to the city.1 One person of the name meets us during this period, a lady called Candiana, widow of a certain Felix, and mother-in-law of a certain Eraclius, who in the year 726 sold a piece of land at Treviso to a certain Agrestius.2 Whether this lady belonged to the family of Candiano at Heraclea it is impossible to say.
From the first days when Rialto became the seat of govern- ment, the name Candiano occurs constantly. If we reject the Altino Chronicle's Bishop Giovanni of Olivolo, the earliest notice of the family after its settlement at Rialto would appear to be in 864, in which year, according to John the Deacon,3 who is fol- lowed by Andrea Dandolo, a band of conspirators, including Pietro, the son of Stefano Candiano, set upon and killed the doge Pietro Tradonico, in consequence of which Pietro was banished to Constantinople, and Stefano to France. It is necessary to observe, however, that the Chronicle of Altino, which sympathizes with the conspirators, places this event at a much later date, and does not mention the name Candiano, though it includes a certain Petrus, the son-in-law of Dimitrio Kalebrisino. The account in this latter chronicle seems, however, to be due to a confusion between two bishops of Olivolo, both called Domenico, and it cannot be regarded as of sufficient weight to require us to set aside the accepted story.4 Twenty-three years later, in 887, a certain Pietro Candiano, probably not the conspirator, was doge for five months. Four other members of the family filled that office, Pietro II (932-9), Pietro III (943-59), Pietro IV (959-76), and Vitale (978-9).
1 Filiasi, iii. 74. Filiasi quotes the Marcian MS. Amadeo Svajer 1618 for the statement : ' Edificarono una cittk dita Eracliana appo i lidi di Candiano, sul lido Ermelo appo Realiana cittk,' &c. In a late manuscript, Codex Marc. It. vii. 91, p. 109 infra, we find the following account of the foundation of Heraclea: ' Similmente quelli della citta di Treuiso ditta Amorosa, della qual erra conte uno nominato Marcello, insieme con quelli di Ciuidal, di Belum, et di Ceneda, abandonorno tutti i sui luochi et uenero alii lidi ditti Cundinea, et li edificorno una citta, et la nominorno Erachliana per honore di Heracleo imperator ditta dopoi Citta Nuoua.' A similar statement occurs on fo. 459 b of the same manuscript, where, however, the name is written 'Candinea', not 'Cundinea'. The same manuscript (fo. 106 a) states that some say that the Sanudi, formerly called Candiani, came from Ravenna. The manuscript, whether right or wrong, is of no value for matters of ancient history, but it is evidence for the existence of the name Candinea as applied to the lidi where Heraclea stood.
2 The deed is printed at full length with annotations by Troya, op. cit. parte iii, Codice Diplomatico Longobardo (1853), pp. 425-9.
3 pp. 117, 118.
4 Cf. Simonsfeld in Archivio Veneto, xiv (1877), pp. 109, 110. Andrea Dandolo seems to refer elsewhere to the story in the Chronicle of Altino. SeeR.I.S. xii. 198.
12 THE HOUSE OF SANUDO
To write the history of the family during this period would be to write the history of Venice. It is sufficient for the present purpose to remark that the family was not merely the most considerable in Venice during this period, but also owned vast possessions on the mainland.1
It is to be regretted that no early genealogy of the families of Candiano and Sanudo exists- The earliest detailed pedigree known to me is to be found in the younger Giacomo Zabarella's Tito Livio Padovano (Padua, 1669), on which the genealogy in Capellari's Campidoglio Veneto 2 is based. The earlier part of Zabarella's work is clearly fabulous. It derives the family from the Janus of ancient mythology, whom it identifies with Noah, and traces the line through Mezentius, Lucio {sic) Porsenna, M. Livius Salinator, and Livy the historian. Livy's wife is said to have been called Cassia, from whom his descendants are called Cassiani, corrupted into Candiani ; among these appears Tomaso Candiano, said to be one of the three original consuls of Rivus Altus in 42 1.3 The name ' Sanuto ' is said to have been first assumed by Pietro Candiano, son of Pietro II, and grandson of Pietro I. Two explanations are given of the change of name. One derives it simply from the sanity of this doge. The other asserts that his name was properly Canuto (gray-haired), and that it was changed to Sanuto because of his wisdom.4 Five generations later than Pietro III, or four later than Pietro IV, we come to Marco Sanudo, who is said to have flourished under the doges Domenico Contarini (1043-71), Domenico Selvo (1071-85),
1 Filiasi, vi. 131, who quotes Epist. Dorasii de fam. Candiana, Venetiis, anno 1760. A grant on the mainland by Otto I to Vitale Candiano in 963 is to be found in Ottonis I Diplomata, pp. 366, 367. Another grant by the same emperor to the same person in 972 will be found in the same collection, p. 554. These grants are confirmed to his son Domenico by Otto III in a document, dated 998, printed in M.G. H., Diplomatum ii, Otto III (1893), pp. 718, 719-
2 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 15.
3 It should be noted that this name does not appear among the three consuls in Andrea Dandolo, 69. Tomaso Candiano is first mentioned in a chronicle, terminating in 1360, preserved in a fourteenth-century Marcian manuscript (It. vii. 2,7)- This chronicle states (fo. 1 a) that on the occasion of Alaric's invasion in 413 (a few lines higher on the same page the foundation of Venice is dated March 21, 421) in the consulship of Galdano Fontana, Simon di Glanchoni, and Antonio Corluo (a slight distortion of the names given by Andrea Dandolo) at Padua, Albertto Falier and Ttomaxo Candian were appointed consuls for two years to build the city of Venice. See p. 109 infra.
4 Although the change of name from Candiano to Sanudo is a common- place of the chronicles from the fourteenth century downwards, I have not found any writer before Zabarella who either associates the change with a particular person or offers any explanation of it.
THE HOUSE OF SANUDO 13
and Vitale Falier (1085-96). He is said to have been counsellor and captain, and also to have been ambassador at Constantinople, where he obtained from the emperor the recog- nition of the Venetian authority in Dalmatia and Croatia ; he is also said to have formed many friendships in Greece, par- ticularly in the Archipelago. The embassy here mentioned must be that which obtained the recognition of the Venetian claim to Dalmatia and Croatia in the year 1084 or 1085. This embassy is recorded by Andrea Dandolo,1 who gives the names of the ambassadors, but makes no mention of Marco Sanudo. Marco, according to Zabarella, had a son Pietro. of whom nothing is recorded in his text except that he married a sister of the doge Enrico Dandolo and thus increased his greatness in the highest degree ; and that by her he became the father of three sons, Marco, the conqueror of the Archipelago, Bernardo, and Lunardo. In the genealogical table at the end of his work, Zabarella affixes to the name of Pietro the words ' Cau. Grande 1160', implying that he appears as a knight in that year. Bernardo is said by Zabarella to have been, while still a young man (giovinetto), one of the electors of the doge Enrico Dandolo in 1 192, and this statement is confirmed by the list preserved in Andrea Dandolo.2 Lunardo, according to Zabarella, was 1 Capitan delle Navi ' to Enrico Dandolo at the capture of Con- stantinople. He also appears among the officers of the Venetian navy at Abydos in 1196,3 but the Venetian chronicles name Bernardo and not Lunardo among the captains of galleys in the Fourth Crusade.4 There can be no doubt that Marco Sanudo, the ambassador at Constantinople, who appears in Zabarella as grandfather of the conqueror of the Archipelago, is the same as the Marco Sanudo Costantinopolitani, who, as has been seen above, is mentioned by Marino Sanudo Torsello as the father of the conqueror. Hopf 5 asserts that Marco Sanudo belonged to the Venetian colony at Constantinople, but has, apparently, no evidence for this statement except the surname of the con- queror's father, and the supposed fact that the conquering
1 250. 2 333.
3 Tafel and Thomas in Osterreichische Geschichtsquellen, 2te Abth., Dipl. et Acta, xii (1856), p. 218.
4 The lists of ' sopracomiti delle galie ' and of ' patroni delle navi ' in the Fourth Crusade are given in several manuscript chronicles, and are presumably extracted from official records. The names of the sopracomiti may be seen in Ramnusius, De Bello Costantin. (1634), pp. s^t 39- Bernardo Sanudo appears among the sopracomiti, but Lunardo Sanudo does not appear at all. The oldest of these chronicles is apparently one in which 1469 is referred to as the present time, Cod. Marc. It. vii. 53, ff. 136 b, 137 a.
5 Ersch and Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopadie, lxxxv, Griechenland (1867), p. 222.
i4 THE HOUSE OF SANUDO
expedition started from Constantinople. But Zabarella is prob- ably correct in regarding the residence of the elder Marco at Con- stantinople as merely temporary, and the positions of trust held by the conqueror and his brothers are evidence that the family must have been in closer touch with the home government than any member of the colony at Constantinople could possibly have been. It must be remembered that the electors of doges and the sopracomiti of Venetian galleys were chosen at Venice,1 and would naturally be selected from among men present in that city. The office of giudice del comune which Marco Sanudo filled at Constantinople in 1205 was, as will be shown later,2 a magistracy of the mother city, not of the colony. The reasons why the expedition started from Constantinople will be explained hereafter.3
But whether the conqueror was the son or the grandson of Marco Sanudo Costantinopolitani there can be no doubt about the identity of his mother. Zabarella's statement that she was the sister of the doge Enrico Dandolo is confirmed by the chronicle ending in 1360,4 which is here identical with the chronicle of Enrico Dandolo used by Hopf.5
The date of Marco Sanudo's birth is uncertain. Sauger, the Jesuit historian of the Dukes of Naxos,6 who is, unfortunately, far from accurate in his dates, asserts that he was sixty-seven at the time of his death, which he places in 1220, but which we shall see reason for placing not earlier than 1229. The earliest recorded event in his life is in 1177, when it is stated that he commanded a galley in the fleet of thirty galleys under Sebastiano Ziani, which is said to have defeated and captured Otto, son of Frederick Barbarossa, who was in command of a fleet of seventy- five galleys. This expedition is unknown to contemporary writers, and cannot be fitted into the history of the time. It is first mentioned in the fourteenth-century chronicle of Andrea Dandolo,7 which, however, does not give the names of the com- manders of the separate galleys. These names, including that of Marco Sanudo, were printed by Muratori 8 from the Ambrosian MS. of Dandolo and by Romanin 9 from the sixteenth-century chronicle of Magno ; they are also to be found in the Marcian MS. chronicle, It. vii. 53, a work which appears to date from 1469,10 in a chronicle, ending in 1475, preserved in a sixteenth-
1 For the election of sopracomiti, see Molmenti, p. 134.
2 p. 46s infra. 3 See pp. 41, 42, 55, 56 infra.
4 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 37, p. 1 10 infra.
5 See Cod. Marc. It. vii. 102, fo. 45 a.
6 Histoire nouvelle des anciens Dues de l'Archipel (1688, 1699), p. 122 infra.
7 302, 303. 8 Ibid.
9 Storia di Venezia, ii (1854), p. 1161.
10 This date is referred to as the present. See p. 134 supra.
THE HOUSE OF SANUDO 15
century manuscript,1 and in the sixteenth-century chronicle of Marcantonio Erizzo.2 The expedition is also recorded in an inscription, apparently not contemporary, at Salvore, which is said to have been the site of the battle. The story is rejected by all recent historians except Romanin, who holds that the battle was real, but was exaggerated and misdated (1177 instead of 1 1 76) by the Venetian chroniclers. It is easier to believe that it is fictitious, in which case there is nothing known of Marco Sanudo before the Fourth Crusade. According to the chronicle ending in 1360,3 he was present with his uncle at the capture of Zara and Constantinople, where he performed marvellous deeds, of which no details are given. His name does not appear in the lists of sopracomiti delle galie or patroni delle navi that took part in the crusade/ nor is he mentioned in any extant history of the crusade. It will be remembered that Bernardo Sanudo, probably the conqueror's brother, was in command of a galley on this occasion, while two other Sanudi, Zaccaria and Rodolfo, were in command of smaller vessels. Marco himself probably accom- panied his uncle, instead of commanding a ship of his own.
1 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 51. 2 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 56.
3 p. no infra. 4 See p. 134 supra.
CHAPTER II VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE
It does not fall within the scope of the present work to deal at length either with the causes or with the events of the Fourth Crusade, and they will only be noticed in so far as they have a bearing on the policy adopted by Venice after the capture of Constantinople.
There had long been a keen rivalry between Venice, Pisa, and Genoa for commercial supremacy at Constantinople and in the eastern empire. Venice had hitherto enjoyed the largest share of imperial favour, but the privileges of Pisa and Genoa had been growing steadily, and the sailors of these cities, not con- tent with peaceful competition, had freely indulged in acts of piracy which must have been only less galling to the Venetians than to the Greeks themselves.1 The Genoese pirates, who were more active than the Pisan, appear to have displayed a more than ordinary daring in the year 1199, m which they are said to have occupied several ports in the Levant, and had thus in a measure set a precedent for the conquests made by the Vene- tians in the Fourth Crusade. In the previous year the Genoese pirate GafTorio, the boldest and most successful that the republic had yet produced, had been surprised and captured by the imperial navy. According to the Marquis Serra,2 who appears to have had access to some Genoese sources still unpublished, the Genoese on hearing the news declared their treaty with the Emperor Alexius broken, and dispatched to Crete a fleet of twenty-three galleys which in 1199 captured and garrisoned a port which Serra identifies with Fraschia. The inhabitants, far from well disposed to the Byzantine government, were unable or unwilling to expel them. It is difficult to believe that so large an expedition could have passed unrecorded- in the numerous contemporary chronicles and documents which have been published. The number of ships suggests a confusion with Enrico Pescatore's expedition of 1206, which, according to
1 For the relations between the Italian cities and Constantinople under the Comneni and Angeli, see Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant, i (1885), pp. 190-264, and Schaube, Handelsgeschichte der romanischen Volker des Mittelmeergebiets bis zum Ende der Kreuzziige (1906), pp. 223-60. I have treated the subject with special reference to piracy in my paper, Genoa and the Fourth Crusade, English Historical Review, xxv (1910), pp. 26-32, the latter part of which is partly incorporated in the present work.
2 Storia dell' antica Liguria (1835), i. 434.
VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE 17
Nicetas,1 was composed of five round ships and twenty-four triremes (a-Kacpr] rpLKpora). That Fraschia should have been seized in 1199 is probable enough. The capture of a single port is a very different matter from the conquest of an island, and we cannot therefore suppose that the authority used by Serra has simply transferred the conquest to too early a date ; but the conquest can hardly have been made by the public forces of the city, or it would have been mentioned in the preamble to the next treaty between Genoa and the empire, in which there is no suggestion that there has been open war between the two states. It is more likely to have been a private venture. Hopf asserts2 that there had long been a Genoese colony in Crete under four rectors or consuls, a statement for which he quotes no authority, but which might conceivably be traced to its source by a reference to his manuscript papers at Berlin.3
Another adventure of the year 11 99 introduces us for the first time to another famous Genoese corsair. In that year, according to the Marquis Serra,4 the pirate Leone Vetrano with four galleys attacked Corfu. This island had been conquered in 1 1 85 by the Norman king, William II of Sicily, from whom it had been held as a fief by the sea-robber Margaritone of Brindisi,5 and had barely been restored to the Eastern empire, when its possession was thus again disputed. Leone Vetrano, according to Serra, captured and garrisoned a castle near Cape
1 Nicetas, Bonn ed., p. 843 ; Migne, col. 1029 ; Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, torn, i, p. 495.
2 p. 221.
3 I have failed to find it there. Not one of the Cretan histories has yet been published, though there are extant two histories of some size covering this period— Antonio Calergi's and Andrea Cornaro's. This is the more remark- able considering the elaborate care with which both the prehistoric and Venetian remains on the island are being described. Hopf had studied both the histories to which I have referred, but he makes several categorical state- ments in this part of his work which are not borne out by his authorities where these can be traced. I find that there is no mention of such a colony in Calergi, but have not had an opportunity of examining Cornaro on the subject. Two fifteenth-century chronicles, Cod. Marc. It. vii. 2034 and the Chronicle of Bernardino Caballino (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 48), together with the sixteenth-century Chronicle of Marino Sanudo (R. I. S., xxii. 544), are cited by Cav. Gerola (Monumenti Veneti in Creta, i [1905], pp. 93, 94) for the statement that Temenos, an inland castle, fifteen miles south of Fraschia, was occupied by Enrico Pescatore (in 1206) but had been built previously. Cav. Gerola understands this to mean that it had been a stronghold of Genoese pirates before Pescatore. I have not seen the two MS. chronicles, but the words which he quotes from Sanudo do not convey this impression.
4 i- 434, 435-
5 Hopf, p. 181, erroneously inclines to regard Margaritone as a Genoese. See Desimoni, Giornale Ligustico di Archeologia, iii (1876), pp. 226, 227.
18 VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE
Polacro, on the west side of the island of Corfu, perhaps on the site of the later castle of Sant' Angelo, which according to tradition was built in 1214 by Michael Angelus, Despot of Epirus, as a protection against Genoese pirates.1 From Corfu he passed on to the Peloponnese, where he captured the two Messenian ports of Methone and Corone. Methone had long been famous as a nest of pirates and had suffered destruction for this reason at the hands of King Roger of Sicily.2 Mr. Miller3 asserts that Vetrano made himself master of the island of Corfu, but this seems to go beyond what our authorities warrant.
In March of the same year we have a letter from the Emperor Alexius III 4 to the Genoese podesta, in which allusion is made to the destruction of Gafforio, and the desire expressed by the Genoese government for a renewal of free intercourse with the empire. The emperor expresses his willingness to treat, but informs the Genoese that pirates from their city are still cruising in his dominions, and doing no little damage under pretext of their war with Pisa ; he warns the republic that for any steps he may take against the pirates the empire is not to be held responsible, but the pirates themselves. If Miklosich and Miiller5 are right in attributing to the year 1301 a safe-conduct, dated April of the fourth indiction, we find Alexius attempting a less bold method of dealing with the pirates than that suggested at the conclusion of the previous letter. The safe-conduct in question is granted to the Genoese Guglielmo Cavallario, with authority to hire the crews of the Genoese corsairs to enter the imperial service.6 How far this attempt was successful we have
1 W. Miller, The Latins in the Levant (1908), p. 80.
2 Gesta Henrici II et Ricardi I, ii. 199. Hopf, p. 213, and Miller, p. 24, assert that it was destroyed by the doge Domenico Michieli in 1125, apparently basing this statement on a passage in the Chronicle of the Morea (ed. Schmitt, 1904), 1692-4, which, however, probably refers to its destruc- tion by the great Venetian armament of the year 1206. A reference to a forcible capture of Methone by the Marquis Boniface of Montferrat has been found in an obscure passage in Raimbaud de Vaqueiras. See Savj- Lopez in Bausteine zur Romanischen Philologie, Festgabe fur A. Mussafia (1905), pp. 188, 189. But the reading in Raimbaud is very doubtful, and the only historian that mentions Methone on the outward journey is the Anonymus Halberstadensis (Riant, Exuviae Sacrae [1877], i- 15), who says nothing of the capture of the city. 8 Op. cit., p. 2.
4 Sanguineti and Bertolotto, Nuova serie di documenti sulle relazioni di Genova coll' impero Bizantino, Atti della Societa ligure, xxviii (1897), pp. 464, 465.
6 Acta et Dipl. Gr. Medii Aevi, iii (1865), pp. 48, 49.
6 The best text of this document is given with a facsimile by Bertolotto, Atti della Societa ligure, xxviii (1897), pp: 467, 468, who shows that KafiaWapicp, not KaKaWdpco, is the correct reading. Bertolotto proposes in his article, Un genovese a Bisanzio, Guglielmo Cacallaro oppure Cavaliere ? Giornale ligustico di Archeologia, &c, xxii (1897), pp. 352, 353, to translate
VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE 19
no means of knowing.1 In the year 1204 we shall find Genoese established in the castle of Apalire in Naxos, but we do not know how long they had occupied it, nor do we know whether they were nominally in the imperial service or not.
A survey of the record of Levantine piracy, in which the Genoese easily took the first place and the Pisans the second, might lead to the expectation that the emperor would have felt a preference for the Venetians over the other great maritime cities. But with Alexius III, who occupied the Byzantine throne from 1195, the reverse was the case. The peaceful supremacy of Venice in the commerce of his dominions was intensely distasteful to this emperor. He could hardly be ex- pected to make Genoa his prime favourite, but he encouraged the rivalry of Pisa,2 and according to Nicetas he even stirred up war between Pisa and Venice.3 The treaty rights of Venice were often ignored, while those of Pisa and Genoa were extended. The Emperor Isaac's treaty with Venice was not renewed till 1 198. The Pisans received a renewal of their privileges in 1198 or 1 199, along with a special decree guaranteeing their position at Thessalonica and Halmyros, and on October 13, 1201, a com- plete reconciliation was effected between the emperor and the Genoese, whose privileges were renewed, and whose quarter in Constantinople was increased.4
Ka/3a\\apio) by ' knight ', a meaning he clearly proves to be possible. In the Nuova serie di documenti, ubi supra, p. 468, he suggests the alternative of taking Cavallario as a proper name, and this view is supported by Dr. Schaube, p. 255. I incline to this interpretation, which I have adopted in the text, but surnames are not always given in Byzantine documents. Compare NikoXoo? 6 larpos in Sanguineti and Bertolotto, p. 465. In both works Bertolotto questions the date. As only the month and the indiction are given, it seems difficult to fix the exact year. Cav. Manfroni, Le relazioni fra Genova, rimpero Bizantino e i Turchi, Atti della Societa ligure, xxviii (1898), p. 641, maintains that the condition of piracy to which this document refers exactly fits the reign of Alexius III and that such an act of feebleness could belong to none but him. I fail, however, to see why the document should not just as well belong to the year 1186, in the reign of Isaac II, when piracy was scarcely less rampant and the emperor scarcely less feeble.
1 Appalling descriptions of piracy in the neighbourhood of Attica in the reigns of Andronicus I and Isaac II are to be found in the correspondence of Michael Acominatus (ed. Lampros), ii (1880), pp. 42, 43, 68, 75. Aegina was their principal lair. There is no mention, however, of their nationality, from which we may infer that they were Greek. See also Miller, op. cit., pp. 8, 9.
2 In a Pisan document of 1197 we find that the Pisans had engaged to expel pirates from the empire (Documenti degli Archivi toscani, Documenti sulle relazioni delle citta toscane coll' Oriente cristiano e coi Turchi [1879], p. 72), and in a document of 1199 we find an entry of money spent by the Pisan government for escorting an imperial ship to Chios (ibid., p. 77).
3 Nicetas, Bonn ed., pp. 712, 713 ; Migne,col. 920 ; Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, torn, i, p. 346. 4 For the date, see Heyd, i. 241, 242.
C 3
20 VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE
The Venetians, long accustomed to an unquestioned supremacy in the markets of the empire, looked with jealousy on the growing privileges of their neighbours, and formed a natural longing for some change of government which might restore to them their pristine favour, and might, perhaps, at the same time arrest the growth of piracy. The theory of a deep-laid plot, by which Venice was supposed to have arranged the diversion of the Fourth Crusade in concert either with the Egyptian sultan or with Philip, King of the Romans, may be regarded as extinct.1 But it would have been too much to expect that the doge should have resisted the proposal of the young Alexius Angelus that the crusaders should place him on the throne of Constantinople. The success of the expedition meant that the throne would be occupied by an emperor who owed his position to Venice, and who would be prepared by way of recompense to grant to Venice a decided advantage over the other Italian cities. It is interest- ing to observe that Venice, which had exacted a heavy price from the crusaders, appears to have demanded very little from the young Alexius. On this occasion the leaders of the crusade extorted promises that could never be fulfilled, but the doge was content with demanding compensation to the extent of 30,000 marks for the Venetian property seized by the Emperor Manuel in 1171.2 This demand was strictly analogous to the demands often made, but always in vain, by the Italian republics when opening negotiations with the Eastern empire. There was no word of any denunciation of the treaties which Alexius III had made with Pisa and Genoa. Such a denunciation could not have been claimed without giving a selfish colour to the whole expedition, and would have placed Venice in the wrong in the eyes of the world. The doge trusted to the influence of Venice with her own protege to secure her retention of the lion's share of the commerce of the empire.
To the other Italian cities, the expedition must have appeared to differ from its predecessors in degree rather than in kind. Venice had engaged in war with the empire in the years 1171-5, and the Italian colonies at Constantinople had been wont to take part in dynastic struggles. In 1190 the Pisans had even offered to supply Frederick Barbarossa with ships for the siege of that city. The Pisans and Genoese must have expected
1 For a compendious critical summary of the discussions that have centred round the Fourth Crusade, see Kretschmayr, pp. 480-9.
2 So Andrea Dandolo, 321. If the mark of Cologne was taken as the standard, this sum should be worth about ,£94,000 sterling. See Schaube, p. 813. Hugh of St. Pol, in Tafel and Thomas, xii. 305, states the sum promised at 200,000 marks (about ,£630,000), but this, of course, is merely payment for the expenses of the war. A like sum was promised to the crusaders.
VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE %\
their position there, always very precarious in the case of the Genoese, to be weakened; but they had endured worse troubles than were likely to arise from the accession of the young Alexius. During the assault on Constantinople in July 1203, the Pisans naturally threw in their lot with the Greeks, and defended the emperor who had shown them favour against the pretender sup- ported by their enemies. The restoration of Isaac Angelus was the work of Greeks who had fought for his brother, and the Pisans suffered no punishment for fighting on that brother's side. But the great fire of August 1303 altered the whole situation. The Greeks, as was their wont, refused to discriminate between Latins, and the whole Italian population in consequence, Pisans and Genoese included, found their only safety in the camp of the crusaders. When the usurpation of Murzuphlus and the murder of Alexius IV converted the dynastic struggle into a war of conquest, there was no longer a question of restoring the Pisan and Genoese colonists. As the ally of a lawful emperor restored to his own, Venice had only claimed the full discharge of all just debts, and had not sought to oust others from their rights ; as a partner in conquest, she now looked forward to a different position. The treaties of the Comneni and Angeli would lapse with the destruction of their state ; Venice made a new bargain with the creators of the new empire.
By a treaty concluded in March 1204, in anticipation of the capture of Constantinople, Venice was to receive full payment of the debts owing to her, and half the spoil of the city remaining after all debts were paid both to Venetians and crusaders ; an emperor was to be chosen by twelve electors, six of whom were to represent Venice and six the crusaders ; she was also to have three-eighths of the territory of the empire and three-eighths of the capital city, and was to retain all the privileges that she had possessed in the Greek empire ; moreover, no person belonging to any state that might at any time be at war with Venice was to be permitted to enter the empire until peace should be restored ; finally, the patriarch was to be elected by the Venetian clergy if the emperor was a crusader, by the crusading clergy if the emperor was a Venetian. It was, of course, understood that the emperor would be elected from the crusaders, so that the patriarchate was in effect assigned to the Venetians. The actual distribution of territory was to be the work of a joint commission of Venetians and crusaders.1 The commercial clauses of the treaty are important. The Venetian privileges are no longer dependent on the will of the emperor, but are part of the constitution of the empire, and are secured by an actual terri- torial lordship in Constantinople, and in any ports that may fall 1 See the text of the treaty in Tafel and Thomas, xii. 445-52.
22 VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE
to the Venetian share. The Pisans, as being at war with Venice, are expelled from the empire ; they can only recover their rights by making peace with Venice ; while the Genoese, in the event of a quarrel with Venice, are liable to forfeit any rights that the new rulers may grant them. The trading rights of the other Italian cities are, in fact, made conditional on the goodwill of Venice.
Constantinople was captured on April 13, 1204, and the ques- tion of the election of an emperor presented itself at once. There were only two candidates for the dignity, Baldwin, Count of Flanders, and Boniface, Marquis of Montferrat, leader of the crusade. The choice really lay with Venice, which possessed half the votes in the college of electors, and could therefore turn the scale in favour of either candidate. But before making his selection the doge took steps to secure that the choice should entail no bloodshed, and should not be followed by a disruption of the crusading army. An arrangement was made, to which both candidates assented, that the unsuccessful competitor should be invested with ' all the land beyond the strait towards Turkey, and the isle of Greece [i.e. the Peloponnese].'1 It is nowhere stated that this arrangement was the work of Dandolo, but Dr. Gerland in his valuable monograph on the Latin empire 2 attri- butes it to him, and I have no doubt that he is right in doing so. We have, however, the clear testimony of Robert de Clary 3 that it was at Dandolo's suggestion that the two palaces in Con- stantinople were placed in the keeping of the whole army pending the election.
The election resulted in favour of Count Baldwin of Flanders, and there has been much speculation on the reasons which led the doge to take his side. The favourite theory is that the doge feared that the Latin empire under Boniface might become too powerful, and might oppose Venetian interests, while Baldwin was too weak to resist the influence of Venice. Dr. Gerland,4 who supports this view, has to admit that the doge's foresight for once deserted him. Venice had in fact no interest in the weakness of the empire. Her commercial supremacy gave her the utmost interest in the maintenance of its stability, both against foreign foes and against internal disorders. She had had experience of a weak rule at Constantinople for twenty-four years, and was not likely to prolong such a situation deliberately.
1 Villehardouin, Conquete de Constantinople (1874), p. 152 ; Kretschmayr, p. 314, erroneously substitutes Hellas and Crete for the Peloponnese.
2 Geschichte des Lateinischen Kaiserreiches von Konstantinopel, i (1905),
p. 4.
3 Hopf, Chroniques Greco-Romanes (1873), p. 72.
4 Op. cit., pp. 2, 3.
VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE 23
No man had struggled harder than Dandolo to hold the crusaders together before the conquest was won ; he had also endeavoured to prevent the election of an emperor from resulting in the secession of the defeated party, and he was destined later in the year to take the lead in healing the breach between the two chiefs.1 But though it was important to Venice that the empire should be strong, it was still more important that the empire should support her claims to commercial supremacy or commercial monopoly. Whatever the new emperor, was to be, it was necessary that he should not be a friend of Genoa or Pisa.
This motive seems to be suggested, though with some con- fusion, by Nicetas.2 With him the Piedmontese marquisate of Montferrat and the Ligurian city of Genoa are both, in accordance with Byzantine usage, included in AajjnrapSia.3 Dandolo, he says, reflected that Boniface was sprung from Lombardy, which lies on the sea-coast, and from which it would be easy to invade either the Venetian territories or the Eastern empire. The fear was, in fact, that Boniface might make common cause with the Genoese. This idea was suggested, but not developed, by Sir Edwin Pears,4 and it is easy to see how closely it corresponds with the facts. Both the geographical position of his marquisate and the history of his house inclined Boniface to maintain close relations with the Ligurian city. There were fairly well marked spheres of commercial influence in northern Italy. Venice landed goods at Verona, and sent them northwards by the Adige and Brenner road ; she had no commercial treaty with any city west of Cremona.5 On the other hand, Genoese commerce made its way by the roads north and west of Pavia and Milan, and along
1 Gibbon (ed. Bury, vi [1898], p. 414) rejects, but Sir Rennell Rodd (The Princes of Achaia and the Chronicle of the Morea [1907], i. 62) accepts the idea that Venice feared an increase of Boniface's power in Italy. It is difficult to see how the position of Venice in Italy could have been affected.
2 Bonn ed., p. 789 ; Migne, col. 981 ; Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, torn, i, p. 431.
3 Compare Cinnamus (Migne, Patr. Gr. cxxxiii [1864], col. 320), ex Aiyovpcov itvirtcov, ovs Aofnrdpdovs T]fi1v 6vopd£ovo~iv avOpcoiroi. Ibid., col. 589, Kai to Aiyovpcov c'it ovv Aaprrapbcov irpoiTcoo-aTO edvos. Ibid., col. 656, ou 7ro\v to iv fiecrco Kai Ovevverot Aafinapdois firjviaavTes are yvwfias a7Toppayeio~i rrjs clvtcov €7raveo-T7)o-di> re civtoIs Kai ras oIkici? els <!8a(pos kciOcXovtcs itrl neyicrrois airovs efafiiaxrav. In all these passages Aop.ndpdoi or Aapurdp^ot clearly means Ligurians or Genoese ; on the other hand the full form Aoyyijiapbia is used in Nicetas (Bonn ed., p. 121 ; Migne, col. 428) for Apulia, and Aoyyo&apc'iKcs, Aoyy ifidpboi, appear to have the same sense in Miklosich and M tiller, Acta et Dipl. Gr. iii. 38. Compare Heyd, i, p. 2162.
4 The Fall of Constantinople (1885), p. 368.
5 For a brief account of the Venetian and Genoese spheres of commercial interest, see Kretschmayr, p. 359. A full account of the sphere of Genoa in her Italian hinterland will be found in Schaube, pp. 633-45. For the Venetian sphere, see Schaube, pp. 692-712.
24 VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE
the Po. Montferrat was well within this sphere. Fortune had indeed thrown Boniface into alliance with Venice ; he had taken the command of an army that had already contracted with Venice for transport beyond sea ; but the commerce of his native land was in the hands of Genoa, and he might be expected as emperor to encourage the ambitions of that city.
There were, moreover, more definite personal ties that bound the Montferrat family to Genoa. Conrad of Montferrat had received active support from Genoa in the Holy Land. We read nothing of Venetians in the history of his wars, but we find that in the defence of Tyre he was aided by the Pisans and Genoese, and that in his contest with Guy of Lusignan for the crown of Jerusalem his cause, though opposed by the Pisans, was warmly supported by the Genoese. Boniface himself had in 1 191 prosecuted the marquises of Incisa for seizing the Genoese envoys to France and England, and had been rewarded by Henry VI with the fiefs of the culprits.1 In 11 94 he had accompanied the Genoese on their expedition in support of Henry VI's invasion of the kingdom of Sicily, and had, along with the Seneschal Markvvard and the Genoese podesta, received the surrender of Gaeta.2 In 1202 he had mediated in the fruitless negotiations for peace between Pisa and Genoa.3 His relations with Genoa were certainly not terminated by his union with Venice in the Fourth Crusade. In the summer of 1204, as will be seen later, an attempt was made by Genoa to purchase from him the island of Crete. When in 1205 he wished to send the captive emperor Alexius III with his wife and nephew to Philip, King of the Romans, he entrusted them to the famous Genoese seaman • Enrico di Carmadino, who happened to be at Thessalonica with a galley belonging to the Genoese town of Porto Venere. In this galley they were brought to Genoa, where they were met by Boniface's son Guglielmo, who con- ducted them to Montferrat.4 It was in like manner by the Genoese captains Ogerio and Rubaldo Porco that Boniface's daughter Agnes was brought to Thessalonica in 1206 to become the bride of the Emperor Henry.5 Boniface as the unsuccessful
1 Toeche, Jahrbiicher der deutschen Geschichte, Heinrich VI (1867), p. 169.
2 Otobon in Belgrano, Annali Genovesi di Caffaro e de' suoi continuatori, ii (1901), pp. 46, 47.
3 Ogerio Pane, ibid., ii. 83.
4 Ibid., p. 95. See also Gerland, p. 105.
6 Desimoni, Giornale Ligustico (1876), p. 225 and (1878), p. 244; Ogerio Pane, ubi supra, ii. 104, with Imperiale's note in loc. Desimoni, Giornale Ligustico (1878), p. 2491, suggests that the Pietro Vento mentioned by Hopf, p. 285, belonged to the Genoese family of Vento; but, in this passage, Pietro Vento appears to be a mistake for Pierre de Vaux. Another Pietro
VENICE AND THE FOURTH CRUSADE 25
candidate was now entitled to receive Asia Minor and the Peloponnese, but he negotiated an exchange with the Emperor Baldwin, in virtue of which he was invested with the ' kingdom of Thessalonica ' instead of the land promised him.1
Vento, mentioned by Hopf, pp. 228, 229, the Pieres Vens of Henry of Valenciennes, played a leading part in the kingdom of Thessalonica after Boniface's death, and may well have belonged to the Genoese family.
1 Villehardouin, p. 156. Gerland, op. cit., p. 20; Kretschmayr, p. 317; and Sir Rennell Rodd, i. 64, understand that Macedonia and Thessalonica were given in exchange for Asia Minor alone without the Peloponnese. But Villehardouin's phrase ' cele terre ', coming immediately after a mention of both districts, implies that both were exchanged. Boniface is recorded to have done homage for the kingdom of Thessalonica immediately after the exchange, but no mention is made of homage for the Peloponnese. The Peloponnese is not mentioned in Boniface's treaty with Venice of August 12, and it is included in the act of partition in October, which would not have been the case if it had been already assigned.
CHAPTER III
BONIFACE AND THE TREATY OF ADRIANOPLE
The connexion of the Montferrat family with Thessalonica was not entirely new. According to the Refutatio Cretae,1 the Emperor Manuel had granted a fief to Boniface's father, the Marquis Guglielmo.2 What this fief was is nowhere specified, but, as will be seen later, other lands in or near Thessalonica were granted to Boniface's brother, Raynero, and the fief granted to Guglielmo is named in the Refutatio Cretae immediately before the city of Thessalonica and its appurtenances. It was, therefore, in all probability, situated in the neighbourhood of Thessalonica. The date of the grant to Guglielmo must remain a matter of conjecture. His connexion with the court of Con- stantinople had been long and honourable, and it is possible to name more than one occasion when such a grant would have been appropriate. He had stayed for several months at the Byzantine court in 1148, and we know that he had sent an embassy to Constantinople in 1168 or 1169. In XI79 Guglielmo's famous son, Conrad of Montferrat, took up arms in Manuel's cause in Italy and distinguished himself by the capture of Arch- bishop Christian of Mainz at Camerino. Ilgen 3 suggests that the fief mentioned in the Refutatio may have been part of the price paid by Manuel to secure this alliance. It is more likely
1 Tafel and Thomas, xii. 512-15.
2 Benvenuto Sangiorgio (ed. Vernazza, 1780), p. 47, who is followed by Cav. Gerola (Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto— Anno 1902 — Fascicolo ii, p. 164), reads 'fratri ' for 'patri ' in the Refutatio Cretae. This reading would imply that the grant was made not to Guglielmo, but to Raynero of Montferrat ; there is, however, no reason for questioning the correctness of Tafel and Thomas's text, which is based on official copies in the Venetian archives. This is not the only variant in Benvenuto's text which would affect the meaning of the Refutatio.
3 Markgraf Conrad von Montferrat (1880), p. 61. Ilgen refuses to believe in the grant of a kingdom of Thessalonica to Raynero, whose marriage he places in 11 79, before Conrad's victory at Camerino. It will be shown below that these views are inconsistent with the best contemporary evidence. M. Chalandon, Jean II Comnene et Manuel I Comnene (1912), p. 600, agrees with Ilgen in refusing to believe that Raynero was crowned king of Thessalonica and in placing the grant to Guglielmo before the war of 11 79. He follows William of Tyre in dating Raynero's wedding in February 1180.
BONIFACE AND TREATY OF ADRIANOPLE 27
that it was one of the rewards of victory, given in the following year, when Guglielmo's youngest son, Raynero, received the hand of the emperor's daughter, the title of Caesar, and ' the honour of the Thessalonians '.
The grant made to Raynero is attested by two contemporary chronicles, both older than the Fourth Crusade, and, therefore, presumably independent of the claim advanced by Boniface. The older of these is by Robert of Torigni,1 who died in 1186, and who appears to have written this part of his chronicle in 1182. Under the year 11792 he states that Manuel gave his daughter by his first wife to Raynero, son of Guglielmo, Prince of Montferrat, and that, on the lady declaring that she would marry none but a king, the emperor caused himself and his second wife, his son, afterwards Alexius II, and his wife, who was the daughter of the French king, as also Raynero and his wife, to be crowned, and gave Raynero the honour of the Thessa- lonians, ' which is the greatest power of his realm after the city of Constantinople.' On this passage Delisle3 remarks that Robert of Torigni must have mistaken for a coronation the betrothal ceremony of Alexius and Agnes of France on March 2, 1 180. But that something of the nature of a coronation must have taken place is proved by Nicetas, who gives Raynero the title of Caesar, though he makes no mention of a fief or other dowry,4 and by William of Tyre,5 who gives a full account of both unions, dating Raynero's marriage in February 1180.6 According to William the bridegroom was on this occasion given the name Joannes and the title of Caesar. He also states that Alexius and Agnes received the imperial insignia at their betrothal. As William of Tyre was present at Constantinople at the time, his evidence ought to be conclusive.
1 Chronicles of Stephen, Henry II, and Richard I (Rolls series), iv (1889), p. 285.
2 The dates in the latter years of Robert of Torigni's chronicle were misplaced in the earlier printed editions of the chronicle and widespread error has resulted as to the date of Raynero's wedding, which Hopf (p. 159) dates in 1178, and which Ilgen, as has been seen, erroneously places before Conrad's victory at Camerino.
3 Societe de i'Histoire de Normandie, Chronique de Robert de Torigni, ii (1873), P. 87.
4 Nicetas, ed. Bekker, p. 300; Migne, col. 581 ; et alibi.
5 xxii. 4, in Migne, Patrologia Latina, cci (1855), col. 850.
6 The date 1 180 is to be found not only in William of Tyre, but in Codinus (Migne, P. G. clvii (1866), col. 646), who gives the exact date of the wedding of the young Alexius as Indiction 13, the year 6688, Sunday, March 2, and in Galeottodel Carretto(Monumenta Historiae Patriae, Scriptores, iii [1848], 1 106), who gives March 2, 1180, as the date of Raynero's coronation. Codinus and Galeotto are almost certainly independent of each other, the one drawing from Greek, the other from Italian sources.
28 BONIFACE AND THE
The other contemporary authority who mentions the grant of Thessalonica is Sicardo of Cremona, who states1 that Raynero ' received the promised princess along with the crown of Salonica. But after enjoying the royal crown for a brief time, both departed from this world.'
The combined weight of this evidence seems to establish the fact that Raynero was granted the title of Caesar, along with some possession in or near Thessalonica to which Robert of Torigni gives the name of the 'honour of the Thessalonians ' and to which Sicardo refers in the phrase ' crown of Salonica '. Some such consolation was due to his bride, the Princess Maria. She had been betrothed to the Hungarian Prince Bela, afterwards Bela III, who had been destined by the Emperor Manuel as his successor, and when this betrothal was cancelled and the succes- sion was transferred to the young Alexius,2 Maria might well demand that her husband should be given some rank worthy of an emperor's son-in-law.
Raynero's subsequent career was brief, and does not connect him with Thessalonica. He and his wife joined in a conspiracy to murder Alexius the protosebastos (February 7. n&i), who was ruling in the name of the young Alexius after the death of the Emperor Manuel ; the conspiracy failed, and Raynero and Maria were besieged in the cathedral of Saint Sophia. After some months of disturbance and one day of severe righting a reconciliation was effected on May 3. In the following year Andronicus Comnenus, who had been invited by Maria, over- threw the protosebastos and himself assumed the regency. Shortly afterwards Maria died, and her husband perished a little later ; Andronicus was suspected of poisoning them.3 Nicetas reserves his judgement on the question of poison. Sicardo, whose Greater Chronicle seems to be reproduced by Salimbene4 and Albertus Miliolus,5 does not hesitate to ascribe the guilt to Andronicus, and the same account is given by two other con- temporaries, Ansbert6 and Tolosano.7 Galeotto del Carretto,8 the best informed of the Montferrat chroniclers, though much
1 M. G. H., Scriptores, xxxi (1902), p. 173.
2 Nicetas, ed. Bekker, p. 221; Migne, col. 513.
3 The two contemporary authorities for these events are Nicetas (Bekker, pp. 300-37 ; Migne, coll. 581-614), and Eustathius of Thessalonica, Migne, P. G. cxxxvi (1865), coll. 23-7. There is also a narrative by Abu'l-Faraj (ed. Bruns and Kirsch, 1789), ii. 389. For the chronology see Muralt, Essai de Chronographie Byzantine (1871), pp. 212-15.
4 M. G. H., Scriptores, xxxii (1905), p. 3.
6 M. G. H., Scriptores, xxxi (1902), p. 644.
6 Osterreichische Geschichtsquellen, ie Abth., Scriptores, v (1863), p. 23.
7 Mittarelli, Rerum Faventinarum Scriptores (1771), p. 103.
TREATY OF ADRIANOPLE 29
later than the events, dates the deaths both of Raynero and of Maria on June 28, 11 83. He makes no suggestion of foul play.
As Raynero and Maria left no issue, any fief or dowry they may have possessed would naturally revert to the emperor, and it is significant that Galeotto del Carretto, who gives Raynero the title of King of Salonica, makes no further mention of such a kingdom till it was, as seen above,1 conferred on Boniface by the Emperor Baldwin. It was, perhaps, because he felt that a claim from Raynero was weak that Boniface in the Refutatio Cretae preferred to fall back upon some unspecified fief granted to his father.
Galeotto's work was presented to Bonifacio IV, Marquis of Montferrat, in 1493 5 Dut ^onS before his time romance had begun to play round the name of Raynero and his kingdom of Salonica. Early in the fourteenth century Jacopo of Acqui began his Chronicon Imaginis Mundi, which he continued down to 1334. There 2 we read as follows :
1 Raynerio however went to Greece, and violently and by great strength he conquers the city of Sollonich and makes himself king there, and for a long time he makes war upon Alexius, Emperor of the Greeks of Constantinople. And at last making peace with him King Rainerio receives for wife Maria, sister of Alexius, Emperor of the Greeks, and King Rainerio also gives his own sister by name Jordana to wife to the said emperor ; which Jordana the empress was a holy woman, and God per- formed miracles by her, and according to a certain chronicle these things happened in the year of Christ 1 138. This Raynerio p!id not beget sons, but at his death he leaves the kingdom to his sister, the Empress Jordana, which Jordana leaves that king- dom of Sallonich to the Marquis of Montferrat.'
A little later3 we read an even more amazing story:
' In the time of the said emperor [Frederic Barbarossa] there flourished among the Saracens a soldan, who was called Saladin, who was a man of the greatest vigour among the Saracens, and powerfully subjugated to himself the land beyond the sea belonging to the Christians. Then the Christians of the east hire with a very great sum of gold to their aid the Marquis Raynerio of Montferrat in Italy and a great company both of Genoese and Venetians with ships and galleys, who all powerfully advance against Saladin, and for a long time they fight against him. Afterwards they agree together in the following manner, to wit, that all the land which from of old and until now has belonged to the Christians, shall be restored to them, and that
1 p. 25 supra.
2 Monumenta Historiae Patriae, Scriptores, iii. 1539. 8 Ibid. 1559, 1560.
30 BONIFACE AND THE
all Christians who are slaves among the Saracens shall depart free, and also the Saracen slaves shall be restored, and thus all shall stand upon their own right. King Saladin stands at peace with the Christians, but with an evil mind, and he sets not his heart upon good, but ever thinks how he may deceive them, that he may recover the said land. The Saracens being divided, the Marquis Raynerio departs with his allies and they overrun all Greece, and they conquer the king of Salonich, and there they find a very great treasure, which belonged to the emperor of the Greeks, and they find there a precious paten of emerald, on which the Lord Jesus Christ supped with his disciples in the holy supper, which paten is called Sangreal. And the whole land of Salonich having been subdued, they all meet together to divide what they have gained, to wit, the Marquis, the Genoese, and the Venetians, and they cast lots for the three, to wit for the whole kingdom of Salonich, for all the treasure gained, and for the said paten alone of Jesus Christ, and the lot of the Marquis falls upon the kingdom of Salonich, which the Marquis accepts, and makes himself king there of that kingdom. But the lot of the Venetians falls upon the treasure, and the lot of the Genoese upon the said paten, but the Venetians are not content, and wish that lots be cast again between themselves and the Genoese, and this does not please the Genoese, but they accept the paten, and bring it to Genoa, where it is in the public treasury to this day ; and this is the beginning of the great war and ill- will which is between the Genoese and Venetians to this day.'
There does not appear to be much truth in this story. The holy paten or Sacro Catino is still to be seen in the Cathedral of Genoa,1 but it was captured at Caesarea in Palestine in iioi, not at Thessalonica. It is curious that Jacopo da Varazze2 should relate that the Genoese on the capture of Caesarea were given a choice between the city, the treasure, and the Sacro Catino, and chose the last. It is also true that the war between Genoa and Venice was in some measure due to a dispute over sacred relics captured either at Constantinople or at Thessalonica. Otherwise the narrative of Jacopo of Acqui is almost pure fiction, and the knowledge that such stories were current should warn us against taking, even from the more sober pages of Benvenuto, any state- ments of a romantic tinge about Raynero or his kingdom.3
1 See Carden, The City of Genoa (1908), pp. 119, 120. The Sacro Catino was broken in April, 19 14.
2 Muratori, R.I.S. ix (1726), 32 D, E.
3 Cav. Gerola, p. 137, takes from Benvenuto Sangiorgio the story of the hereditary transmission of Thessalonica, perhaps first to Jordana, certainly afterwards to Boniface. He also gives a genealogical tree (ibid., p. 157) in which Jordana appears as the wife of Alexius Comnenus. Jordana probably had no existence, and she was certainly not the wife of the Emperor Alexius.
TREATY OF ADRIANOPLE 31
At all events a kingdom or honour of Thessalonica had been among the possessions of the Montferrat family, and it is possible that Boniface had this in view when he accepted the 'kingdom of Thessalonica \ apparently without any exact definition, from the hands of Baldwin. The lavish promises of Alexius IV enabled Boniface to make a further claim upon the land and treasure of the conquered empire. According to the Refutatio Cretae Alexius IV had granted Boniface the island of Crete, together with a sum of 100,000 hyperpers (about ^45,000 l) which had never been paid. The claim may well have been genuine ; it is, at least, consistent with what we know of the character of Alexius IV, but it does not appear to have been ratified by the Venetians and crusaders. At all events no mention is made of the promise of Crete by any of the historians of the Fourth Crusade, and it was ignored in the partition treaty of March 1204. It was probably only because this claim gave the great rival of Venice a handle for interference, that it was suddenly brought into prominence in the summer of that year.
It is easy to imagine with what indignation and dismay the news of the conquest of Constantinople was received at Genoa.2 The revolution which placed Alexius IV on the throne might have portended an increase of Venetian privileges, but he was as likely to quarrel with his benefactors as with their rivals. Now the ownership of three-eighths of the empire and the com- merce of the whole seemed destined to fall into the hands of Venice, and Genoa might well expect to be excluded from every port where she could not find an entrance by force. But in this time of confusion force could be applied in almost every quarter. Genoese corsairs were, as has been seen, already established in Corfu, Methone, Naxos, and Crete, and would doubtless be willing to convert themselves into lawful conquerors at a moment's notice. Indeed, it is difficult to see how a Genoese mind could be expected to regard these corsairs as less entitled to hold any lands they might win than were the adventurers who had enrolled themselves under the cross of Christ or the lion of St. Mark the evangelist.
In such circumstances her old friendship with Boniface offered to Genoa a chance of interfering without committing an act of open hostility against the conquerors. According to the Marquis Serra,.who is doubtless relying on some Genoese source, it was Boniface who first opened negotiations with Genoa ; according
1 See Miller, p. 29; Kretschmayr, pp. 356, 498, 499; Schaube, p. 812. According to Galeotto del Carretto, 1 141, the promise of Crete was made at Corfu, and therefore about May 1203. The date seems intrinsically probable.
2 See the vigorous language of Ogerio Pane, pp. 88, 89.
32 BONIFACE AND THE
to the Venetian chronicles,1 it was the Genoese that first ap- proached him. Either before or after these negotiations had begun, there was a rupture between Baldwin and Boniface. Boniface's kingdom had still to be conquered, when in July Baldwin subdued and garrisoned the principal places in Thrace and then proceeded to Macedonia. Against this Boniface pro- tested as an infringement of his rights, and, while Baldwin was receiving the submission of Thessalonica, Boniface laid siege to Adrianople, which was held for Baldwin by Eustace of Saar- briicken. While Boniface vainly attempted to rouse the Greeks against their garrison, Eustace sent word of his situation to Constantinople, which was then occupied by the doge Enrico Dandolo, Count Louis of Blois, and some minor barons. Dandolo and Count Louis immediately dispatched Geoffroy de Villehar- douin, Manassier de l'lsle, Marco Sanudo, the doge's nephew, and the Veronese Ravano dalle Carceri to bring Boniface to reason.
The quarrel between the two leaders of the crusading host must have seemed a godsend to the Genoese. According to the Marquis Serra's narrative,2 the most detailed that we possess, Boniface offered to sell the island of Crete to the Genoese republic ; the council of the city met and accepted the offer, but was unpardonably dilatory in nominating the envoys to transact the business with Boniface, and while these were on their voyage to the east, Dandolo heard of the transaction and immediately dispatched envoys of his own to Boniface. It is not certain whether there was time for negotiations with Genoa itself between the breach with Baldwin and the Venetian embassy, but it is possible that Boniface desired to sell his somewhat useless island independently of his quarrel with the emperor. The Venetian chronicler merely speaks of Genoese, which would leave it open for the proposal to have come from the heads of the dispossessed Genoese colony at Constantinople ; both sources are agreed that negotiations were in progress when the doge's vigilance discovered the course that events were taking and anticipated the designs of the Genoese.
1 The oldest chronicle which mentions these negotiations, and that from which the rest seem to derive their information, is the one that ends in the year 1475 (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 51, fo. 71a). Though in no sense contemporary, it appears to draw from good sources. Thus, unlike Andrea Dandolo, it knows that Crete was not included in the treaty of partition, and it is able to give the terms of the treaty of Adrianople, which it calls 'segurtade', a name obviously based on the name 'securitas' which the actual documents give to Boniface's acknowledgement of the money paid by Venice. This chronicle also contains lists of commanders of warships, which, as will be seen, are consistent with what we know from other sources as to the movements of some of the Venetian captains at this date.
2 ii. 10.
TREATY OF ADRIANOPLE 33
It would appear that the embassy to Boniface from Con- stantinople was entrusted with both a public and a secret message. Villehardouin 1 records neither the names of the two Italian envoys nor the treaty they concluded, though its text with their names attached is preserved to us both in Venetian and in Montferrat sources. Villehardouin himself and Manassier de lTsle had at least one stormy interview with Boniface, but at last he agreed to accept the mediation of the doge, Count Louis, Coenon of Bethune, and Villehardouin. He was doubtless won to this course by the offers made by the doge, who deftly turned the quarrel into a means of bringing Boniface under the influence of Venice. A treaty was signed by Boniface and the two envoys of the doge on August 12, 1204. By this treaty,2 which has frequently been misunderstood, Boniface resigned to the Venetian republic all his rights to the island of Crete, to the 100,000 hyperpers promised him by Alexius IV, to the fief granted to his father by the Emperor Manuel, to the city of Thessalonica and its appurtenances (apparently the same as the kingdom of Thess'alonica granted him by Baldwin), and to any territory within the empire of Constantinople then held or thereafter to be held by the Venetians ; in consideration of his resignation he was to receive the sum of 1,000 marks of silver (about £3,100 if reckoned by the Cologne standard 3), together with possessions west of the Bosphorus of sufficient extent to produce an annual revenue of io,oco gold hyperpers (about £4.500 4), on the sole condition of maintaining and defending the possessions and dignity of Venice in the empire of Romania against all persons whatsoever, saving his fealty to the emperor. If at any time Boniface or his heirs or lieutenants should fail to perform their duty, Venice was to be entitled to reclaim the 1,000 marks of silver, and to resume possession of all the territories with which she had invested him. An interesting feature of the treaty is to be found in the reservation by which Boniface's duties to the emperor are not made to devolve upon Venice, but are to be performed by Boniface and his heirs as a prior obligation, taking precedence over his new duty to Venice.5
1 p. 168.
2 For the text see Tafel and Thomas, xii. 512-15.
3 See Schaube, p. 813.
4 See Miller, p. 29 ; Kretschmayr, pp. 356, 498, 499 ; Schaube, p. 813.
5 Among the witnesses to the treaty is Pegoraro of Verona, who was afterwards, with Ravano dalle Carceri, one of the first terciers of Negropont. Giberto, the third tercier, does not appear among the witnesses to the treaty itself in the best MSS., but both he and Pegoraro are among the witnesses to the accompanying ' securitas ', the formal receipt given by Boniface for the purchase money. See Cervellini, in Nuovo Archivio Veneto, xvi (1908), p. 275.
P 2G61 D
34 BONIFACE AND THE
It will be observed that Boniface resigns a money claim which is not likely ever to be realized, and an unspecified fief to which he has shadowy claims, together with a definite lordship of Crete, to which he might have a better claim, and a kingdom of Thessalonica of indefinite extent,1 to which he has an in- disputable right, and receives in exchange a sum of ready money together with a fief of definite value, which is doubtless intended to be no other than the kingdom of Thessalonica, for which he has already done homage to the emperor. The effect of the treaty is therefore (i) a sale of Crete to Venice, (2) an under- taking by Venice to see that the kingdom of Thessalonica be- comes a reality, and (3) a defensive alliance — for the free tenure on which the lands are to be held amounts to nothing more — between the new kingdom of Thessalonica and the Venetian republic so far as her new possessions are concerned, against all enemies except the emperor.2 It is probable that the treaty had been planned by the doge before his envoys left Constantinople. At all events, the 1,000 marks were paid over on the very day on which the treaty was signed, and the presence of the ready money may have been a strong inducement to Boniface to sign.3
The motive of Dandolo in concluding this treaty is clear enough. In the first place he held, as on an earlier occasion,4 that the conquest of the empire could not be achieved except by the united action of all parties. Nothing was more important than to effect a reconciliation between Baldwin and Boniface. For the moment it might appear that there was a danger of a coalition between Boniface and Genoa against Venice and the emperor whom she had seated on the throne of Constantinople. For this reason and for commercial reasons it was essential to prevent an alliance between Boniface and Genoa, and to prevent Genoa from acquiring a footing within the territories of the empire. The simplest way to counter the Genoese bid for Crete
1 The kingdom of Thessalonica is, of course, the kingdom granted by- Baldwin, not the ' honour of the Thessalonians ', bestowed on Raynero of Montferrat on the occasion of his marriage.
2 Among recent writers Dr. Gerland appears to interpret the treaty correctly, though in my opinion he has misjudged the motives of Venice. Sir Rennell Rodd (i. 69) supposes that the land to be granted to Boniface would be taken out of the Venetian sphere (i.e. in Epirus), and that no homage would be due to the emperor for it. But this is clearly not implied in the text. Mr. Miller (p. 29) appears to have overlooked Boniface's renunciation of Thessalonica, and treats the territory promised by Venice as part of the price paid for Crete.
3 The text of Boniface's acknowledgement of the money is to be found in numerous chronicles and collections of documents. A critical text is given by Dr. Cervellini in Nuovo Archivio Veneto, xvi (1908), pp. 274, 275.
* See pp. 22, 23 supra.
TREATY OF ADRIANOPLE $$
was for Venice to buy it for herself. If Genoa was willing to purchase the island, Venice could not expect Boniface to resign his claim without some compensation ; the island had still to be conquered and the alliance of Boniface was well worth 1,000 marks. The claim to 100,000 hyperpers, so lavishly promised by Alexius IV, was not likely to be realized in any case ; it was at best an excuse for war against Baldwin, and Boniface lost nothing by abandoning it. The Venetian suzerainty was evidently intended to be nominal — it was not to interfere with the fealty already owed to Baldwin — but the obligation to defend the possessions and dignity of Venice was intended to be real. It was aimed, not against Baldwin, but against Genoa, and it placed Boniface under obligation to resist the attempts of Genoa to acquire territory in the east. In return Venice guaranteed to Boniface that his kingdom of Thessalonica should become an actuality. By making herself responsible for its value, she made it clear to Boniface that sufficient pressure would be brought to bear upon Baldwin to overcome any resistance on his part. It is quite a mistake to suppose with Dr. Gerland 1 that Dandolo's object was to maintain the Latin empire in a weak condition by promoting strife between the two leaders. On the contrary, the treaty healed the strife and promised to secure the co-operation of Boniface against Genoa. Some difficulty was experienced in inducing Baldwin to accept the proffered mediation, but the forces that made for peace were too strong for him, and eventually he gave way and reinvested Boniface with the kingdom of Thessalonica.
It may be well to note here that in a group of chronicles, the oldest of which is contained in the fourteenth-century manuscript, Cod. Marcianus It. vii. 37, and ends in 1360, the astonishing statement occurs 2 that by the terms of the treaty Marco Sanudo ruled (or was entitled to rule) over a large part of Crete, namely, all the territory to the west as far as the whole of ' Chao Spada ' (Capo Spada), in which he is said to have built the city of Canea. This description was perhaps intended to cover the whole country to the west of Milopotamos. Any such claim on the part of Marco Sanudo must, of course, have been inde- pendent of the treaty. Some lands in Crete were, as will be seen later,3 promised to Marco Sanudo by Jacopo Tiepolo, Duke of Crete, and the chroniclers may be guilty of a con- fusion between the bargain made with Tiepolo and the more famous treaty concluded with Boniface.
Meanwhile a commission was at work on the partition of the empire between the emperor, the Venetians, and the crusaders.
1 p. 26. 2 p. 109 infra. 3 p. 92 infra.
D 2
36 BONIFACE AND THE
In the beginning of October1 the commission drew up the scheme of division. The act by which this was accomplished has often been published, and has been edited with a geographical commentary and full apparatus critiais by Tafel and Thomas.2 The best map illustrating the treaty is that in Spruner-Menke's atlas, which rejects some of the wilder conclusions of Tafel and Thomas. It is customary to praise the skill with which Venice secured for herself the places which would be of most service for her trade, but it may be doubted whether this praise has not been somewhat extravagant. Venice received the whole of the Adriatic coast and adjacent islands, presumably because this part of the empire was the nearest to her. Elsewhere she received only scattered territories, which were probably selected for commercial reasons, but the chief centres of her trade were by no means all reserved for her. Thessalonica had been assigned to Boniface already, and while Venice received Rhaedestus and Adrianople, Abydos was allotted to the emperor, and Halmyros to the crusaders. In the main the imperial and crusading territories were continuous, and Venice received nothing in the Aegean except the islands of Euboea, Andros, Aegina, and Salamis (Oreos, Caristos, Antrus, Egina, et Culuris) ; among those assigned to the emperor we find Lesbos, Lemnos, and Scyros (Mitilini, Limni cum Skiro), Samos, Tenos, and Samo- thrace (Samos et Tinos cum Samandrakio), and Chios (Chio), while the portion assigned to the crusaders includes ' Dode- canisos ', a name which, according to Byzantine usage, ought to apply to the whole Archipelago. Of the places where Genoese corsairs had established themselves, Corfu, Methone, and Corone fell to Venice, whose claim to Crete was acknowledged by the silence of the act of partition, while Naxos, as part of the Dodecanisos, was allotted to the crusaders.
Further references to lands afterwards belonging to the Duchy of the Archipelago have been found in the following names which appear in the portion assigned to Venice : ' Conchilari, Canisia, Pertinentia Lopadi.' Da Canale3 merely repeats the names given in the treaty, preserving the reading ' Conchilari, Canisia'. Biondo and Navagiero refer to Crete and to the greater part of the Archipelago as falling within the Venetian share, but their account has clearly been coloured by the course of events. Rannusio,4 who was the first historian to publish a
1 For the date see Heyd, i. 269. 2 xii. 452-501.
3 Chronique des Veniciens, in Archivio Storico Italiano, viii (1845), pp.
34Q-4-
4 De Bello Costantinopolitano (1634), pp. 159-6S, quoted by Tafel, Symbolae Criticae, Part II, pp. 24-44, in Historische Abhandlungen, Munchen, v. 1849.
TREATY OF ADRIANOPLE 37
full account of the partition, based on a copy in the Venetian archives, and to attempt an explanation of the names employed, regards Andros and a part of the Cyclades round Delos as in the Venetian share, but names nearly all the most important islands of the Cyclades, including Naxos, as part of the share allotted to the crusaders. He distinguishes these, however, from the Dodecanisos, which he reads Diodetonisus. Muratori,1 who was the first to publish the actual text of the partition from two manuscripts at Milan, gave two alternative readings in the passage last cited : ' Concilani, vel Conchi Latica, Cavisia, vel Nisia.' This first suggested that Naxos (Nisia) was allotted to Venice, an opinion which was confirmed by Tafel's emendation of ' Conchilari ' to * cum Cycladibus ',2 followed by an impossible suggestion from Tafel and Thomas3 that 'Lopadi' meant Lebinthus. In this way it was made to appear that the Cyclades as a whole were assigned to Venice, and that Andros and Naxos were definitely named as Venetian. The ' Dode- canisos ' had in consequence to be treated as a term of uncertain meaning, although Tafel himself,4 in commenting on the privi- legium of 1199, on which the partition treaty was clearly based,5 had interpreted it to mean the Cyclades.6 Tafel's emendation was immediately accepted without question. Finlay and Hopf did not even suggest to their readers that it was a mere con- jecture. Menke,7 however, has with good reason disputed it. He reads 'cum Chilari, Canisia, etc.', identifying Chilari with the modern Kjari in Albania, and Canisia with Konitza in Epirus. This leaves it possible to interpret the * Dodecanisos ' as including the greater part of the Cyclades and Sporades. Menke's explanation is not noticed by Heyd, Gerland, and Rodd, who have adhered to Tafel's conjecture. But it will be observed that the conjecture entirely fails to explain the syllable 'ca' which stands in the manuscripts either at the end of Latica or at the beginning of Canisia. It is, further, inconsistent with the claims made by the Venetians themselves in 1382, when they cited the act of partition to prove that they were suzerains of the Duke of the Archipelago for the island of Andros, but apparently made no claim to a general suzerainty over his
1 Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, xii. 328.
2 Symbolae Criticae, ii. 58, 59.
3 xii. 469, 470.
4 Symbolae Criticae, i. 62-4. 6 So Miller, p. 28.
6 Tafel even suggests that by Dodecanisos we are to understand the island in the lake of Prespa in Macedonia, which may have been dedicated to the twelve apostles.
7 Hand-Atlas, Vorbemerkungen, p. 40.
38 BONIFACE AND TREATY OF ADRIANOPLE
duchy, as they could have done if Naxos in particular or the Cyclades as a whole had been allotted to them.1 It would therefore appear that the islands of the Archipelago, with the exception of the groups specifically assigned either to Venice or to the emperor, were included in the Dodecanisos allotted to the crusaders.2
1 See the duke's reply, Sitzungsberichte der K. Akademie der Wissen- schaften, xxi (1856), philosoph.-hist. Classe, pp. 242-5.
2 While there seems to be no case whatever in favour of the reading ' Cycladibus ' it might be possible independently to attack the interpretation of 'Dodecanisos', as referring to the Archipelago, on the ground that it comes among names indubitably belonging to Epirus and Thessaly. Thus Mr. Miller, p. 29, while noticing Menke's view, accepts Tafel's conjecture 'cum Cycladibus', and with him refuses to identify Dodecanisos with the Cyclades. Menke suggests that this part of the list originally ended with ' Dodecanisos ' and that the Thessalian names were added later. But the whole arrangement of the lists is very confused and the identification of ' Dodecanisos ' with the Archipelago can hardly be overthrown merely on the ground of the order of the names.
CHAPTER IV THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
The news of the sale of Crete had not long remained a secret. The Marquis Serra informs us that when the Genoese envoys returned from their fruitless errand, the Council of the Republic sent an ultimatum to Venice, requiring that city to choose between renunciation of the island and war ; Venice chose war, and the great struggle between the two republics began. It is, however, incredible that an open declaration of war could have escaped the notice of our published authorities. The warfare that now began was in the first instance a private warfare, though the Genoese republic was afterwards dragged into it. It was a curious situation. Venice and Genoa were each at war with Pisa, and now Venice and Genoa were practically at war with each other.
Without much delay a number of Genoese citizens banded themselves together under the leadership of Enrico Belamuto and Guglielmo Porco 1 and collected a force of six 2 galleys, with which they went on a predatory expedition to the Levant. In the harbour of Methone they succeeded in capturing a ship bearing a quantity of money, together with some relics of the saints and crosses, and some rich presents sent by the Emperor Baldwin to Pope Innocent III and to the Order of the Temple in Lombardy. These were being conveyed under the care of Brother Barozzi, a Venetian, who was Master of the Temple in Lombardy. The gifts from the emperor to the pope are said to have consisted of a carbuncle worth 1,000 marks of silver,3 a precious ring, five pieces of velvet, and an altar-pall. The gifts intended for the Temple were more numerous — two icons, one containing three marks of gold and the other ten marks4 of
1 This act of piracy is recorded in a contemporary letter of Innocent III (November 4, 1204), printed by Count Riant, Exuviae Sacrae, ii. 56, 57, and is also narrated in the contemporary Genoese annals of Ogerio Pane, p. 93. I accept Count Riant's emendation ' Porcus ' for the ' Portus ' of Innocent's letter.
2 So Ogerio Pane. Pope Innocent says seven galleys.
3 About ,£3,100, if marks of Cologne are intended. See Schaube, p. 813.
4 Is the mark here two-thirds of a pound weight, irrespective of the monetary system? The pound weight varied greatly from city to city, the two extremes being the small and large pounds of Venice, weighing respectively 0-3024 and 0-480 kilo.
40 THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
silver with the wood of the true cross and many precious stones, two golden crosses, nearly 200 topazes, emeralds, and rubies, a crystal ampulla, two silver cups, a gilt reliquary, two silver boxes, and a silver ampulla. The actual money seized by the corsairs only amounted to fifty marks of silver.1 Innocent, when demanding restitution, made no mention of relics, but we learn from Ogerio Pane that many relics of the saints were captured. One of the pirate galleys belonged to Porto Venere. Its contents were brought to Genoa and distributed, among the Genoese churches.
The pope, in a letter dated November 4, 1204, called upon the Archbishop of Genoa to see that restitution was effected, and threatened the city of Genoa with interdict, intimating that if the interdict should prove unsuccessful they were to expect punishment from the pope and the Emperor of Constantinople. The reply to the pope's letter does not appear to be preserved, but there exists a decree of January 3, 1205, by which the Genoese podesta conceded certain commercial immunities to the men of Porto Venere in return for the gift of a holy cross.2 Jacopo d'Oria,3 basing his statements on the books of the cathedral at Genoa, asserts that the cross was made of the wood of the true cross and adorned with silver, and was captured by the Genoese pirate Deodedelo, who brought it to Genoa. According to Jacopo da Varazze4 the capture was effected by Dodeo 5 of Fornaris, who presented the holy cross to the com- munity and cathedral of Genoa, where it is still to be seen, but retained the relics in the hope of selling them. Jacopo da Varazze takes credit to himself for having secured them for the Church of the Dominican Order.
The conduct of the Genoese in seizing and retaining these treasures may have been morally no more culpable than that of the Venetians and crusaders who had seized them at Con- stantinople, but the action was an open challenge to the con- querors and was accepted by them as such. The exact details of the Venetian expedition to Naxos are a little difficult to piece together, but it would appear that Daniele Barbaro c is right in
1 About .£160, Schaube, ubi supra.
2 Monumenta Historiae Patriae, Liber Iurium, i (1854), 521, 522.
8 Regni Iherosolymitani Brevis Historia, in Belgrano, Ann. gen. i (1890), p. 141. 4 Col. 43.
6 Ogerio Pane, p. 97, mentions a certain Dondedeo Bos, doubtless the same person, as a Genoese seaman and companion of Guglielmo Porco in the year 1205.
6 I have not inspected all the MSS. of the chronicle that goes by this name, but of those which I have seen the Cod. Marc. It. vii. 790 appears to preserve the best text. Kretschmayr, p. 394, gives 1511-1570 as the date of Daniele Barbaro. See p. 106 infra.
THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA 41
separating it from the larger expedition which achieved the conquest of the Archipelago. All the chronicles which contain a detailed account of the conquest of Naxos place it in the time of Enrico Dandolo and make the Venetian force consist of a few public galleys, armed and equipped at the expense of Marco Sanudo. On the other hand, wherever the names of the con- querors of the Archipelago are given they are represented as forming a company and as sailing during the reign of Pietro Ziani, while from Biondo downwards the Venetian chroniclers know of a decree of Pietro Ziani, inviting citizens and friends of Venice to make conquests in the empire of Romania. Daniele Barbaro is alone in knowing of two distinct expeditions to the Archipelago, but he is also alone among Venetian chroniclers in knowing of the piratical Genoese expedition of 1204, and there is every reason to believe that he had before him some good authority. His later statements as to the movements of Marco Sanudo can be checked by the documents in which his name appears. Sauger,1 like other writers, knows of one expedition only from the outside, but makes Marco Sanudo found and fortify the city of Naxos and organize the island before pro- ceeding to his other conquests, for which Naxos serves as a base. It is a curious feature of Venetian history that it has to be constantly reconstructed from statements made by authors writing several centuries after the events which they record.
According to Daniele Barbaro the doge had, shortly before the Genoese expedition, sent home to Venice the greater part of his fleet. He considered it impossible to make any resistance with the galleys at his disposal, but Marco Sanudo, his nephew, requested and obtained the use of eight galleys without crews, and these he armed and equipped at his own expense and took with him on an expedition to Naxos, probably at some date in the late autumn or winter of 1204-5.2 The chronicle ending in 1360 states that the ships were manned with valiant men from Venice ; in all probability the crew would be picked from seamen who volunteered for the purpose. Arriving at Naxos, the fleet moored, as Sauger informs us, in the harbour of Potamides, a little to the west of the south end of the great mountain barrier
1 pp. 115, 116 infra. Sauger is independent of the Venetian chronicles which give details of this expedition. See p. 66 infra.
2 For the history of the conquest of Naxos the primary authorities are the group of chronicles, the oldest of which (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 37) ends in 1360. For a fuller account of this group see p. 62 infra. One chronicle in this group, that of Enrico Dandolo, has been used by Hopf and Mr. Miller, but never published. Some details, especially topographical, are supplied, probably from local tradition, by Sauger, p. 115 infra.
42 THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
which intersects the island from north to south. Here the army landed successfully in spite of the resistance of the islanders and immediately advanced to the fortress of Apalire. The remains of this fortress may still be seen about three miles inland across a flat country. There stands the isolated ridge called Castro- Apalire, marked on the admiralty chart as ' Paleo Kastro Middle Age ruin '. The east side of the ridge, which runs north and south, is almost a sheer descent ; the ascent from the west is easier, but steep and toilsome, and is rendered the more difficult through being covered with scrub. A little below the summit on this side a wall, the lower part of which is still standing, ran along the whole length of the ridge, and above this traces of another wall may be seen, guarding the narrow level space on the summit. In places 'there would appear to have been no fewer than three walls. The north end of the position was the site of a specially strong fortress, of which not only the foundations, but some arches of the superstructure still remain. The solid masonry of the west wall of this fortress is well preserved, and with its great bastion presents an imposing appearance to the traveller mounting the hill-side. The north wall of the fortress was over six and a half feet thick, as I found by measuring the lower portion which still stands. There are two cisterns and a small chapel on or near the summit. My knowledge of architec- ture does not permit me to conjecture how much of the present structure is older than the Latin conquest, but it can easily be seen that the place was almost an ideal stronghold for a pirate company, and it has the advantage of commanding a wide view, which includes the whole island to the west of the line of mountains and stretches far over the sea and other islands to north, west, and south.
There is a description of this castle in Lichtle's Description de l'ile de Naxos.1 As the work is somewhat rare, I venture to insert it here :
1 Three and a half hours from the city in the south-east part of the island on the summit of a precipitous and difficult hill are the ruins of an ancient city called Paliri, which covers the whole length of the hill crest with a small piece of level ground at the north end. Where the ascent was least difficult was the gate, perhaps the only gate, of the city, protected by a fine rampart, well constructed and almost intact. The ruins have an appear- ance of antiquity, but they cannot go beyond the beginnings of Christianity, because the remains of the churches which are to be seen there are of the style of the Eastern Church. In addition to these there are many cisterns for receiving the rain-water, which still perform their function perfectly, since they retain 1 'AttoXXow, t)' (1892), p. 66.
THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA 43
their water even in winter. Apart from the rampart, the position itself secures the safety of the city.'
M. Zerlentes in an article Na£ia vrjcros kcu tt6\i$ 1 regards the remains at Castro-Apalire, or Castro t' Apaliru as he spells it, as those of the Byzantine capital of the island. According to him the ravages of the pirates had induced the population to desert the former capital on the coast for the new capital in the interior, which he thinks is mentioned as early as A.D. 536. Castro t' Apaliru was, according to him, so called because of the anaXipiai or scrub growing on it. The airaXipia is, as M. Zerlentes informs us, the Rhamnus oleoides Lin. of the botanists. The castle, according to M. Zerlentes, contains the ruins of a church, watch-towers, cisterns, houses, and a tower, and dominates the neighbouring valleys and plateaus.
Below the fort of Apaliro, according to M. Zerlentes, there are remains of houses known as Karon \copLa, including a spot called Hebriaces, which was also a fief of the island in Frankish times.
A careful survey of the remains at Castro-Apalire is clearly a task which might repay the archaeologist. My chief difficulty in the way of regarding it as the Byzantine capital is the fact that the Byzantine cathedral, now known as Ai'mamas, is not in the immediate neighbourhood of Castro-Apalire, but is near Potamia, also in the interior of the island,2 rather less than five miles in a direct line from Castro-Apalire, but a great deal further by path or mule-track owing to the distribution of the hills.
The castle, as the chroniclers inform us, was held by the Greeks, supported by a large force of Genoese. Marco Sanudo appears to have formed the siege without delay. Sauger states that it lasted five weeks. One day, according to the chroniclers, when all his men had landed to engage in fighting, Marco Sanudo, fearing that they would flee if they failed to gain the day, set fire to his galleys. In this way the need of activity was brought home to every man, and they attacked the fortress with such vigour that it could hold out no longer. The group of chroniclers who form our main authority do not tell us whether the ships were actually destroyed or not, though we may presume that this was the consequence of Sanudo's act. A chronicle which Stefano Magno 3 calls ' F. C states definitely that Marco Sanudo burned them. Daniele Barbaro says that he sank them, and adds that the Greeks and Genoese, who were defending ' the city', took to flight, and that some of them, especially the Genoese, escaped in small boats, but all who were captured
1 Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xi (1902), pp. 496, 497.
2 See a later article by Zerlentes, BvfavTiaKr) eViypupj) e'/c N«£ou, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xvi (1907), pp. 285, 286.
3 Annali veneti, Codex Vindobonensis Foscarini, n. 6239, fo. 79 b.
44 THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
were slain. The story of the destruction of the galleys sounds romantic, but it rests on the same authority as the rest of the story of the conquest, and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary,1 should probably be accepted. The island of Naxos is universally stated to have submitted after this victory, and Daniele Barbaro adds that Marco Sanudo fortified it well, and left a sufficient garrison in it when he departed. He was not invested with it till a later date, but, although the island had been assigned to the crusaders by the treaty of partition, no objection appears ever to have been taken to its occupation by a Venetian nobleman. He had in fact conferred a service on the whole empire by wresting it from the Genoese, who had shown themselves as much the enemies of the emperor as of Venice. The Venetian commonwealth equally abstained from making any claim to this conquest by one of its citizens, and Marco Sanudo, as will be seen later,2 received his investiture as Duke of the Archipelago not from the doge but from the emperor. Daniele Barbaro states that after the conquest of Naxos, Marco Sanudo, with the knowledge and approval of his uncle, the doge, went to Venice to induce the republic to undertake the conquest of the whole Archipelago.3 It is clear from the documents that bear his name that Marco Sanudo did return to Venice in the year 1205, DUt did not leave Constantinople till after his uncle's death in June of that year. Before that event occurred, it had become plain that the conquerors had a hard struggle before them both on land and on sea. In February 1205 the city of Adrianople, which had fallen to the share of Venice, revolted, and the Vallachian prince, Ionitsa,4 was summoned to its aid. The Emperor Baldwin appeared before the city on March 29, and on April 1 he was joined by the doge. On April 14 the emperor was wounded in battle and captured by the Vallachians, but the Venetians had had no share in the disaster, and the doge, assisted by Villehardouin, rallied the defeated army and retreated in safety. Meanwhile Enrico Pescatore, a Genoese citizen, who had succeeded his father-in- law Guglielmo Grasso 5 as Count of Malta, had sent three ships under the command of Armanno Visconti and Alberto Gallina to cruise in Greek waters. They fell in with two Venetian vessels,
1 Sauger does not mention it. But his silence is unimportant, as he probably had nothing but genealogies and tradition to serve as the founda- tion of his history.
2 p. 60 infra. 3 p. 106 infra.
4 I take the spelling of this name from N. Jorga, Byzantine Empire (1907),
P- l73-
5 On Guglielmo Grasso, see my article, Genoa and the Fourth Crusade, pp. 28, 29, and the authorities there quoted, to which I should add Sanguineti and Bertolotto, p. 474, and Manfroni, p. 644.
THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA 45
which they chased in an easterly direction for several days. The Venetians scuttled one of their vessels, but the Maltese ships caught it in time to seize a large part of its cargo, and a few days later ' by the mercy of Christ ' captured the other vessel also. Altogether 200 bales of cloth, a vast quantity of money, 1,200 bucklers and many other arms, and 900 men fell into their hands. They placed the men on shore, but retained the spoil.1
The great doge died of a fever on June 1, 1205.2 He is rightly regarded by his countrymen as a hero. It was he who guided the crusade to its successful issue, and his was the presiding genius in the new empire in the first year of its existence. If the Latin empire was destined soon to crumble into dust, it was otherwise with the greatness of his native city. Venice now entered upon the most glorious period of her existence, in which her trade was to receive the widest expansion ; and when a fresh wave of Turkish conquest broke upon the restored Greek empire, Venice, with her own new possessions and the new possessions of her citizens, became the bulwark of Christendom, and challenged the Moslem supremacy in Greek lands and waters for centuries after the Greeks had ceased to be able to protect themselves.
It was felt that the time had come to invite further assistance from the west to complete the conquest of the eastern empire. Dandolo had, as has been seen, arranged for his nephew to return to Venice to ask for succour. The crusaders simulta- neously made an appeal for further Frankish volunteers. After deliberation on the part of the barons of Romania, a letter to the pope was drawn up, which was signed by Henry of Flanders, acting as regent for his captive brother, on June 5. Similar letters appear to have been sent to France and Flanders, and a bishop and two knights were appointed to convey them to their destinations.3 It is interesting to observe that the Vene-
1 The Maltese ships proceeded to the Syrian coast ; their crews were afraid to put in at Tyre and Acre, but after some time they landed at Tripoli, where they were employed by Bohemund, Prince of Antioch, to reduce the revolted castle of Nefin. This they accomplished, defeating a Turkish army which had advanced to the relief of the castle. In return for these services Bohemund renewed to Visconti and Gallina, on behalf of the people of Genoa, a charter of privileges which had been granted in 1203. The renewal of the charter is dated July 1205, which gives a terminus ad quern for the capture of the Venetian vessels, Lib. Iur. i. 522, 523 ; Pane, pp. 99-102.
2 I see no reason for questioning this date which is given by Andrea Dandolo. Dr. Gerland, p. 573, rejects it, because the death of Dandolo is not mentioned in the letter to Pope Innocent, signed by the regent Henry of Flanders, on June 5. But the letter may have been drawn up before June 1, and, as will be seen, it makes no mention at all of the Venetians.
3 Villehardouin, p. 230.
46 THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
tians are not once mentioned in the letter to the pope. The crusaders are still a distinct and compact body, who seek recruits in the traditional manner of crusaders ; their position is quite different from that of a national state like Venice, which has made a national conquest.1
But before the Venetian envoys departed, a great step was taken in the organization of the Venetian conquests. For two years the Venetians of Romania had been accustomed to the government of a doge on the spot, and they not unnaturally regarded the enlarged Venetian quarter at Constantinople, with the numerous new possessions of the republic in the east, as too important to be governed by a number of separate legati, vice- comiti, or consoli, appointed by the mother city. Accordingly, an assembly of Venetian citizens in Constantinople was held, which elected Marino Zeno to be ' Podesta of the Venetians in Romania and Dominatore of a fourth and a half of the empire of Romania '. The title is significant. The Venetians in Constan- tinople claimed to elect a ruler, not only for themselves, but for all the Venetian citizens and Venetian territories in the east. In fact they aimed at erecting the Venetian territory in Romania into a dependent republic, which should be a very fair copy of the mother city. The podesta was immediately surrounded, like the doge, by a council. His first document is signed, not only by himself, but by six giudici, two giudici del comune, three con- siglieri, one camarlingo, one avvogadore del comune, and one conestabile, in addition to non-official persons.2 Three of these officers, it will be observed, are described as del comune, which means that they were officers of the mother city, to which the word comune appears to be always confined. The giudici and avvogadori del comune are found to be frequently coming and going between Venice and Constantinople, as may be proved by the lists in which their names appear.3
1 For the text of the letter to the pope, see Migne, Patr. Lat. ccxv (1855), 706-10.
2 Tafel and Thomas, xii. 559-61. For the history of the election of Marino Zeno, ibid. p. 567.
3 The office of giudice del comune had been instituted at Venice in 1179 for the purpose of trying suits to which the comune was a party. They first appear as trying cases between Venetians and foreigners in 1204. It is not improbable that giudici del comune had already been sent to Constantinople to try cases to which the comtine was a party. See Lenel, Die Epochen der alteren venezianischen Geschichte, Historische Zeitschrift, 3. Folge, viii (1910), p. 274. Mr. Miller, p. 43, describes Marco Sanudo as ' filling the post of judge in what we should now call the Consular Court at Constantinople 3 at the time of the Venetian decree authorizing private conquests in the Aegean. This statement is correct so far as it goes, because Sanudo's primary functions at Constantinople would fall within the range of the judicial functions of the modern Consular Court. But it is clear from what
THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA 47
The first act of Marino Zeno is dated June 29, x 1205. In this document the giudici del comune are Pietro Michiel, who had negotiated the treaties with Isaac II in 11872 and with Alexius III in 1199,3 and Marco Sanudo, who had negotiated the treaty of Adrianople and effected the conquest of Naxos. This act, which was apparently laid before the assembly that elected the podesta,4 prohibits every Venetian from alienating to any person other than a Venetian any possession that he may have received or may hereafter receive in the empire of Romania. The prin- ciple here asserted became a guiding principle of Venetian policy. The republic did not conquer more than a small fraction of the territory assigned to it in the partition treaty, but it maintained the principle that no land acquired by a Venetian citizen, whether within or without the Venetian territory, was to pass into the hands of an enemy of Venice.5 This principle is exemplified in the title assumed by Marino Zeno, who claims not merely terri- torial authority within the Venetian sphere as Dominatore, but a personal authority over all Venetians in Romania as Podesta. The decree may also be taken as having a reference to Marco Sanudo's conquest of Naxos, and to the further conquests in the Archipelago which he was projecting.
The task of securing the adhesion of the mother city to the arrangements made at Constantinople, and of obtaining the forces necessary for further conquests, appears to have been entrusted to the two giudici del comune} Pietro Michiel and Marco Sanudo, who probably arrived at Venice on July 20.&
follows that the officers at Constantinople of the Venetian coinune occupied a much more important position than the modern Consul. Both ghidici del comune at this date were men who had negotiated important treaties, both were appointed to consult with the home government on a most critical question of imperial policy, and both were included in the college of electors for the doge. It is clear that the giudice del comune at Constantinople was at this date at least as important a person as the British Ambassador at Constantinople at the present day.
1 Erroneously given as June 2 by Tafel and Thomas, xii. 558.
2 Andrea Dandolo, 313.
3 Tafel and Thomas, xii. 246-78. This document is rich in information about the government of the Venetian colony at Constantinople.
4 It claims to have been made 'conlaudatu populi Venetie et de aliis gentibus '.
5 This doctrine is emphatically laid down in the letter addressed to Queen Joan I of Naples in 1363 ; see Gerland, Neue Quellen zur Gesch. des lat. Erzbistums Patras (Scriptores Sacri et Profani, Fasc. v) (1903), p. 143.
6 This is the date when, according to Marino Sanudo, 535, the galley bearing the news of Dandolo's death reached Venice. The Historia Ducum Veneticorum, in Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores, xiv (1883), p. 94, merely says ' in July '. The official intimation of the doge's death was probably brought by the two envoys. It is difficult to see why it should not otherwise have been brought much sooner.
48 THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
They probably brought the news of the doge's death, and of the steps that had been taken at Constantinople. Rainerio Dandolo, the son of the old doge, who had been acting as vice-doge at Venice, considered the action of the colony at Constantinople too important to be the subject of a merely verbal message, and dispatched four envoys, among whom Ruggiero Premarino 1 may be noted, to Constantinople in order to have the transactions placed in writing.2 Rainerio Dandolo then summoned an assembly of all the Venetian citizens. These met in St. Mark's Church, and chose forty electors, including Pietro Michiel and Marco Sanudo. The electors almost immediately agreed upon Pietro Ziani, who was at once invested with the ducal office.3
The new doge appears to have been by no means satisfied with the steps taken by the Venetians at Constantinople. He was determined to assert the authority of the mother city. The new regime at Constantinople was indeed acknowledged, but Corfu, Albania, and a part of Epirus were excluded from the juris- diction of the Constantinopolitan podesta, and it seems to have been taken for granted that Crete, which lay outside the ' fourth and a half of the empire of Romania of which Marino Zeno was dominatore, was to belong directly to the mother city.4 The territories thus reserved had, in fact, been partly conquered by Venice that summer. The newly elected patriarch, Tommaso Morosini, had set out for Constantinople in early summer, and had conquered Ragusa, Durazzo, and Corfu on the way.5 No public assistance was to be granted to Marino Zeno, but the republic undertook the complete conquest of that portion of the eastern empire which it had reserved for itself, and merely per- mitted the private conquest and occupation of other territories. In fact, Pietro Ziani divided the Venetian share into two portions ; the one portion was to be conquered and ruled by the Venetian republic, the other portion was left to Marino Zeno and private individuals to conquer and administer, and Venice gave a general licence to her citizens and allies to conquer and occupy lands,
1 Perhaps the same as the Ruggiero Premarino who had been among the electors of Orio Mastropiero in 1178. Ruggiero Premarino had been one of the two commanders of the Venetian expedition of n 95, which had captured Pola and defeated the Pisans at Methone. See Andrea Dandolo, 315, 317.
2 Tafel and Thomas, xii. 567, 568.
s For an account of the election see the Historia Ducum Veneticorum, ubi supra. The names of the electors are given by Andrea Dandolo, 345.
4 Crete, as having been purchased from Boniface, had not been included in the partition of the empire.
5 Hopf, p. 221, followed by Heyd, i. 277, and, apparently, by Manfroni, p. 650, asserts that the flotilla that accompanied Morosini in 1205 threw a garrison into Spinalonga in Crete, but I have not been able to find any authority for this statement. The phrase ' que adhuc possidebatur a Grecis ' in the Historia Ducum Veneticorum, p. 95, appears to suggest the contrary.
THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA 49
presumably with the consent of the emperor or other feudal suzerain, without in any way limiting them to the Venetian dominions.
The text of this decree is not preserved, and the earliest record of its existence is to be found in Biondo,1 who merely states that the doge gave the Venetian citizens liberty to retain for them- selves whatever they might capture, with the exception of certain larger territories which were reserved for the republic (praeter major a Reipublicae reservata). Navagiero2 gives the decree in a slightly fuller form, as does also Sabellicus.3 It is probable that these writers had the text of the decree before them, or used authorities who had access to the decree. Reference appears to have been made in the preamble to the expense already incurred on the crusade and the heavy cost which the republic would have to bear in order to conquer the whole of the territory assigned her. This is made a reason for permitting citizens and allies to conquer, under their own auspices, islands in or places round the Ionian and Aegean seas, with the exception of certain specified territories, and to transmit them to their heirs, provided that they should not alienate them to any but Venetians. There is no reservation of the rights of the republic over the conquests made ; the ultimate sovereignty in these would doubtless be governed by the partition treaty, and it is important to observe that the licence extended to allies, so that the decree would cover the conquest of Euboea by Ravano dalle Carceri of Verona and his kinsmen. Biondo and Sabellicus both state that the decree specified the territories reserved for the Venetian state, but they do not name them. Happily the decree is in existence by which Marino Zeno renounced his claim to these territories,4 and there can therefore be no doubt of their identity.
The decree at all events set Pietro Michiel and Marco Sanudo free to organize a private expedition to the Aegean. Daniele Barbaro5 informs us that, after obtaining the Venetian decree, Marco Sanudo and his 'compagnia' sent envoys to Constan- tinople and received the Emperor Baldwin's consent to their expedition. The emperor's consent was, of course, necessary for an expedition that was not to confine itself to the Venetian share of the empire, but it would have to be given by the regent and not by the captured emperor. We find that Pietro Michiel was
1 De Origine et Gestis Venetorum, in Thesaurus Antiquitat. et Hist. Italiae, Tom. v (1722), Pars i. 14 C.
2 R. I.S.xxiii(i733), 986 C.
3 Rerum Venetarum, dec. i, lib. viii (17 1 8), Tom. i, Pars i, p. 185.
4 Tafel and Thomas, xii. 569-71. See p. 48 supra for the names of these territories, p. 50 for the renunciation.
5 p. 107 infra.
P 2961 E
50 THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
once more in Constantinople on September 29,1 when he signed a record of the election of Marino Zeno and of the decree pro- hibiting the alienation of fiefs held by Venetians. This record, which was made at the instance of the envoys sent out by Rainerio Dandolo, was couched in a humble strain, and was careful to represent that the election of Marino Zeno had been only a temporary measure, and that the Venetians at Constan- tinople were ready to accept any podesta or rettore whom the doge and his council might send out. In the month of October, Marino Zeno, with the consent of his council and people, defi- nitely renounced all claim to the territories which the mother city had reserved for herself.2 In the same month the regent Henry and the podesta Marino Zeno confirmed the treaty of partition, and more closely defined the duties that the empire and the republic owed each other. By the treaty, as confirmed,3 the Venetians, as well as the Franks, were bound to follow the emperor from June 1 to September 29 in each year, whenever the emperor and Frankish magnates on the one hand, and the podesta and his council on the other hand, should have agreed that the emperor should go on an expedition for the conquest or defence of the empire. The only exception applied to those knights whose lands lay close to those of an enemy, or who were themselves attacked. In the event of an attack by a * principalis persona ' service might be extended beyond the ordinary term. The same treaty granted afresh to the Venetians liberty of commerce throughout the empire, and repeated the provision that no person at war with Venice should be received or per- mitted to abide within the empire.
It is probable that this definite promise that the Venetians should bear their share in the wars of the empire encouraged the regent to authorize private conquests by Venetians. He had, in fact, almost as strong a motive as the Venetians for clearing out the pirates' nests in the Aegean, which must have seriously hampered his communications with western Europe. It is likely that the seizure of his brother's presents in the previous year was not the only insult that he had to avenge. But the first conquest made under Pietro Ziani's decree did not need the emperor's sanction. Marco Dandolo, a cousin of the late doge,4 and Jacopo Viadro 6 conquered Callipolis, a city which had been assigned to
1 Erroneously dated September 2 by Tafel and Thomas, xii. 566-9.
2 Ibid. pp. 569-71. 3 Ibid. pp. 571-4.
4 So Hopf, Geschichte der Insel Andros, in Sitzungsberichte der k. Akademie der Wissenschaften, xvi (1855), philosoph.-hist. Classe, genea- logical table after p. 130. Capellari's Campidoglio Veneto makes the conqueror of Callipolis the grandson of Enrico's cousin, Marco.
5 'Viadio', in the printed text of Andrea Dandolo, 334, is clearly an error for 'Viadro', which is found in Laurentius de Monacis (1758), p. 143,
THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA 51
Venice by the partition treaty, and Marco Dandolo became lord of that city.1
Armed with the necessary authority both from the republic and from the emperor, Marco Sanudo proceeded to form a company for the conquest of the Archipelago, but, before his expedition was ready, events had happened which engaged the public forces of his city. In the year 1206, as Ogerio Pane informs us,2 Enrico Pescatore attacked Crete with ships, galleys, huissiers, boats (buciis), and other armed pirate vessels. Nicetas,3 who evinces a special animosity against the Genoese, gives the numbers as five round ships and twenty-four triremes — a very large navy for a count of Malta, even though, like Pescatore, he was admiral of the sadly disorganized kingdom of Sicily. The expedition was in all probability a joint undertaking of many Genoese adventurers, just as the expedition which Sanudo was preparing was a joint undertaking of many Venetian ad- venturers. Pescatore, who may have been able to use Fraschia as a base, met with complete success, and, as a Venetian chronicler informs us, took almost all the cities, fortresses, and castles, and subjugated the island to himself.4 Cav. Gerola5 gives a list of the fortresses which can with some degree of probability be regarded as having been erected or strengthened by him. Altogether, he is said to have fortified no fewer than fourteen places. Most of these are, as Cav. Gerola points out, posted on hill-tops difficult of access, and must have been de- signed as places in which the Genoese garrisons could take refuge and from which they could make raids, without any view to the defence of the country or interference with the movements of an invading army. We are told in the Venetian chronicles that Pescatore meditated the conquest of all the neighbouring islands and provinces, and that he asked the pope's permission to be crowned king. The request, if ever made, was unsuccessful, and in a few months' time it became clear that it would tax his powers to the utmost to hold what he had already won. It may be supposed that his large armament did not long hold together. His allies would desire to return home with their
and in both manuscripts of the Latin chronicle ending in 1360. Both these chronicles are at this place little better than transcripts of Andrea Dandolo.
1 The context of Nicetas' record of this event (ed. Bekker, 820 ; Migne, 1009 ; Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, torn, i, p. 470) seems to indicate that it took place in the autumn of 1205.
2 p. 104.
3 Ed. Bekker, p. 843 ; Migne, 1029 ; Recueil des Historiens des Croisades, torn, i, p. 495.
4 Historia Ducum Veneticorum, p. 95.
5 La dominazione Genovese, pp. 141, 142, and notes ; also in Monumenti Veneti in Creta, i (1905), pp. 93-6. See p. 82 infra.
E 3
52 THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
plunder, and it is probable that they did not anticipate the blow that Venice was preparing. As Cav. Gerola remarks, the words of Nicetas show that the Genoese conquest was at least un- popular with the Greek inhabitants. About the same time Morosini's conquest, Corfu, probably encouraged by Leone Vetrano, who may still have held his castle at Cape Polacro, shook off the Venetian yoke and gave provisions to the corsairs.1 It is no easy task to disentangle the. facts of the Venetian expedition or expeditions of the year 1206. The oldest chronicles2 know of one expedition only, commanded by Rainerio Dandolo and Ruggiero Premarino. Later chronicles know also another commander, Jacopo Baseio. The oldest chronicle that I have examined in which his name occurs is that ending in 1475,3 which, as was seen above,4 is particularly well informed about the sale of Crete, and is generally well informed about naval expeditions, being able in most cases to give the lists of captains. This chronicle recognizes two expeditions — one of thirty galleys under ' Premarin ', which sailed to Spinalonga, and one of twenty galleys under ' Baxeio', which sailed to Famagosta. The names of the captains of galleys in each fleet are there recorded. This chronicle is not cited by Cav. Gerola, who, however, cites a large number of other chronicles, from which he draws the inference that there was only one expedition, consisting of thirty warships, eight horse transports, and thirty merchantmen, in which the supreme command was given to Baseio, while Dandolo commanded the merchantmen of Alexandria, and Premarino those of Beirut. The earliest printed chronicle in which Baseio is mentioned is that of Navagiero,5 who gives Baseio the sole command in the year 1206, but states that in the following year ' Rinieri Dandolo ' and ' Rinieri (sic) Premarin ' with the galleys destined for Alexandria and Beirut, and with eight other ships, joined the expedition. Baseio, according to him, was deprived of his command after Dandolo's death. Marino Sanudo 6 assigns the command in 1206-7 to Dandolo and Premarino, but gives 'Jacopo Basilio' the command of an expedition in 1224 in which Dandolo and Premarino joined. In like manner the
1 Martino da Canale, p. 346; Andrea Dandolo, 335.
2 Martino da Canale, p. 346; Andrea Dandolo, 334, 335; Laurentius de Monacis, p. 143. The Historia Ducum Veneticorum, p.95, does not name the admirals, but merely states that Pietro Ziani ' magnum congregavit exercitum et ad prefatam insulam cum magno labore et expensis pluries destinavit'. This would be consistent either with a series of expeditions, all in different years, or with two expeditions in the first year, followed by others in later years.
8 p. 112 infra. 4 p. 32* supra.
5 986. 6 536, 544-
THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA 53
Cretan historian, Antonio Calergi,1 who generally records the right events, but in a hopelessly inaccurate order, gives Dandolo and Premarino the command in the great expedition of 1206, reserving for Baseio the command of the expedition which eventually expelled Pescatore from Crete. I formerly under- stood Stefano Magno 2 to distinguish the expedition under Baseio from that under Dandolo and Premarino, but I am now of opinion that he probably intended one expedition only, with ' jacomo Basegio' in supreme command, and Dandolo and Pre- marino in command of the 'galie de mercantia'. It is rather curious that a little later he names Dandolo as captain, and Premarino as vice-captain of the whole expedition, and gives the names of the sopracomiti, twenty-nine in all, omitting Jacopo Baseio altogether.3 An entirely different list of the sopracomiti who served under Baseio is printed by Cav. Gerola 4 from an unpublished chronicle.5 The chronicle ending in 1475 6 gives separate lists of the sopracomiti serving under Premarino and under Baseio. The former list agrees with that given by Stefano Magno,7 while the latter list, which contains twenty names only, is distinct both from the list in Stefano Magno and from that published by Cav. Gerola. Marco Sanudo appears in Stefano Magno's list and in the corresponding list in the chronicle ending in 1475. ^e ls a^so named in the same connexion by his kinsman Marino Sanudo,8 in the life of the doge Pietro Ziani. There would appear, therefore, to be only one list of the sopra- comiti who accompanied Dandolo and Premarino, and this list is quite distinct from the lists of sopracomiti who served under Baseio. Furthermore, the list of sopracomiti who served under Dandolo and Premarino includes some of the most distinguished names of the time, whereas the sopracomiti named in the other lists are almost without exception 9 persons otherwise unknown. Combining this fact with the silence of the earlier authorities concerning Baseio, I draw the conclusion that his expedition must have been distinct from that of Dandolo and Premarino and must have been regarded by contemporaries as by far the less important. Our best authority for its destination is probably
1 Codex Londinensis, Brit. Mus. Add. 8636, ff. 358 b, 363 b-366 a.
2 fo. 87 a. See my article, Genoa and the Fourth Crusade, p. 53.
3 The first name on the list is Zuan Basegio.
4 p. 166. 5 Codex Marc. It. vii. 30, quoted by Gerola, p. 166.
6 p. 112 infra.
7 The names are the same, but the order is different. The list must at some date have been arranged in three columns of ten, ten, and nine names respectively. The chronicler of 1475 has read these perpendicularly, while Stefano Magno has read them horizontally. 8 536.
9 The chronicle ending in 1475 includes Candian Sanudo and Domenego Michiell among the 'armadori ' serving under Baseio.
54 THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA
the chronicle ending in I475> which knows the names of its captains, and does not confound it with the expedition of Dandolo and Premarino. Here we read that it sailed to Fama- gosta in Cyprus, a not unlikely destination in view of the piracy committed by Pescatore in the Eastern Mediterranean in the previous year.
This fleet cannot have sailed before July, in which month Baseio witnessed a document at Venice,1 and according to the chronicle ending in 1475 2 it sailed in August; but it probably sailed before the news of the Genoese successes had arrived, and was therefore entrusted with no more important task than to deal with Genoese pirates in the Levant. The chronicle ending in 1475 states that it captured three Genoese ships at Famagosta. The chronicles that assign greater deeds to it are, doubtless, misled by a confusion between this expedition and that com- manded by Dandolo and Premarino.
The news of the double Genoese success in Crete and Corfu naturally stirred the Venetians to a special effort. According to Andrea Dandolo,3 the inhabitants of Crete had requested succour against Pescatore ; such an event would not be at all inconsistent with the subsequent revolts of Crete against Venice, but it would of course be rash to suppose that the messengers who came to Venice represented the whole population of the island. At all events it was, as has been seen, determined to equip a second expedition and to place it under the command of some of the foremost men of the state. Ruggiero Premarino, after obtaining the written record of Marino Zeno's election as podesta,4 had probably returned to Venice. On August 5, 1206, he is found at Ferentino on an embassy to the pope, from whom he received a reply at that date. In September 1206, he and Pietro Michiel sign a receipt to the doge Pietro Ziani 5 for payment of expenses incurred on an embassy to Constantinople, presumably the embassy of the previous autumn, though it would appear that the two envoys were really at Constantinople simultaneously on two distinct missions. Giovanni Gradenigo, who had signed as avvogadore del comune at Constantinople on June 29, 1205, had also returned. It was now that a fleet of thirty galleys, in some chronicles described as merchant galleys, was equipped and placed under the command of Rainerio Dandolo, who had for three years been vice-doge for his father Enrico Dandolo, with Premarino as vice-captain, and twenty-nine sopracomiti of individual galleys, among whose names we find Giovanni
1 Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 16. 2 p. 112 infra. 8 335.
4 The record is dated September 29, 1205. See above, p. 50.
5 Cigogna, Inscrizioni Veneziane, vol. iv (1834), p. 538. See also Gerola, p. 167.
THE STRUGGLE WITH GENOA 55
Gradenigo, Pietro Michiel, and Marco Sanudo.1 In addition to Venetians, the ships carried 600 Lombard and Romagnolese horsemen.2 The account of this expedition, to be found in the Chronicle of Martino da Canale,3 is at once the oldest and the most detailed that we possess, and is to be preferred to the later narratives which differ widely from it and from one another in the order of events. According to this chronicle the Venetian fleet first made its way to Corfu, which was captured by storm after a fiercely contested battle ; after which they sailed to Crete with all their company and heard news that there were four Genoese galleys in the harbour of Spinalonga ; these they captured, and then sailed hither and thither about the sea, ' capturing their enemies as falcons capture birds '. As Cav. Gerola very pertinently remarks,4 they were not sufficiently encouraged by their success to attempt the conquest of Crete. The fleet appears then to have returned home, but it is noteworthy that Marco Sanudo and Giovanni Gradenigo remained in the East, where they witnessed a document at Constantinople in February 1207.5 The document itself is interesting as being the first where Marino Zeno gives Pietro Ziani the title of 1 Dominatore of a fourth and a half of the Empire of Romania ', a title which we find Zeno using for the last time in the Pactum Adrianopolitanum of the spring of 1206, but which Pietro Ziani had not yet assumed in July of that year.G Henceforth it was to be a title of the Venetian doge, not of the Constantinopolitan podesta.
1 p. 112 infra.
2 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 54, fo. 160 a; Gerola, p. 142 and note.
3 P- 346. 4 P- 143.
5 Wrongly dated February 1206 in Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 4-1 1.
6 Ibid., pp. 18, 15.
CHAPTER V THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
It must have been about this time that Marco Sanudo gathered the fleet with which he effected the conquest of the Archipelago. According to Daniele Barbaro, who does not know of his share in the naval warfare of 1206 and his return to Constantinople, the expedition had been organized at Venice, presumably during the year 1205-6.1 The earliest authority for this expedition is Andrea Dandolo,2 who definitely places it in the first year of Pietro Ziani, 1205-6, and this date has been accepted by the best of the later chronicles. It is, however, in- consistent with the movements of Sanudo as traced above. The date 1207 is given by Zabarella3 and Sauger,4 who probably both obtained it from some genealogy or family tradition. Certainly the tradition of the ducal family of Naxos on this point is worth more than that of the Venetian chroniclers, and the date is probably correct. It is also supported by the chronicle ending in 1475,5 which places the event after Premarino's expedition to Spinalonga, but before the expulsion of Pescatore from Crete. Daniele Barbaro, who alone dis- tinguishes this expedition from that which Sanudo undertook during his uncle's reign, represents it as due to the miserable condition of the inhabitants and traders in the Archipelago, who were at the mercy of the pirates that infested the Aegean Sea ; the emperor was too busily occupied with the war against his rival of Nicaea, and the attention of the Venetian republic was too much concentrated on the conquest of Crete, for either to be able to spare the necessary forces for the relief of the pirates' victims ; in these circumstances Marco Sanudo collected a company, partly of Venetians and partly of strangers, who undertook the conquest of these islands at their own expense.6 Such, no doubt, was the orthodox Venetian view of the occasion of this conquest, and that it was not without its justification is proved by the abundant evidence that we have from inde- pendent sources of the prevalence of piracy in the Aegean.
Of the magnitude and composition of the expedition and of the incidents of the conquest we have little direct testimony. Andrea Dandolo is practically our sole authority, for the others
1 p. 107 infra.
2 334« 3 P- 56. 4 p. 115 infra. 5 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 51, fo. 72 a. 6 p. 107 infra.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 57
do nothing but reproduce his statements with varying degrees of accuracy. It may be well to set down his narrative in his own words :
1 Accordingly, the power of the Latins having been increased by marvellous deeds, and the power of the Greeks exhausted, many nobles, the rest of the Greeks being leagued with them, resolve boldly to invade the towns of Greece. And sailing separately1 Marco Sanuto with his followers acquired the islands of Nisia, Parius, Melius, and Saint Herinus, and Marino Dandolo acquired Andre.
'Also Ravano dalle Carceri of Verona and his nephew receive Euripus or Nigropons.
* In like manner Andrea and Geremia Gisio [receive] the island of Thinas, Scheria, Scopulus, and Schiatus.
1 Moreover, Philocalo Navigaioso obtaining Stalimene was by an imperial privilegium made Megaducha of the Empire.' 2
One of the most remarkable statements in this narrative is that the rest of the Greeks leagued themselves with the Venetian nobles.3 This is perfectly consistent with the view cited above from Daniele Barbaro, that the expedition aimed at delivering the islanders from the pirates. Already in the previous year the ravages of the Vallachian prince Ionitsa had induced the Greeks of Thrace to attach themselves to the side of the Franks, and Marino Zeno had felt sufficient confidence in their loyalty to make a grant of Adrianople to the Greek noble, Caesar Theodorus Branas,4 who, with his Greek followers, well repaid his trust by the active share that he took in the war against Ionitsa in 1206. The Greeks were aware by this time that Vallachian hordes and Genoese corsairs were a more frightful scourge than Frankish conquerors.
We know nothing of the names of Marco Sanudo's com- panions, except in connexion with the lordships which they won, and we cannot be sure that all the conquerors named by Andrea Dandolo belonged to the same expedition. Euboea at all events, the Euripus or Nigropons of Dandolo, had already been conquered by Jacques d'Avesnes, and had probably passed into
1 The Latin word is ' segregatim '. Dandolo can hardly have meant separately from one another. Can he have meant ' on a private expedition ' (i.e. separately from the forces of the state) ?
2 334.
3 This translation implies that ' sibi ' is to be taken with the main subject 'Nobiles', not with the nearer subject ' Graecis '. If the latter construction were adopted, the meaning would be ' the rest of the Greeks having leagued themselves one with another'. Such a statement would only be true of Theodore Lascaris's empire of Nicaea, a reference to which would be out of place in this sentence.
4 See Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 17-19.
58 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
the hands of Ravano dalle Carceri and his comrades before this date.1 Daniele Barbaro 2 professes to give the names of Marco Sanudo's companions, both Venetian and foreign ; but his only additions to Dandolo's list are Piero Zustignan, Domenigo Michiel, and Giacomo Viaro, Venetians, and the following foreigners : the Toschi, who are described as Flemings, and the Counts della Ruosa of Ireland, together with numerous other knights and Lombard gentlemen. The identity of these two foreign families is disclosed by the conquests attributed to them. The Toschi, who acquired ' ZafTalonia ', Zante, and Santa Maura, are clearly the Tocchi, though these latter came from Benevento, not from Flanders, while the Counts della Ruosa, who are said to have made themselves lords of some lands of the Morea, are no less clearly the Burgundian family, De la Roche, lords of Thebes, Athens, Argos, and Nauplia. It is certain that neither of these families took part in this expedition, or gained any lands in consequence of it. Of the Venetians named by Daniele Barbaro, Piero Zustignan and Domenigo Michiel are stated to have jointly conquered the island of Zia or Ceos. This is in agreement with the genealogical sources used by Hopf,3 from which it appears that Pietro Giustiniani and Domenico Michiele each became lord of a fourth part of Ceos and Seriphos, while the remaining half of these islands fell to the brothers Andrea and Geremia Ghisi.4 The Giacomo Viaro of Daniele Barbaro is, doubtless, the colleague of Marco Dandolo in the conquest of Calli- polis.5 His share in the spoils of the Archipelago is not mentioned by Daniele Barbaro, but we know from Hopf s authorities that he became Marquis of Cerigotto. For the rest, the names and conquests of Marco Sanudo's companions can only be gleaned from documents dealing with particular islands or particular
1 See Stefano Magno, quoted by Hopf, Chroniques Greco-Romanes, p. 179 ; Miller, p. 45. 2 p. 107 infra.
3 See Hopf, article Ghisi in Ersch und Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopadie, lxvi (1857), p. 336; article, Giustiniani, ibid, lxviii (1859), p. 303; Veneto- Byzantinische Analekten, in Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, xxxii (1859), philosoph.-hist. Classe, pp. 427-9. The only sources used by Hopf which I have not inspected are the genealogies of Venetian families compiled by Marco Barbaro (Codex Vindobonensis Foscarini, 6155, 6156, and Cod. Venetus, Museo Civico, Cicogna 570) and Capellari (Codex Marc. It. vii. 16, 18). A genealogy of the Giustiniani family based on Capellari is to be found in Litta, Celebri Famiglie Italiane. The extracts from these genealogical sources which I have examined in Hopf s ' Nachlass ' at Berlin do not contain any statement concerning the exact proportions in which the islands were divided, though these may be inferred from later documents in the Venetian ' Misti '.
4 Domenego Michiell is named in the chronicle ending in 1475 as ' armador ' of a galley in Baseio's expedition of 1206. See p. 53s supra.
6 Jacopo Viadro on p. 50 supra.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 59
families, the results of which are to be found in Hopf 's Geschichte der Insel Andros and Veneto-Byzantinische Analekten.1 Alto- gether, we learn that Marco Sanudo himself acquired Paros, Antiparos, Cimolos, Melos, Amorgos, Ios, Cythnos, Sicinos, Siphnos, Syra, and Pholegandros ; Marino Dandolo, a nephew of the great doge,2 became lord of Andros ; Tenos, Myconos, Scyros, Sciathos, and Scopelos, with half of Ceos and Seriphos, formed the lordship of the brothers Andrea and Geremia Ghisi ; Pietro Giustiniani and Domenico Michiele became each, as has been seen, lord of a quarter of Ceos, to which the exiled arch- bishop of Athens, Michael Acominatus, had retired, and a quarter of Seriphos ; Thera, or Santorin, and Therasia fell to Jacopo Barozzi ; Filocalo Navigaioso became lord of Lemnos and imperial Grand Duke ; Leonardo Foscolo received Anaphe ; Giovanni Quirini was the new lord of Astypalaea ; 3 while Marco Venier became Marquis of Cythera or Cerigo, and Jacopo Viaro of Cerigotto. As Hopf4 and Mr. Miller 5 remark, not only was Patmos allowed to be independent, but its monks received many privileges from the Venetians.
The new reigning families were all Venetian, and any non- Venetian allies must have been compelled to rest content with minor fiefs. Marco Sanudo became suzerain of all the nobles who had gained lordships in this expedition, with the exception of the Venieri and Viari, who depended directly on Venice, and perhaps of Filocalo Navigaioso, who became Megaducha or Grand Duke, that is, Admiral of the Empire.6 If he held Lemnos in virtue of this office, he must have been an immediate vassal of the emperor, but it is possible that the office of admiral and the lordship of Lemnos were originally distinct.7
1 Ubi supra.
2 So Hopf, Chroniques Gre*co- Romanes, p. 486 ; according to Capellari, Marino Dandolo was the elder brother of Marco, the conqueror of Callipolis, and grandson of the doge's cousin Marco.
3 According to Navagiero, 986, Giovanni Quirini was the first Venetian castellan of Methone and Corone, conquered in 1207; according to Marino Sanudo, 536, he was the first Venetian castellan of Methone, but not of Corone, but Andrea Dandolo (335) makes Petro Polano and Lello Veglo the first castellans of these cities.
4 p. 223. 5 p. 44.
6 In my article, Genoa and the Fourth Crusade, p. 55, I erroneously stated that the brothers Ghisi held their lands directly from the emperor.
7 Schaube, p. 265, quotes from Sacerdoti, Le colleganze nella pratica degli affari e nella legislazione veneta, Atti delle adunanze del R. Istituto Veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti, lix (1899- 1900), parte II, p. 40, a document executed at Thessalonica in October 1206, in which Navigaioso is styled 1 Filocarus Navigajoso megaduca de Constantinop.' Hopf, Chroniques Greco-Romanes, p. 179, wrongly cites Stefano Magno, fo. 79 b, for the assertion that Filocalo Navigaioso was ' non nisi brevissimum tempus ' Megaducha of Stalimene (Lemnos). What Magno really does, is to quote
60 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
One name is conspicuous by its absence from this list. Pietro Michiel, who had been most closely associated with Sanudo in the past, preferred to seek a share in the spoils of Corfu, which, as has been seen, was conquered in the previous year. By a decree of July 1307, the Venetian republic granted hereditary fiefs in that island to ten of her citizens, of whom Pietro Michiel was one.
There is little direct evidence as to the time occupied by the conquest of the Archipelago. But it is universally treated as a single event, and no record of resistance has survived. A chronicle called * F. C is quoted by Stefano Magno1 for the statement that the conquest was completed in one year. This seems intrinsically probable, and may be provisionally accepted as a fact.
Marco Sanudo was himself invested with the Duchy of the Aegean Sea — Archipelago is a later corruption of Egeo pelago — by the Emperor Henry, ' on a freer tenure than any baron who was then in Romania, with all his rights, reasons, honours, and justices aforesaid pertaining to the duchy'.2 There appears to be no evidence of the occasion of this investiture. Lichtle,3 in his list of the dukes of the Archipelago, gives the date 12. 10, but cites no authority. The Abbe Pegues 4 gives the same date, also without citing any authority. Buchon 5 states that this would be at the congress of Ravenika. Finlay ° makes the definite state- ment that it took place at the parliament of Ravenika in 1210 ;7 he does not state his source, but he was probably relying on Buchon. The investiture is not recorded in Henry of Valenciennes' account of that parliament.8 The latest historian of Naxos, Grimaldi, gives in one place the date 121 2, and in another the date 1209. He does not connect it with any particular event, but in both places mentions it immediately after the completion
' A. N.' for the statement that the conquest of the Archipelago was com- pleted in a short time. This statement is not in Andrea Navagiero, and it is clear from this and other passages that Magno must have some other chronicle in his mind.
1 Ubi supra.
2 So Duke Marco II in his reply to Venice on the suzerainty over Andros. See Hopf, in Sitzungsberichte, xxi. 243.
3 'A7roXXc0j>, r/, p. 82.
4 Histoire et phenomenes du volcan et des iles volcaniques de Santorin (1842), p. 52.
5 Histoire des conquetes (1846), p. 167 note. The same statement is made by Hopf in Sitzungsberichte, xvi. 36.
6 History of Greece (1877), lv- i°9» 277.
7 This was actually the date of the second parliament of Ravenika. Buchon and Finlay, however, confuse the two parliaments held at that place.
8 Apud Geoffroi de Ville-Hardouin, ed. De Wailly (1874), pp. 404-6.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 61
of the conquest of the Archipelago.1 An earlier date is sug- gested by Sauger,2 according to whom Marco Sanudo, after the conquest of the Archipelago, sent envoys to the Emperor Henry and King Boniface. Both gave friendly replies, and Henry created him ' Duke of the Archipelago and Prince of the Empire'. As Boniface died in the summer of 1207, this would fix the investiture for that year. On a point like this, Sauger's reputation is, perhaps, not the highest, but there is no reason why the investiture should have been delayed.
Comment has often been passed, most recently by Mr. Miller,3 on Marco Sanudo's intention not to recognize the suzerainty of Venice. But, if we set aside the bold conjecture of Tafel to read 'cum Cycladibus' in the partition treaty,4 Andros alone of all the islands in the duchy had been assigned to Venice in that treaty. The emperor, as overlord of the whole empire, was entitled to receive homage for the lands that had been assigned to the crusaders.
Marco Sanudo's conquests were, apparently, not confined to the Archipelago. Two groups of Venetian chronicles either record or imply that he conquered Smyrna. The group contain- ing the direct statement is represented by seven manuscripts now in St. Mark's library, which, so far as the present narrative is concerned, do not present more than verbal differences from each other. The verbal coincidence does not, however, mean that the seven manuscripts belong to the same chronicle, but that the seven chronicles which they represent are temporarily identical, inasmuch as they have drawn their material with a minimum of alteration from a common stock. The oldest of the seven appears to be the ' Vitturi Cronica', which ter- minates in 1396 and professes to have been written in that year. The present manuscript (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 2051) professes to have been completed by Antuonio Vituri in November, 1464. It is alone among all the chronicles that I have inspected in making a member of the Vituri family the first ' retor ' or rettore of Crete, but, apart from this natural partiality to the author's family, it appears faithfully to represent the common source of the seven chronicles.5 Five chronicles of this group end about the middle of the fifteenth century, viz. : (1) A Cronaca di Venezia, preserved in a fifteenth-century manuscript (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 550), ending in 1442. (2) A Cronaca Veneziana, also preserved in a fifteenth -century manuscript (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 104), ending in 1443. (3) The Cronaca di Venezia of Abbioso Camillo of Ravenna, preserved in a sixteenth-century manu- script (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 2052), also ending in 1443. This
1 For a fuller notice of Grimaldi's History of Naxos, see p. 69 infra.
2 p. 116 infra. 3 p. 571. 4 p. 37 supra. 5 See p. in infra.
62 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
chronicle was used by Marino Sanudo, author of the lives of the doges. (4) A chronicle described in the catalogue of St. Mark's library as by Antonio di Matteo di Curato. The chronicle is, however, quite different from that contained in Cod. Marc. It. vii. 163, which also bears his name. I doubt, in fact, whether the two have anything in common except that they end in the same year, 1457. The chronicle in question is preserved in a fifteenth-century manuscript (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 162). (5) A Cronaca di Venezia written in the name of Piero Dolfin, which relates events in his life between 1435 and 1439. The catalogue, however, suggests that it belongs to Zorzi Dolfin. It is quite distinct from the Cronaca di Venezia of Pietro Delfino, preserved in Cod. Marc. It. vii. 559. It is preserved in a sixteenth-century manuscript (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 794), ending in 1458. The group of seven is completed by a Cronaca Veneta, described in the catalogue as ending in 1492, and as being the Cronaca Zancaruola up to 1380. The chronicle, however, really ends in 1528, and is quite distinct from that preserved in Cod. Marc. It. vii. 1274, which is also conjectured to be the Cronaca Zancaruola. Our chronicle is preserved in a sixteenth-century manuscript (Cod. Marc. It. vii. $1^). The direct statement of the conquest of Smyrna is also made by the chronicler cited by Stefano Magno 1 as A. N., but the facts cited from the same chronicler in the context do not seem to connect him with this group.
The conquest is implied, but not recorded, in the group of chronicles which has already been used as our main authority for the conquest of Naxos.2 This group, like that last mentioned, consists of different chronicles by distinct writers, whose names are as often as not preserved to us, but who show merely verbal differences in this particular portion of their work. This close verbal agreement extends to at least six chronicles, two of which, however, omit all mention of Smyrna. Of these six the oldest is probably (1) the Cronica Antica di Venetia, which terminates in 1360, and has been cited above for the connexion of Ttomaxo Candian with the foundation of Venice 3 as well as for the con- quest of Naxos.4 This chronicle is preserved in a fourteenth century MS. (Cod. Marc. It. vii. $j).5 Two other chronicles belonging to this group terminate in the fourteenth century. The best known of these is (2) the ' Cronaca Veneta di Enrico
1 Annali Veneti, fo. 79 b. Stefano Magno records the same event in the Cronaca Magno, vol. ii, Cod. Marc. It. vii. 514, fo. 79 a.
2 See p. 41 supra.
3 See p. 123 supra. The reference to Ttomaxo Candian suggests that the author had access to a source which was ready to do honour to the Sanudo family. 4 p. 41 supra. 5 See pp. 109, no infra.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 63
Dandolo di Giovanni sino al MCCCLXXX', as it is entitled in the Marcian manuscript, It. vii. 103. The author was pre- sumably that Enrico, son of Giovanni, who appears in Capel- lari's * genealogy as seventh in descent from Andrea, brother of the doge Enrico. In addition to the Marcian manuscript which I have used, and which bears the date 1660, there is a manuscript at Vienna, Foscarini n. 6230, used by Hopf, who has left a manuscript transcript of the part with which we are at present concerned. The transcript is preserved in Hopf's Nachlass at the Royal Library at Berlin, and I have collated it with the Marcian manuscript. The Vienna manuscript is entitled Cronaca Veneta di Enrico Dandolo al 1373, and in spite of the title of the Marcian manuscript, the text of the chronicle contained in that manuscript really ends in 1373 or perhaps in 137 1. A third manuscript of Enrico Dandolo is in the Museo Civico at Venice (Cod. Cicogna 3423). The Marcian manuscript has been used by Mr. Miller, the author of The Latins in the Levant. It may be said that this chronicle is the best known of all the unprinted material for the history of the conquest. (3) The third chronicle of this group is one preserved in a curious medley of chronicles and fragments of chronicles contained in the Codex Marcianus, It. vii. 91. The chronicle in question is the last contained in this manuscript, and begins on fo. 600 a. It belongs to the sixteenth century and ends in 1356. The three remaining chronicles of this group end in the fifteenth century. One of these, (4) a Cronaca Veneta, ending in 1410, is preserved in a fifteenth-century manuscript (Codex Marc. It. vii. 89). Both this chronicle and the last mentioned omit the reference to Smyrna, though they otherwise present a close verbal agreement with the other chronicles belonging to the same group. (5) A Cronaca di Venezia, attributed to Pietro Delfino, quite distinct as has been seen above from the chronicle of the same name ending in 1458, is preserved in the fifteenth- century manuscript, Cod. Marc. It. vii. 559, and ends in 141 8. (6) Finally, there is the Cronaca Veneta of Antonio Morosini, the original of which is preserved at Vienna. A tran- script of this was made in 1887 and purchased by St. Mark's Library at Venice in 1889. My knowledge of the chronicle is based upon the transcript, not upon the original. The transcript is now Cod. Marc. It. vii. 2048. The chronicle was appa- rently begun in 1374, after which date it becomes a diary, ending in 1433 or later.
This second group of chronicles has received more attention from later writers than has the group described first. Its narra- tive, though not its words, is to be found in the chronicle ending 1 Campidoglio Veneto, s.v. Dandolo.
64 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
in 1475 to which frequent reference has been made in this work. More important is the use of some chronicles of this group by Marino Sanudo in the Vite de' duchi di Venezia,1 the only published authority which deals with this part of Marco Sanudo's career.
According to the group which contains the direct statement, and which I shall call the Vituri group, Marco Sanudo, after conquering Naxos and many2 neighbouring islands and giving them to his followers, ' went to Lastre,3 where was the empire of the Greeks and an island which was called Le Smire,4 and took it and gained much treasure, all which he divided among his men'.
I know of no place which can be identified with Lastre. It may be some name unrecognizably corrupted. It is important to note that it is regarded as the seat of the Greek empire, and, as will be seen later, the group headed by the Cronica Antica ending in 1360, which I shall call the Cronica Antica group, attributes to Marco Sanudo a war with the Emperor of Constantinople, who has clearly been named in error for the Greek emperor
1 545 E.
2 So the Vituri Chronicle ; the other chronicles belonging to this group have ' two other islands \
3 So the Vituri Chronicle, the ' Dolfin ' chronicle, and the chronicle ending in 1528; the chronicle ending in 1442 has 'Lastra', while the anonymous chronicle ending in 1443 blends this notice with that of the conquest of Smyrna, reading ' last0 doue era limperio di grifoni a lisola che se dise le Simire,' i. e. ' Last0 where was the empire of the Greeks at the island which is called le Simire (or Smyrna) '. The other chronicles maintain the general construction of the sentence as it appears in the Vituri Chronicle, but Abbioso Camillo has ' Last0 ' and Antonio di Matteo ' Cast0 ' apparently for ' Castello ' or 'Castro', which may explain the origin of the spelling Last0. Stefano Magno (Cronaca Magno, fo. 79 a) appears to have used a chronicle which combined the reading Cast0 with the construction of the sentence as it appears in the anony- mous chronicle ending in 1443. At all events, after narrating the conquest of Naxos and 11 — surely this cannot represent the 'do' of the chroniclers other than Vituri — islands of the Archipelago, he states that Marco Sanudo afterwards went 'al castel delo Smire' and took it, in which places (i.e. in the islands of the Archipelago and at Smyrna), having acquired much wealth, he caused himself to be called Duke of the Archipelago. The chronicler who served as Magno's authority for this statement may be the same as the A.N. to whom reference is made in his 'Annali Veneti ', where he is said to have stated that Marco Sanudo went ' alle Smire ' and took it and gave it over to pillage. Magno ends his reference to A. N. by saying that according to him this happened ' dapoi ' (afterwards). This word, as it happens, is used by the Vituri group as the beginning of the notice of the conquest of Lastre and Smyrna, ' e dapoi ando a Lastre '.
4 % Le Smire' is the reading of the Vituri Chronicle, of Antonio di Matteo, and of the chronicle ending in 1528. The reading in the chronicle ending in 1442 is not quite clear, but is either 'Alesmine' or 'Alesimine'. The anonymous chronicle ending in 1443 has, as will be seen above, ' Le Simire ', Camillo has ' Le Smirre', and Dolfin has 'Aleximire'. The initial 'A' is probably either the preposition which has got attached to the noun, or a repetition of the last letter of the previous word ' chiama \
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 65
of Nicaea. Le Smire is the Italian name for Smyrna, and one is half tempted to adopt the reading which Magno appears to have found in the chronicler ' A. N.', traces of which are found in other manuscripts of the Vituri group, which would make Lastre a corruption of Castello or perhaps of Castro, and would make it the castle of Smyrna, thus reducing the two conquests to one. Or we may adopt the reading Castro for Lastre, without identifying it with Smyrna. This would leave it quite impossible to identify the place, since the name Castro is so ubiquitous in Greek lands as to be as good as no name at all. The description of Smyrna as an island need trouble nobody. It merely illustrates the kind of material out of which the history of this period has to be reconstructed.
One interesting trait in the narrative is Marco Sanudo's division of the spoil among his followers. Marco Sanudo appears to have had a rare gift of rendering himself popular both with the conquerors and with the conquered. Of his popularity among the Greeks we shall find abundant evidence later. His reputation with the Latin adventurers was clearly based on his liberality towards his followers, and it is difficult to see how he could find the spoil to reward them without alienating the Greeks. Much of his popularity with the conquered was, no doubt, due to his Greek marriage, which will be mentioned presently, but it is also possible that a large part of the plunder may have been at the expense of the state or of absentee landlords, the loss of which would not affect the well-being of the Greek inhabitants. Smyrna was, no doubt, the richest city that fell into his hands, but the wealth that was most easily pillaged would consist of high-priced articles of luxury, the loss of which would not disturb the prosperity of the population.
The war with the emperor, probably Theodore Lascaris, is briefly described in the chronicles of the Cronica Antica group. According to their narrative, Marco Sanudo with a fleet of seven or eight galleys attacked the emperor, who was in command of a fleet of thirty galleys. The deed was certainly in keeping with the dashing valour of the duke who had set fire to his own galleys at Potamides, but it is not surprising that on this occa- sion he should have been defeated and made prisoner. He purchased his ransom by the surrender of Smyrna 1 ' and all those countries ', probably all his conquests on the mainland,
1 In this, as in the other group of chronicles, there is considerable variety in the spelling of this name. The Cronica Antica, Enrico Dandolo, and Morosini have 'le Smire', Delfino has 'la Smira', the chronicle ending in 1475 has 'le Smires', Marino Sanudo has 'le Smirne', and, as has been seen already, the chronicles ending in 1356 and 1410 omit the reference to Smyrna altogether.
P 2961 F
66 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
and the emperor in consideration of his nobility — in some chro- nicles, his privation, or his gallantry1 — gave him his sister in marriage, ; from whom a large part of those of the house of Sanudo are descended '. Marino Sanudo,2 who, like the chroni- clers of this group, makes Marco Sanudo's enemy ' the emperor of Constantinople ', asserts that this was the occasion of Marco Sanudo's investiture with the duchy of the Archipelago, but no mention is made of this in the chronicles.
Our information about the achievements of individual ad- venturers in these years is so scanty that it is not surprising that neither Greek nor Western writers, apart from the two groups of Venetian chronicles, should have recorded Marco Sanudo's in- vasion of Asia and intermarriage with the imperial family. The silence of Sauger, the historian of the duchy of the Archipelago, is noteworthy. There is nothing strange in the fact that no tradition of this war survived in Naxos for him to use, but his general readiness to work his knowledge of the history of the Latin East into the story of the Sanudo family proves that his silence on this occasion must be due to an ignorance of the Venetian chronicles in which the facts were to be found. It follows, therefore, that when he agrees with these chronicles in making the attack and stubborn defence of a strong fortress, in his narrative Apalire, a feature of the original conquest of Naxos, he must be treated as an independent and confirmatory authority.
The Cronica Antica group of chronicles is unanimous in making Marco Sanudo's bride the sister of the emperor, from which we may infer that she belonged to the family of Lascaris. Marco Barbaro,3 who may be relying on the chroniclers' statement, which is repeated by Marino Sanudo, and who may have been sufficiently well informed to be able to correct their error in making her brother emperor of Constantinople instead of Nicaea, definitely makes Marco Sanudo marry a lady of the Lascaris family whose Christian name he does not give. The statement may, however, have been derived from some genealogy in the possession of the Sanudo family. Hopf, on the other hand, suggests 4 that the princess belonged to the family of Angelus, of which the Empress Anna was a member. The reason for this suggestion is that Marco Sanudo's eldest son and successor bore the name Angelo, which had not previously been used in the families of Candiano and Sanudo. The argument is not con- vincing. The name Angelus was held in sufficient honour to have been readily given to a prince who had none of the blood
1 See p. 67* infra. 2 Vite de' duchi di Venezia, 545 E.
3 Genealogie, Cod.Vind. Fosc. n. 6156, fo. 376 b, cited in Hopf s Nachlass, iii. 17. 4 p. 242.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 67
of the family in his veins ; moreover, the name Angelo was not unknown in the Sanudo family before this date. When, in March 1196, the Venetian fleet at Abydos refused to return, and resolved to raise a contribution among its officers to defray the expenses of remaining at its post, 179 officers are recorded as having advanced money for this purpose. Their names and con- tributions are recorded in a manuscript preserved in St. Mark's library, and published by Tafel and Thomas.1 Two members of the Sanudo family appear in the list : Leonardo, who may have been a brother of Marco,2 and Angelo, who appears to have been a man of some wealth. At all events, his contribution, which amounted to 99 hyperpers (or about £45 sterling), is the seven- teenth in order of magnitude in the whole list. Marco's son may well have been named after this rich relation. We have also to consider the possibility that Angelo Sanudo, the son of Marco, was the offspring of an earlier marriage. According to Sauger,3 Angelo was twenty-six when he succeeded to the duchy in 1220. It will be seen later that Marco was still duke in 1230, but, even so, the birth of Angelo would fall before the expedition to Asia. Sauger also informs us that Marco was accompanied by Angelo when he went to join the Emperor Henry on his last expedition in 1 21 6, and left Angelo in command of the forces of the duchy when he returned to Naxos after the election of the Emperor Peter in 121 7. Sauger may have had no sufficient authority for these statements, but it would certainly appear that Angelo did represent his father on the mainland, for, according to Duke Marco II, Angelo did homage for the duchy to the Emperor Robert, who was present in Romania from 1221 to 1227.4 It is true that Marco II places this event after the death of his grand- father, Marco I, but, as will be seen later, Marco I must have been still reigning in 1230, the date of his second intervention in Crete. It is even possible that there may be an allusion to the loss of a previous wife in the word ' orbitade ', which is used in the chronicle ending in 1410, and by Delfino and Morosini, to describe the reason why the emperor gave Marco Sanudo his sister in marriage.5 On the whole, there seems to be no reason for supposing that the new duchess was other than what the
1 xii. 216-25.
2 p. 13 supra. 3 p. 122 infra.
4 Pacta Ferrariae, fo. 97a, quoted by Hopf in Sitzungsberichte, xxi. 243.
5 The Cronica Antica reads ' per la sua nobilittade ' ; Enrico Dandolo has 'da puo per algun tempo' (some time later); the chronicle ending in 1356 has ' dapuo poi per sua hurbanita ' ; while the three chronicles named in the text have respectively ' da puo algun tenpo per la orbitade soa ', ' dapuo per la orbiditade sua', and * per la horbitade soa'. The chronicle ending in 1475 has 'perche lo dito misr Marcho era valente', and Marino Sanudo has ' veduta detto Imperadore la sua valorosita e bellezza'.
F 2
68 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
chroniclers would make her, the sister of the emperor. Whether she was the mother of Angelo Sanudo or not seems doubtful, but in view of the evidence quoted above it seems easier to believe that he was born of an earlier marriage. It should be noted that Marino Sanudo's statement that 'almost all ' of the house of Sanudo are descended from this lady is not borne out by the Cronica Antica group from which his information appears to be derived. In these chronicles we find ' una gran parte ' (a large part), instead of Marino Sanudo's 'quasi tutti'. Sauger1 asserts that Angelo was Marco's only son. Hopf,2 however, knows of another son called Giovanni, who lived at Negropont, and died about 1360, and who was apparently the ancestor of a branch of the Sanudo family that long continued to exist in that island. The oldest genealogy of the Dukes of the Archi- pelago describes Angelo as ' filius primogenitus ', which seems to imply that there were other sons.3
It would be an interesting task to study Marco Sanudo's work in the organization of the Duchy of the Archipelago, and more particularly of Naxos, if the necessary material existed. Zerlentes has made a very successful study of the social condition of Naxos in the fifteenth century,4 but it is not easy to say which of the conditions which he describes go back to the time of the conquest, and whether any go back further. Direct state- ments about the work of Marco Sanudo are only found in very late writers, and even these do not carry us far. One thing seems certain, that the conquest definitely introduced the feudal system into these islands, and that the relations between the lords and their tenants were henceforward conceived on a feudal basis, which appears to have endured in Naxos till the Turkish govern- ment abolished seignorial rights in 1720. The feudal system, whereby most of the greater tenants held their lands on condition of military service, while tenants lower in the scale were required to provide for the maintenance of their lords who were responsible for the fighting, commended itself to the Latin conquerors as the best means of maintaining a military state, and even the Venetian republic, which knew nothing of feudalism at home, did not hesitate to introduce feudalism into its conquests in the East. Of Marco Sanudo's work in his conquests outside the island of Naxos we know nothing, except in some cases the names of the lords to whom he granted the islands. He kept in his own hands Naxos, Paros, Antiparos, Cimolos, Melos, Amorgos, Ios,
2 Chroniques Grdco-Romanes, p. 480.
3 See Miller, Der alteste Stammbaum der Herzoge von Naxos, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xvi (1907), p. 259.
4 See Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xiii (1904), pp. 137-42.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 69
Cythnos, Sicinos, Siphnos, Syra, and Pholegandros ; which means that in these islands the fiefs were small and that there was no lord of the whole island except the duke. We know the names of none of the lords who held under the early Sanudi in these islands. We only know the names of those lords who ruled whole islands and who had, presumably, contributed to the expenses of the conquest. The reason why we have a tradition about the settle- ment of Naxos is because it was the capital of the Archipelago, and therefore attracted more interest than the other islands, and because it became the refuge of the Latin nobility, who still inhabit the island and who have preserved something of the memory of the Latin conquest and settlement. Three histories or descriptions of Naxos have been written by Catholics resident in the island. To one of these, by the Jesuit father Robert Sauger, reference has frequently been made above. The work is severely criticized by Hopf,1 especially for its errors in chronology. But a modern scholar would hardly expect to find in a seventeenth- century work an accurate resume of the history of the earlier dukes. What we seek in Sauger is the tradition that survived in the Latin families at a time when they were still rich and powerful and proud of their origin. The second of the three works to which I have referred was written about 1800 by the Jesuit father Ignace Lichtle, and is entitled ' Description de Tile de Naxos '. Several manuscripts of this work are in existence. I have studied one in the British Museum, MS. Add. 36538, and I possess a modern Greek translation, never completed, which appeared in 'AttoWcdv, €ttj £', rf (Piraeeus, 1891, 1892). The third work is a history of Naxos, written by one of the noble Genoese family of Grimaldi, which settled in Naxos in the seventeenth century. The work is dated 187- (sic). The manu- script belongs to Madame della Rocca of Naxos. I had the privilege of seeing it on the last evening of my visit to Naxos, and made a few extracts, while I owe other extracts to the courtesy of Madame della Rocca and the Mesdemoiselles Grillo. The work contains a great deal of information about Naxos. It does not appear, however, so far as my inspection has gone, to be based on any documentary authorities older than the seventeenth century, and any information that it contains refer- ring to an earlier period must be regarded as merely a record of Naxiote tradition, to which the author doubtless had full access.
To these larger works we may add the brief but fairly detailed description of the island in Coronelli's Atlante Veneto, tomo ii, Isolario, parte i (1696), 232-4. Daniele Barbaro 2 only devotes one sentence to Marco Sanudo's 1 Sitzungsberichte, xvi, pp. 28, 29. 2 p. 106 infra.
70 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
work at Naxos after the capture of the fortress (of Apalire). His narrative runs as follows : ' Marco Sanudo therefore remained victorious, and having made himself fully master of the island of Nissia (Naxos), and being desirous that the whole Archipelago should come under the dominion of Venetians, after he had well fortified this island and placed in it a sufficient garrison, with the knowledge and counsel of the doge, his uncle, he went to Venice . . .' Here the completion of the conquest and the fortification of the island are placed between the conquest of Naxos and the mission to Constantinople, that is, in the year 1304-5.
That Marco Sanudo fortified Naxos before proceeding to the conquest of other islands is also attested by Sauger.1 He states that after the capture of Apalire there was a general submission to the conqueror, who immediately completed the subjugation of the whole island ; he now resolved to establish his authority there in order to facilitate the conquest of the remaining islands of the Aegean, and for this purpose erected many fortifications in different suitable places to inspire awe in his new subjects, beginning with the foundation of the castle, called Naxos after the island, which, as Sauger states, continues to be the most important castle of the whole island. Sauger goes on to say that he selected this as his residence because of its pleasant situation ; it is composed, says he, of a great square tower with walls of extraordinary thickness, with an open space round it, which in its turn was enclosed within a wall strengthened by great towers 29 or 30 feet from one another, within which are enclosed about 300 nouses. ' This castle ', he says, ' is situated on the coast, on a small hill on the west side of the island ; and to the east of it stretches a pleasant plain, more than a league broad, and two leagues long, ending in several small hills full of villages and hamlets affording a delightful view.'
Sauger's description clearly applies to the present Castro of Naxos, which must, according to him, have been built between the conquest of Naxos and that of the rest of the Archipelago. It has already been seen that Marco Sanudo was away from Naxos during the greater part of this time, and it will be seen presently that Grimaldi assigns a later date to the foundation of the Castro of Naxos. Still there is nothing to prove that Sauger is wrong. There is nothing on which tradition is so vague as on dates. The important fact is that Marco Sanudo founded the Castro of Naxos, which forms the natural acropolis of the ancient city. This city appears to have been deserted in Sanudo's day and he thus became its second founder. The wall with which he surrounded the Castro still stands, as do many of 1 pp. 115, 116 infra.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 71
the towers on it, but they are rather obscured by the practice — which, from the dates on the houses, must have existed from the seventeenth century at latest — of building on or against the wall. The best impression of the thickness of the wall is obtained in passing through one of the three long gateways into the Castro. Of the great square tower or keep, which formed the centre of this fortification, all the upper stories have long since disappeared, and the existing room on the ground-floor is now used as a lumber room. It had, in fact, been already reduced to its present condition when Lichtle wrote. It does not appear to have been occupied since the Turkish conquest, and was probably used as a quarry by the builders of neighbouring houses. Nothing like 300 houses are now to be found in the Castro. There certainly would not be room for so many unless they were very small. None but the Roman Catholic nobility, who are in some cases greatly impoverished, continue to reside there : the minor Latin families have long since adopted the Greek religion and dwell in the lower, or Greek, town.
On the hill-slope below the Castro is the Borgo, also enclosed by a wall. This is certainly not older than Marco Sanudo, if so old. From the first it has been the Greek city, while the Castro has been the Latin. The modern town stretches far along the coast below the Borgo, but its name, Neochori, implies its later origin.1 It could only have sprung into being when it was no longer considered necessary to dwell behind strong walls. The fortifications of Naxos, unlike those of Apanocastro, a more central fortress which will be mentioned later, do not appear to have ever been accommodated to the use of cannon. The city must, in fact, have enjoyed since the sixteenth century a kind of Turkish peace, which, if it did not attempt to destroy the corsairs, at least prevented them from growing strong enough to venture to attack even an unfortified town.
Marco Sanudo, according to Sauger, not only provided Naxos with a castle, but gave it a harbour. His harbour was the same as the modern harbour, protected on the north by the island of Bacchus or Palati and on the west by a breakwater, which he constructed at great expense. There is evidence, not mentioned by Sauger, but quoted by Bent,2 that the island of Bacchus was at one time joined to the mainland by a pier, as it has recently been joined again, but I know of no evidence to connect the blocks of the old pier with the Middle Ages. The construction of a breakwater is a slow work, and, whatever may have been the date of the foundation of the castle of Naxos, the breakwater
1 Zerlentes, Aiapdxi iv Na|a> Kaarpivav ko.1 Nco^optrcoi' (llapvacrcros xi. 408 [1888]), gives a careful description of the topography of the city.
2 The Cyclades (1885), p. 337.
72 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
at least cannot have been completed till after the conquest of the other islands of the Archipelago. Sauger also states that Marco Sanudo constructed an arsenal in which galleys might be protected against enemies and storms.
He continues as follows : ' And having thus established his new authority, Sanudo devoted his whole attention to winning the love of his subjects, whose natural antipathy to the Latins he recognized. Wherefore he granted them as much freedom as they had previously possessed in the practice of their religious worship according to their own rite. He confirmed the authority of the Greek archbishop, priests, and monks, and all their privileges. He released the monasteries of the Order of Saint Basil from all taxes and imposts, and he won the love of those schismatics to such a degree that they were scarcely able to express the joy which they felt in living under so tolerant a ruler.'
The popularity of the rule of the Sanudi among the Greek population appears to be beyond dispute. Later on, Marco Sanudo will be seen heading the Greeks of Crete against the Venetian duke, and it is not improbable that this popularity was due in some measure to his mild treatment of the Greek religion. It must not, however, be supposed that the property of the Greek Church was never alienated. The local tradition at Potamia relates that the Byzantine church now known as Aimamas, situated in a garden belonging to the Roman Catholic archbishop, was the Greek cathedral before the conquest, when it was given to the Latin Church, but that the Eucharist was secretly celebrated every year by a Greek priest till the garden was definitely closed in 1820.1 The removal of the capital from Potamia to the city of Naxos would, of course, make the posses- sion of the ancient cathedral a matter of minor importance.
The next paragraph in Sauger creates a greater difficulty, because it is not easy to see how the process described could have taken place without a certain dispossession of the Greeks. It runs as follows :
1 Meanwhile the new duke, both from motives of political expediency and out of gratitude, wishing to reward the officers of his army who were distinguished in the expedition and to increase their devotion, distributed among them many lands which he ennobled by making them lordships, which these men and their descendants held for more than a century, until in the process of time these fiefs were reunited to the ducal demesne/
That the feudal system was introduced at the time of the conquest seems certain, and that lands were then given to the companions of the conqueror seems equally certain. It is also
1 See Zerlentes, Bv{avTiciKr} emypa(f>r) €< Na£ov, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xvi (1907), pp. 285, 286.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 73
possible that Sauger is right in believing that all the fiefs even- tually returned to the duke. , At all events, the Latin families of the conquest, with the single exception of the Sanudi, seem to have been extinguished at some early date, and their fiefs must either have escheated to the duke or have passed by marriage or purchase to other families. I have not come across the name of any noble family except the Sanudi which was settled in Naxos before the time of the Crispo dukes. It is hardly probable that the whole of Naxos was granted to the comrades of Marco Sanudo, though it is possible that the whole country outside the city of Naxos was from this time supposed to consist of fiefs. As will be seen later, the island came eventually to contain fifty-six fiefs, most of which were held by Greeks. It is not improbable that the lands held by Greeks were feudalized, and their tenures were assimilated to the feudal tenures to which the Latins were accustomed. If lands were found for the Latins without dispossessing the Greek population, they must have been taken from the Byzantine Government, or from absentee Greeks, or have been waste before the conquest. As will be seen later,1 Grimaldi makes the not improbable state- ment that the coast, including the subsequent city and the rich plain of Naxos, had been deserted before the conquest through fear of pirates, while Lichtle states that the mountain pastures had been treated as desert, but were converted by their lords, who let them out to herdsmen, into valuable possessions. It may also be supposed that many a Greek owner might become the tenant of a Latin lord without suffering any pecuniary loss, as it is not at all improbable that the exactions of the Byzantine treasury and the extortions of its officials would be more burden- some than the dues paid to a Latin lord. But in all probability the increase in the wealth of the island under the rule of Marco Sanudo was the main reason why it was possible for the con- queror to be regarded with feelings of gratitude by both nations. The conquest of the Archipelago had been largely a conquest from pirates, and Sanudo and his companions must have destroyed or expelled the majority of them from the Aegean. Whether the plain of Naxos had or had not been deserted before the conquest, it was Marco Sanudo who gave the island what it had not possessed for centuries— a port, and thus enabled it to reap the benefit of its great fertility. He also made it the capital of the Archipelago, a fact which doubtless led to its being a centre of commerce as well as the seat of government. Even the presence of Venetians may in itself have stimulated the trade of the island. Here, as elsewhere, the Latin conquest was the beginning of a new era of vigorous life and commercial 1 pp. yS, 123 infra.
74 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
expansion. In this respect the Latin conquest was not unlike the Turkish. From 1400 to about 1540 the Aegean islands were constantly ravaged by war and piracy, but when once the Turkish power was definitely established the islands recovered their population and prosperity, in part no doubt as the natural effect of a more peaceful regime, but in part also as the result of a systematic colonization carried through by the Ottoman government.1
Sauger proceeds, ' In this first prosperity Naxos was imme- diately settled by a multitude of Latins, consisting of followers of the duke, together with many strangers who flocked to it from all sides, expecting to grow rich in the service of such a leader, with the result that the Latin religion began to grow not only in numbers, but in the importance of the people who ministered to it. This compelled Sanudo to ask a bishop from the pope, who sent him one gladly ; and he founded a cathedral for him in the Castro beside his own palace, and granted him many lands for his maintenance. The revenues of the bishop increased greatly from this time, because of the piety and liberality of the inhabitants, as we shall see later. The Chapter of the new cathedral was soon afterwards composed of six canons, a provost, precentor, dean, and treasurer, and in spite of all the persecutions of the infidel it remains to this day.'
Here there can be no doubt of the accuracy of Sauger's state- ments. The cathedral which Marco Sanudo erected is still the Roman Catholic Cathedral of Naxos, but it has undergone extensive alterations. The last restoration was in 1865, when the floor was raised eight or ten feet. This will give some idea of the extent to which the dust of centuries has raised the ground outside. From this it would seem to follow that the existing room in the ducal keep, which is now some feet below the level of the ground, must formerly have been above it. Four escutcheons can still be seen over the great door of the cathedral. I am informed that they are those of Delia Craspere, Crispo, the Venetian Republic, and Sanudo, but I do not know when they were carved, certainly not before the time of the Crispo dukes, perhaps by Archbishop Domenico Delia Craspere, about 1579. An inscription over the door of the cathedral states that it was consecrated in 1589 by Archbishop Raphael Schiati in honour of the Purification of the Virgin Mary. It is interest- ing to observe that the former Greek cathedral appears to have had the same dedication.2 According to Coronelli,3 the Latin
1 See Mr. Hasluck's most interesting article, Depopulation in the Aegean Islands and the Turkish Conquest, in The Annual of the British School at Athens, xvii, 1910-n, pp. 1 51-81.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 75
cathedral had previously borne the title of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary, and the consecration by Schiati aimed at transferring the festival of dedication to a season when the Latin families would be in the city, and not in the country. It has been the seat of an archbishop since 1520.
There is very little in Lichtle that is not already in Sauger. He informs us, however, that Marco Sanudo fortified the Castro with twelve 1 towers, and that the Castro was, as it still is, the habita- tion of the Latins, the rest of the city towards the sea, ' the bourg ', being surrounded by walls and inhabited by the Greeks, as well as that which lies outside the walls and is called Neochorio or New Town. He mentions that Sanudo's palace was confiscated by the Turks and is almost entirely in ruins. He also mentions the construction by Marco Sanudo of the Latin cathedral, citing Tournefort as his authority.2 Elsewhere 3 he states that ' the first duke, when establishing himself at Naxos, had divided to his comrades the mountains of the island, which were very profitable to them, since, in addition to good wheat which grew on the morsels of ground which could be sown, they let the mountain country year by year to herdsmen, who paid a con- siderable quantity of cheese by way of rent; and as these mountains had been assessed as desert places, the annual dues which their masters had to pay to the " grand seigneur " (the Sultan) were very moderate. But what still more gratified the vanity of these lords was that these labourers and herdsmen were practically slaves, who had to attend them on every occa- sion, especially when they went to their country houses, accom- panying them in long processions, carrying their furniture, clothes, children, and in short everything that could add to the train.'4 A little later,5 Lichtle, describing the city of Naxos, speaks of the ducal palace as a square building with very thick walls, a description with which the existing remains agree very well. He states that all round it there was formerly a balcony supported on large pieces of marble fixed in the wall, with an iron balustrade, commanding a free and charming view over the sea and a great part of the country. It was also possible to take walks during the day round the balcony. After the departure of the last duke, he tells us, the palace was confiscated and generally neglected ; finally, the south side fell and the whole palace became a ruin, which no one mounts except to discover what is going on upon the sea.
In describing the cathedral he gives twelve or thirteen as the
1 'Deux douse' in MS. Brit. Mus. Add. 36538, fo. 47a; 12 in 'AttoXXcw/, (', P- 146.
2 SeeTournefort,Voyage(i74i), i. 231. 3 MS., fo. 55 a, 'AttoXXcov, £, p.150. 4 See Tournefort, ubi supra, p. 230. 5 MS., fo. 65 b, 'AwoWaiv, (', p. 163.
76 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
number of canons in his own day ; the number had clearly been increased since the time of Sauger.
Lichtle1 gives a list of the ancient noble families of Naxos, which I insert for what it is worth. It must be remembered that none of these families, except the Sanudi, goes back to the time of the conquest. ' I. Sanudo comes from Venice. 2. Crispo from Spain. 3. Sommaripa comes from the Marquises de Som- merive in Languedoc ; the family came from Verona to Naxos. 4. Giustiniani from Genoa. 5. Barozzi came from Crete, and is sprung from Venice and from the founders of that city. 6. Grimaldi from Genoa. 7. Loredano from Venice, lord of Antiparos. 8. Cocco from Venice, Greek Church. 9. Baseggio, Venetian. io. Girardi, Venetian. *n. Malatesta, Venetian. *I3- Sforza Castri from Venice. 14. Coronello from Spain. The families marked with an asterisk are no longer extant.'
This list is also to be found in Grimaldi, who cites Lichtle as his authority. It will be observed that No. 12 is missing from Lichtle's list as published. The vacant place is assigned by Grimaldi to ' Delia Carcero from Venice '. Under the form 1 Delia Carcero ' clearly lurk the ' dalle Carceri \ Grimaldi also gives a list of noble families which arrived later. These are Lastic de Vigouroux from France, Delia Rocca from Italy, Raimond de Modene from France, De Campi from Italy, Goza- dini from Italy, and Dambi from Italy. Then follows a much longer list, that of Latin families which have become Greek. I regret that I had not the time to transcribe this. It includes the Latin families, not of noble birth, which have remained in the island.
A little later, Grimaldi, after relating the circumstances of the conquest of Naxos, states that ' Sanudo behaved in the noblest way towards the Naxiotes, whereby he won their respect, and they showed him in the most lively way their appreciation of his kindness, and having consolidated his power in Naxos, he made an expedition against the Cyclades \ Here again, we have the consolidation of power in Naxos placed before the conquest of the Cyclades ; but, unlike Sauger, Grimaldi relates the conquest of the other islands before he proceeds to describe the erection of fiefs in Naxos. His narrative then proceeds as follows : ' The Duke Marco Sanudo, in order to reward his officers and the nobles who had settled in Naxos, divided Naxos into $6 topar- chies, TLfiapLd (fiefs) commonly called roVcu,2 and these pre- served to the present day their ancient names. Now it is known that in the year 1670 the Ottoman Tachirizes, or overseer, defined
1 'AnoWav, rj , p. 83. The student of Hopf can easily correct these places of origin.
2 All four names are given.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 77
the tribute of each fief, and in the tribute-list, entitled Hill- pastures and Entrities, 1670, May 11, new style, is to be seen the name of each private owner. In the table before us we give the name of each fief according to the duke's division, and the name of the owner, and his tribute according to the tribute-list of 1670, May 11.' x The names of the first twelve fiefs, with their owners and assessments, will be given in an appendix to this work.2 I regret that time did not permit me to copy more. A glance at the list will show that the distribution of fiefs does not corre- spond with the division among separate owners in 1670, though it does not follow that the distribution goes back to Marco Sanudo. The twelve fiefs are divided among sixteen owners. Eight of the twelve had one owner apiece in 1670; two were divided between two owners each, and two between three owners each; two owners, on the other hand, appear as owning parts of different fiefs. It is quite possible that the list of fiefs was fixed from the beginning. It must have been fixed long before 1670. Not much can be learned from the names of the owners, who, if Latin, belong to families other than those of the conquest. It will be observed, however, that in 1670 most of the land was in the hands of Greeks. If we treat the subdivisions of fiefs, where recorded, as equal, we shall find that the share of these twelve fiefs held by families men- tioned in Lichtle's list of noble Latin families was assessed at 6,375 aspra, while the share possessed by other families was assessed at 7,325 aspra, and for this purpose I count as Latin the Cocchi, who had joined the Greek Church and held the third part of a fief assessed at 850 aspra. It is impossible to infer from this anything as to the relative size of the holdings of the two races in the time of Marco Sanudo, but it seems natural to suppose that, as time went on, Greeks more often acquired fiefs previously held by Latins than vice versa, and that the preponderance of Greek fiefs was either less marked under Marco Sanudo, or actually non-existent.
Elsewhere, Grimaldi states that Naxos, like other islands, had been pillaged by the Venetians in the reign of John Comnenus, and had remained in a miserable condition till the time of the Latin conquest. Marco Sanudo, according to him, after con- quering Naxos, treated the people so generously that they ' were found eager to follow him, entered his fleet, and sailing to the
1 This list is known to Zerlentes, who, when he has occasion to refer to it, quotes Coronelli, Atlante Veneto, Isolario, p. 233, and Bowd, IldarKovXa Ktti eWpm'ai, iv Bvpavi [irjviaicp 7reptoSt/cw avyy pa fip.art (Athens, 1 874), i. 265. See Byzantinische Zeitschrift,xi. 497, 498, xvi. 285. The article in Bvpav is not accessible to me. Coronelli, loc. ciL, gives a list of fifty Pascoli and thirty-six Villaggi, but enumerates neither the owners nor the tribute.
2 p. 122 infra.
78 THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
islands of Paros, Antiparos, Melos, Cimolos, Siphnos, Sycinos, Polycandros, Ios, Anaphe, and Thera, subdued them, sent to them governors, and returned to Naxos.' Then we have the creation of the duchy of the Archipelago, and then the war with Theodore Lascaris. It would be interesting to know what was Grimaldi's source for this. He records it as follows: * 'About which time (1209) Theodore Lascaris was proclaimed emperor of Nicaea, and he claimed to rule over the Cyclades and to expel the duke, whereupon the Naxiotes showed themselves eager to defend their lord, although they were of a different religion.' Grimaldi then goes straight on to the work of fortification. ' About this time/ he says, ' the duke determined to possess a castle on the summit of the small hill to the west of Drymalaea, for at this time the coasts of Naxos were uninhabited because of the pirates ; and the duke took up his residence on this hill-crest and it was his capital ; then they built a wall with two bastions and houses, which they equipped with everything necessary for defence ; the duke came and dwelt there with all his officers and the castle is called Epano-castro to this day.' The castle is that which is marked ' Fortress Venetian ' on the admiralty map. There is a curious diversity in the statements of our authorities about the foundation of Apano- or Epano-castro. Sauger's story2 that Duke Marco II raised a revolt of the people of Drymalia by destroying the altar of St. Pachys, and was compelled to build this castle in order to overawe them, has become famous. Lichtle,3 however, makes the castle much more recent. He thinks it was probably erected in 1390, when the fleet of Bayazid conquered Euboea, obliterated Chios, and pillaged other islands of the Aegean ; the population, we are told, fled for safety from the coast of Naxos to the interior, the Latins to the summit of Apanocastro, and the Greeks to the Burgo on its slope. He mentions the statement, to which he does not commit himself, that the old cathedral at Ai'mamas served as a cathedral to the inhabitants of Apanocastro, from which it is distant about one hour's journey. The remains of the fortifications show, as Lichtle points out, that the walls of the tower were pierced for cannon, but whether this was done when it was first built, as he supposes, or afterwards, I am not prepared to say. On the whole, it may be said that the weight of evidence is against Grimaldi's statement that Apanocastro was Marco I's capital, and it is difficult to see why he should have founded a city there. The seat of his power was on the sea, and it was essential to him to communicate with Venice and with the other islands. If he thought fit to build a new city at all, he would be compelled to
1 p. 123 infra. 2 Translated by Karales, pp. 42, 43.
3 aA7roXXw)f, t]\ p. 67.
THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO 79
descend to the coast, as without doubt he ultimately did. I am inclined to think it more probable that Apalire and not Apano- castro was the original seat of Marco Sanudo's government, but that he early saw the necessity of founding a capital on the coast with a harbour adjoining. At Apalire he had a castle already built, which it was natural to occupy until he had leisure to build another.
Grimaldi proceeds: 'After the lapse of a few years, Marco Sanudo planned and built a strong tower near the island of Bacchus, on a hill which they surrounded with twelve towers, and proclaimed that any one might build a house in that place according to an appointed plan ; accordingly, the Venetian nobles and officers erected houses near the ducal tower in the manner of a castle; after this they erected yet other houses near the castle on the ruins of the ancient capital called Dia. Although many of the Venetians and Genoese nobles came to Naxos, they did not forfeit the rights of citizens, but re- tained the same rights as the other nobles of Venice. Near Sanudo's tower they built a church for the catholics (Avtlkol), and asked for a bishop from Rome, providing sufficient revenues for his living. After this the duke divided Naxos into fifty-six toparchies and gave them to the nobles to administer. We append the names of the toparchies, most of which have pre- served their ancient names.' * . . . ' When the duke and some of the nobles had given the foresaid toparchies, the fame of it spread to Europe, and many Italians came to the islands, and settled there ; so it happened at that time that the inhabitants of Naxos were partly Italian and partly Greek, but since they differed from one another in manners and religion, they were not in good accord in the government, but the wisdom of the duke united them completely, and divided the offices between the Greek nobles and the Venetians, for the Venetians, like the native Greek Naxiotes, were divided into nobles and peasants and plebeians. Both the Italian and the Greek nobles used in every form of transaction the Italian language, which the Greeks called Frankish, but the common people used only one dialect, the Italohellenic, full of changes and corruptions, though both nations understood this dialect, and the Italians performed divine service according to the order of the western church, and the Greeks according to that of the eastern. The duke also established a tribunal in Naxos, and the judges there were invested with power and authority, and the court exercised jurisdiction over all kinds of men, of whatever rank or in whatever office they might be, and they administered justice in the name and authority of the duke, in cases of doubt following the laws of the Venetian republic. 1 For the names see p. 123 infra.
So THE CONQUEST OF THE ARCHIPELAGO
Next to the duke was the Great Captain (Meya? Kairerdvios = Gran capitan) of the island, with whom two counsellors occupying the third rank in the council chamber sat to administer justice with equal authority. After them was the treasurer, who was chosen from among the nobles, and superintended the expendi- ture and revenue of the duke ; next to him was the chancellor. The chancellors had the duty of receiving their commands. The fifth rank was that of the castellan. The duke struck coins called ducats.'
This description doubtless represents the organization that was eventually established. It would be natural for tradition to ascribe all the institutions to the founder of the duchy, but in any case it is probable that some such organization did go back to him, and that he was responsible for the admission of the Greek nobles to a share in the profits and honours of the new regime along with the Latin conquerors. This may well have been one of the chief causes of his popularity with the Greek population, of which we shall see further evidence in his wars in Crete. It is curious that not one of the Naxiote historians knows anything of his Greek marriage.
CHAPTER VI MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
The great Venetian armament after its exploit at Spinalonga had returned safely home at the end of 1206,1 and did not set forth again until April 7, 1207.2 That some changes took place in the personnel is certain : Marco Sanudo and Giovanni Gradenigo, who had remained at Constantinople.3 would no longer be among the sopracomiti. Whether there were any changes in the number or in the composition of the flotilla it is impossible to say with certainty, but any considerable dif- ferences in these respects between the expeditions of 1206 and of 1207 might afford a partial explanation of the discrepancies already noticed in the accounts given by the chroniclers.4 It is improbable that the new expedition was weaker than the old, and we shall see some reason for believing that it was consider- ably stronger.
A detailed history of the doings of the Venetian fleet prior to its entrance into Cretan waters is beside the present purpose. Reference has already been made to the article by Cav. Gerola, and it is only necessary here to say that the redoubtable corsair, Leon Vetrano, being so unfortunate as to encounter the armada on its voyage, was taken to Corfu and accorded a short shrift : 5 that after the fleet had captured Methone and Corone — towns which enjoyed ill repute as nests of pirates who preyed on passers-by 6 — the commanders determined to try their strength against the recently established dominion of Enrico Pescatore in Crete.7
1 Codd. Marc. It. vii. 2034, 48 (Bernardino Caballino), 40, Lat. x. 36, cited by Gerola, p. 16864.
2 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 2034, ibid.
3 p. 55 supra. 4 p. 53 supra.
5 Canale, p. 348 ; Dandolo, 334 ; Monaci, p. 143 ; also chronicles cited by Gerola, p. i686§.
6 Dandolo, 335 ; Monaci, p. 143 ; Martino da Canale, p. 348, a vivid account of the fighting. It seems plain from Martino da Canale, by far the best authority, that these towns were captured from the Greeks, and not from the Latins, as Cav. Gerola, p. 144, and Mr. Miller, p. 39, think. Cf. English Historical Review, xxv. 56126.
7 Dandolo, 335, and Monaci, p. 143, have a story that the Athenians and Achaeans sent an embassy to offer themselves to Venice, whereupon the Venetian armament attempted to seize Achaea, but was repulsed by Otto de la Roche : but cf. Miller, p. 35, for reasons against accepting the statement.
P 2961 G
82 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
It must have been obvious to those in authority that the enter- prise was not one to be undertaken lightly. In the preceding year the affair at Spinalonga had allowed the Venetian com- manders to form some idea of the strength of Pescatore's position, and they had evidently then considered themselves too weak to attack him successfully. But the expedition of 1207, to judge at any rate by its exploits, was more formidable than that of 1206, and the temptation to nip in the bud the Genoese occupation of Crete was evidently too strong to be resisted. It is said that when the armament came into Cretan waters, the chaplain, Leonardo Pelegrin da S. Angelo, was sent with a flag of truce to Pescatore, inviting him to depart peaceably and to leave the island to its rightful owners. And though the fact is vouched for by a single chronicler only,1 it seems well in accordance with what we know of the character of the prudent Dandolo.2 In any case the attempt at settlement, as might be expected, came to nothing, and the Venetian armament prepared to deliver its attack.
As has already been noticed,3 Pescatore had made use of the time at his disposal to add to the strength of the fortifications of the island. He is said to have constructed or reconstructed no fewer than fourteen defensible positions, of which twelve can be identified with some probability4 — Candia, Temenos, Poli- castro or Palaeocastro,5 Mirabello, Milopotamos, S. Nicolo, Bel- riparo, Monforte, Castelnuovo, Belvedere, Bonifacio, S. Giorgio. Most of these, according to Gerola, were in positions difficult of access, intended rather as refuges for a scanty Genoese garrison than as centres from which the country might be held down by military force. Their situation seems to suggest that Pescatore had not yet succeeded in establishing his power over the whole of Crete, for, with the exception of S. Nicolo and Monforte, they are all situated in the section of the island including the Territorio di Candia and the Territorio di Rettimo.6 At the time of the
1 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 40, cited by Gerola, p. 16978.
2 Cf. his conduct in the matter of the fortifications of Methone and Corone which it had been proposed to dismantle, Dandolo, 335. 3 Above, p. 51.
4 See the discussion in Gerola, La dominazione, pp. 141, 142 and notes, and Monumenti, i. 93-6. Our conclusion does not correspond in detail with Cav. Gerola's.
5 In the chronicles, as Gerola notes, p. 16987, the fortress is called Policastro, and it is clearly situated on the coast. There are many places in Crete called ' Palaeocastro' : but Gerola is convinced that the one referred to is the Palaeocastro to the north-west of Candia. The evidence of the chronicles seems to establish this conclusively. And in Tavola 1 of vol. i of Gerola's Monumenti (a seventeenth-century map of Crete) this particular Palaeocastro is given the alternative name 'Policastro'. Gerola has not noticed this fact, which confirms his conclusions so remarkably.
6 Gerola, Monumenti, vol. i, Tavola 2.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 83
Venetian attack, apparently, the authority of the Count of Malta was limited to the central and eastern portions of Crete.
It is no easy matter to determine what help the armada might be expected to receive from the inhabitants of the island. Reference has already been made to the words of Nicetas1 to show that there was little love lost between the Cretans and their Genoese master. Also Andrea Dandolo 2 tells us that the Cretans sent an embassy to Venice asking for help against Pescatore. Probably there was such an embassy, but it is impossible to say what proportion of the Cretan population it represented. There seems then sufficient reason for believing that the feeling of the Cretans was for the time passively, if not actively, friendly to Venice. Doubtless, what they really desired was indepen- dence, nor was this the only time when they were destined to try the policy of playing off a potential against an actual conqueror.
But there is no reason to think that the assistance given by the Cretans to Venice would be of much value, and for the rest the invaders had to rely on themselves alone. Hopf3 states that a Venetian colony had previously been established at Spinalonga, and if this were true, the Venetians would have had a convenient pied-a-terre, but his statement, as has been seen above,4 appears to be unattested.
The first objective of the Venetian armament was naturally the town of Candia itself. The troops were landed despite the opposition of the Genoese, and the town was captured after a sharp struggle in which both Dandolo and Premarino played a prominent part.5 With the fall of Candia the Venetian troops spread like a flood over the whole island, driving the Genoese to take refuge within the walls of their fortifications.
As to the time occupied by this conquest, it is impossible to obtain any exact information. Since the Venetian fleet did not leave home waters until early in April, it cannot have performed its manifold exploits and arrived off Crete until the end of summer at earliest. It appears from Dandolo that Candia fell some time after August.6 In all probability the task of clearing the open country of Genoese and the successive reduction of the fortified positions occupied all the remainder of the year. The fleet apparently did not return home at the end of 1207, but remained throughout the winter to complete its task. It must
1 p. 51 supra. 2 p. 54 supra.
3 p. 221. * p. 48s supra.
5 Canale, p. 350, for account of fighting; Historia Ducum Veneticorum, p. 95; Codd. Museo Corr. 1499, 1013 I Cicogna, 2113, 2831 ; Marc. It. vii. 38, 39> 95> 559 (Pietro Delfino), 2048 (Antonio Morosini), 37, 2051 (Vituri), 40, cited by Gerola, p. 16856.
6 Dandolo, 335 (third year of Pietro Ziani).
G 2
84 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
have been evident by this time that Count Enrico was not strong enough to oppose the forces of Venice without assistance from his native city. In the course of the year 1208 he had been reduced to take refuge in the last considerable fortress which remained to him — the stronghold of Palaeocastro, situated on a high rock not far to the west of Candia.1 He was then obliged to do what so far he had been too proud to do ; he sent one Arnaldo Burdino and two galleys to Genoa with a request both for advice and for speedy succour.2 The government, now at war with Venice, determined after some debate to assist the Count of Malta. Reinforcements on an adequate scale, consist- ing of ships and galleys, well manned and supplied with pro- visions and money, were quickly dispatched to his aid. This fresh accession of strength enabled Enrico to carry on the war with vigour, and shortly afterwards, apparently towards the end of 1208, a great piece of good fortune befell him. The Venetian commander, Dandolo, was wounded and captured in a skirmish, dying five days later through his heroic refusal to taste of food in captivity.3 Enrico gave back the corpse with all due honour to the Venetians 4 for burial.
When the news of Dandolo's fate reached Venice, the govern- ment determined to honour his memory and avenge his death. In pursuance of the first end, his male descendants were freed from taxation for ever ; in pursuance of the second, a new and powerful armament was fitted out to settle once for all the struggle for the possession of Crete.
It is difficult to arrive at the precise strength of the Venetian forces dispatched at the end of 1208 or the beginning of 1209. The accounts given by the chroniclers vary greatly. The two
1 p. 82B supra. 2 Pane, p. 109.
3 As to the exact circumstances of Dandolo's death there is very little agreement among the chronicles, and Andrea Dandolo, who is followed by Monaci, says his death was due to an arrow discharged by a Cretan rebel. On the other hand, the Genoese chronicler, Pane, p. ijo, and the Venetian chronicles, Codd. Museo Corr. 443, Cic. 21 13, Marc. It. vii. 2051 (Vituri), 48 (Caballino), 519, 40 (quoted by Gerola, p. 17088), all agree that he died in captivity. Cod. Marc. It. vii. 2034 gives a story of a taunt ad- dressed by Pescatore to his captive Voy me solevy chiamar Rigo Pescador: e senzafalo to ho ben pescado ad aver pre so chossi grosso pesse (Gerola, ibid.). According to Jacopo da Varazze, 44, Dandolo was captured and afterwards liberated by Pescatore.
4 Dandolo, Monaci, Calergi, and Cod. Marc. It. vii. 519 (cited by Gerola) say that he was buried in the church of S. Giorgio at Candia (not at Venice, as Gerola thinks, p. 146)— which is not true. The better opinion seems to be that of Pane, p. 109, who says that the corpse was dispatched to Venice for burial, but that on the way the three galleys escorting it were seized by Ben- venuto, son of Alamanno Costa, and it was taken to Syracuse and buried there.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 85
groups of chronicles used for the conquest of the Archipelago,1 with the exception of the Vituri Chronicle, name Anzolo Querini as Venetian captain ; in this respect they are supported by the chronicles ending in 1475 2 anc* i486 3 and by the Cretan his- torian Antonio Calergi.4 Of these the chronicle ending in i486 speaks of a fleet of eighteen galleys, while Calergi makes Querini captain of thirty ships which accompanied Baseio's thirty galleys.5 Another group, headed by the most venerable of all, Martino da Canale,6 and numbering Andrea Dandolo7 and Monaci 8 in its ranks, tells us of six galleys and six ships 9 which set sail from Venice fairly late in 1209 10 under the command of Giacomo Longo. Calergi alone knows of both commanders, but it will have been observed that he does not assign Querini an inde- pendent command. This is probably the easiest view. We learn from Dandolo and Monaci that Longo's armament carried Gia- como Tiepolo, created first Duke of Crete, to his new sphere of activity. Its arrival in Crete concluded the captaincy of Pre- marino, although there is the usual disagreement among the chroniclers as to the order of succession. With the exception of Calergi, the chroniclers who name Querini assert that he departed before Tiepolo's arrival, leaving Marco Sanudo in charge. The Vituri Chronicle n makes Nicoleto Vituri retor and Marco Sanudo capitanio, while Navagiero,12 Magno,13 and Marino Sanudo14 name Paolo Ziani as successor of Baseio, Premarino, and Dandolo respectively. In Calergi he only commands a portion of the fleet.
It seems clear that the fortunes of Venice in the island under- went an immediate improvement on the arrival of the new arma- ment. The successive disasters of Pescatore's reinforcement and Dandolo's death had probably been accompanied by loss of heart, if not by loss of territory. But the new expeditionary force, in conjunction with the Venetian troops already in Crete, soon reduced Pescatore to worse straits than ever. During 1209, it must be supposed, the country had been once more swept clear of Genoese troops, and the Count of Malta was now completely confined to the coast fortress of Palaeocastro. Early in 1210 matters
I See pp. 61-63 supra. 2 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 51, fo. 76 a.
3 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 54, fo. 160 a.
4 Cod. Lond. Mus. Brit. Add. 8636, fo. 363 b.
5 In addition to some of the chronicles used by me Gerola cites, p. 17092, Codd. Marc. It. vii. 519, 791, 95, Lat. x. 36, Museo Cic. 2113, 2831, Corr. 443- . 6 P- 35o- 7 336. 8 p. 153-
'Calergi makes it six galleys and ten ships.
10 Martino da Canale, p. 350, two years after Candia was taken. Dandolo, 336, seems to place it in the fourth year of Ziani, 1208-9.
II p. in infra. 12 987.
13 Annali Veneti, Cod. Vindobonensis Foscarini, n. 6239, fo. 87. " 544.
86 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
became so desperate that he determined to demand help from Genoa once more. The blockade by sea must have been tem- porarily relaxed 1 or else not close, for Pescatore was able to slip out with two galleys and some other vessels, leaving the fortress under safe guard.2 He arrived in Genoa on April n,3 and asked for fresh help against his enemies. This time his request does not seem to have been granted quite so readily. Whether, as Cav. Gerola suggests,4 the government was anxious to avoid any further quarrel with Venice, or whether the cause of Pescatore appeared hopeless, we can only conjecture, but it is certain that not until all attempts to arrange an agreement between the Count of Malta and his opponents had failed,5 did they determine to afford him help. But having made up their minds they supported him generously. He received eight galleys, besides other ships, furnished with troops, horses, and stores. The total value was estimated at 2,000 pounds of silver.6 In acknowledgement of these benefits Pescatore not only bound himself, in the event of success, to repay the cost of the expe- dition, but also granted to the city of Genoa certain definite rights in the territory conquered by him.7
No sooner had the rumours of the count's new armament gone forth than fresh help was planned for his opponents, this time from the Venetian colony in Constantinople. The flotilla which happened to be available at the moment, consisting of four great ships and some smaller vessels, was hurriedly dis- patched under the leadership of Leonardo Navigaioso, who was perhaps associated in command with Giacomo Agaddi dalle Scale.8 The main Venetian fleet was cruising off Rhodes, prob- ably on the look out for Genoese corsairs. The division from Constantinople was at first mistaken for the enemy, but the two squadrons quickly joined forces and, falling in with Pescatore and his armament, discomfited him so completely that he had the greatest difficulty in bringing some relics of his shattered expedition to Crete,9 while the remainder of his vessels were captured or driven back to Genoa.
1 Daniele Barbaro (Cod. Marc. It. vii. 790, fo. 162 b) says that the Venetians sailed away to help their countrymen in the other islands of the Archipelago. In view of the vigour with which the attack on Pescatore was being pressed, this explanation is hardly convincing.
2 Perhaps the name of the commandant was Alberto 'Gallina', cf. document cited by Gerola, app. 1, p. 158.
8 Pane, p. 114. * p. 147. 5 Pane, p. 114. 6 Ibid.
7 Liber Iurium, i. 553, 554, cited by Gerola, pp. 147, 148.
8 Codd. Marc. It. CI. vii. 2034, 704, 323, 45, 46, 95, and Museo Cic. 21 13 (cited by Gerola, p. 171110), name Navigaioso only. Agaddi dalle Scale is found in Marc. It. vii. 1274 (Gaspar Zancaruol), cited by Gerola, p. 171110, and in Antonio Calergi, Cod. Lond. Mus. Brit. Add. 8636, fo. 364 b.
9 Gerola, p. 148.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 87
With the failure of this last great attempt on the part of Genoa to overthrow Venetian power in Crete the cause of Pescatore was doomed. Palaeocastro, his last refuge, was hemmed in both by sea and by land, and his surrender was now only a question of time. Towards the end of 1210 or the beginning of 1211 he came to terms with Venice, renouncing all right in Crete, but receiving some solace for his disappoint- ment in the marriage of his nephew to a lady of the Baseio family, who brought with her an immense dowry in cash.1 Thus it was that the island came into the possession of the Venetians.
It is now time to consider the question whether Marco Sanudo played any part in the affairs of Crete between 1207 and 121 1. By the best Venetian authorities. Canale and Andrea Dandolo, and by the authorities who are best informed about Crete, Monaci and Calergi, he is never mentioned as taking part in war between Venice and Pescatore at any time. But there exist several chronicles which agree in attributing to Sanudo a large share in Cretan affairs long before his intervention at the request of Tiepolo. The group which I have designated the Cronica Antica group,2 supported on the present occasion by the chronicle ending in i486,3 attributes to him exploits in Crete which cer- tainly contain a large element of fable. By a mistaken concep- tion of the part he played in the negotiations with Boniface, he is said to have acquired a large share of the island by purchase.4 By a further misunderstanding of a statement of the limits of his authority in Crete, before his expulsion by Tiepolo in Decem- ber 1212,5 this share of the island is said to have extended ' westward to Chao Spada '. In this district he is said to have built the city of Canea. We are told that in the conquest of the island he performed infinite prodigies, and that on the departure of Anzolo Querini, which followed that of Pescatore, Sanudo remained ' dominador e chapitanio' of the whole island until the republic sent out Giacomo Tiepolo as duke. After which, while Tiepolo ruled the rest of the island, Sanudo continued to rule over his own portion as ' chapitanio '. Then follows the war between Tiepolo and Sanudo, without any reference to a previous revolt on the part of the natives, or an invitation from Tiepolo. These chronicles suggest a continuous occupation of a part of the island from the first conquest to the peace with Tiepolo, and a temporary government of the whole, without, however, any direct appointment from the home government.
The Vituri Chronicle,6 while not attributing to Sanudo any
1 Gerola, p. 149.
a pp. 62-64 supra. See pp. 109, no infra.
8 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 54, fo. 160 a.
4 See p. 35 supra. 5 p. 96 infra. 6 p. in infra.
88 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
share in the conquest of Crete, asserts that after the departure of Enrico Pescatore, Marco Sanudo was sent out from Venice as ' capitanio ', and Nicoleto Vituri as ' retor '. This chronicle gives Sanudo the credit for the Venetian colonization of Crete ; he is made to remain there till after the arrival of Tiepolo as duke, and is represented as using Crete as the base of his conquest of the Archipelago, from which he afterwards returns to Crete at Tiepolo's invitation. The only resemblance between this account and the last is that both assign to Sanudo a captaincy in Crete immediately before the arrival of Tiepolo as duke. That the colonization of Crete did not take place till after the appoint- ment of a duke would appear from the order of the narrative not only in Dandolo, Monaci, and Calergi, but also in the Historia Ducum Veneticorum.1 The chronicler doubtless has in mind the company which Sanudo assembled for the conquest of the Archipelago. The reference to Vituri is found in no other authority, while the conquest of the Archipelago from Crete is clearly an anachronism.
The other chronicles of the Vituri group 2 give the same story, except that they do not name Nicoleto Vituri, but assert that Anzolo Ouerini the captain went to Venice on Marco Sanudo's arrival. With the exception of the chronicle ending in 1528, they also name a Venetian colonization before Sanudo's arrival in addition to that for which he was responsible, and seem to represent him as returning to Venice before his conquest of the Archipelago.
The chronicle ending in 1475 3 supports each of these groups in part. It states that after the departure of Pescatore, Marco Sanudo. was left ' governador ', and had a great part of the island. Anzolo Querini is described as captain, and is said to have returned to Venice. Then we are told that ' with the said Jacomo Sanudo' — a curious blend of Giacomo Tiepolo and Marco Sanudo — ' there went out many gentlemen to dwell there with their families'. Then we have Marco's sudden revolt, in which he captures the retor, not previously named. It will be observed that Tiepolo's name does not appear in the narrative, and it may be mentioned that Marco Sanudo's activity in Crete is placed later than his conquest of the Archipelago.
Navagiero 4 also places this activity after the conquest of the Archipelago. According to him, Sanudo was left governor after Paolo Ziani and his armament had departed, shortly after which Giacomo Baseio was sent out as duke. Sanudo is not mentioned again till his assistance is invited by Tiepolo against the Cretan rebels.
1 p. 95. 2 See pp. 61, 62 supra.
5 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 51, fo. 75 b. * 987.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 89
Some variants in the story are to be found in the Cronica Contarina, cited by Marino Sanudo.1 This agrees with the chronicles noticed above in asserting that after the departure of Pescatore the government of Candia — the name doubtless refers to the whole island — was left in the hands of Marco Sanudo, who had a great part of the islands of the Archipelago and of Candia. It is here stated that he held the title of Duke of Candia, but afterwards took the title of king in order to con- ciliate the rebellious Cretans. In this narrative Tiepolo has no place at all.
In all these narratives there appears to be nothing that we can possibly accept, unless it be the statements that Sanudo had a share in the fighting and was left in command of the island by some Venetian captain for a short time before the arrival of Tiepolo. It will be observed that in most of the chronicles this captain is Anzolo Querini, who in Calergi never holds more than a subordinate command.
The chief difficulty in the way of accepting the story of even this temporary command is that the chroniclers distinctly place it after the departure of Pescatore, and before the arrival of Tiepolo. But it is clear from Canale and Dandolo that Longo's expedition which brought Tiepolo to Crete sailed in 1209,2 whereas Pescatore's undertaking with Genoa, which preceded his last struggle in Crete, is dated July 35, iaio.:i There seems, therefore, no room left for Sanudo's captaincy.
There is, of course, nothing absurd in supposing that Sanudo had a share in the conquest of Crete, but when a statement to that effect is only to be found in chronicles which show plainly how busy rumour had been with his name in the four generations after his death, it becomes as difficult to affirm as to disprove. De questo MT Marco Sanudo infinite cose dir se potia^ well expresses the attitude.
No sooner was the island fairly in the hands of Venice, than the government began to take measures to bind it securely beyond the possibility of escape. It was determined to send out colonists in large numbers, regardless of the trouble with the native Cretans which such a process was certain to cause. Accordingly, by solemn decree of the doge Ziani in September I ail, the whole of Crete, saving only a strip of land from the River Tartarus to Fraschia, together with the environs of Temenos, was divided into 132 knights' fees and 48 serjeanties. The colonists were selected out of each sestiere of Venice, and the terms
1 545-
2 p. 8510 supra. 3 Gerola, p. 147.
4 So Enrico Dandolo, Cod. Marc. It. vii. 102, fo. 45 a, and other chronicles of the Cronica Antica group.
90 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
granted to them were exceptionally favourable. The tenure was perpetual : the property could be disposed of (but, as in Ziani's earlier decree,1 only to other Venetians) ; not until after the fourth year must tribute be paid to the mother country. The obligations attached to possession were slight, consisting mainly of liability to defend the country from foes both internal and external, and to afford aid under certain conditions to Venice "and her allies. The knights were, in addition, obliged each to keep a town house in Candia, in order to contribute to the strength and importance of the capital city.2 Ninety-four of the nobility, many of them members of the highest families,3 and twenty-six of the common citizens embraced the opportunity thus afforded them, and took the oath of fealty in October
I2II.
The island was divided, after the Venetian model, into six sestieri, arranged according to the provenance of the colonists, and shortly afterwards the number of knights' fees was raised to 200, so that each sestiere included 33^ of them. To each of the six divisions a captain was appointed, whose duty it was to manage the partition and allotment of the fees — no easy matter when it is remembered that a part of the island had to be left in the hands of the natives themselves. The business of super- intending the installation of the colonists, of adjusting the in- evitable disputes which arose between the new-comers and those who were dispossessed to make room for them, must have been extremely delicate : and it is hardly to be wondered at that all the troubles which for the next two centuries menaced Venetian possession of the island found their origin in the resulting dis- content.
The government of the island was regulated at the same time. The executive authority was vested in the hands of a duke and two counsellors, dispatched periodically from Venice. There were two Councils, a Greater and a Lesser, after the Venetian model, to assist in the government.4 Venetian ecclesiastics flocked to take the place of the Greek clergy, now ejected from their own churches ; the island was placed under the rule of an arch- bishop, with his seat at Candia, and of five suffragans, having their cathedrals at Sithia, Retimo, Milopotamo, Hierapetra, and Chirone. From the first, the domains of the new clergy were heavily taxed to pay the expenses of the struggle for possession ; and as the burden of such taxation naturally transferred itself to their Greek dependents, the new ecclesiastical regime became un- necessarily unpopular. It is, perhaps, not unreasonable to suppose
1 p. 49 supra. 8 Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 129-36.
8 Ibid.; Hopf, p. 241.
4 Compare Querini's decree, Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 251.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 91
that one of the secrets of the difference between the failure of the Venetians in Crete and the success of Sanudo in the Isles in con- ciliating the subject Greek population lies in the difference between the ecclesiastical policy pursued in each case. That of Sanudo was as wise and as tolerant as that of the Venetians was foolish and harsh.
If, as we saw, there is not sufficient evidence to prove that Marco Sanudo played any part in the conquest of Crete, none the less the importance of his influence upon the history of the country in subsequent years is undeniable. With his power firmly established in his own dominions, he was the bulwark of Venetian authority in the Archipelago. Twice he was asked by a Venetian governor to interfere in the affairs of Crete on behalf of his country ; and on each occasion, though the intervention was for the moment effectual, the event was disastrous. In order to understand the circumstances it will be necessary to return for a moment to the consideration of the condition of Crete in 1211.
The principal authorities for Cretan affairs at this time are Andrea Dandolo, Monaci, and Calergi.1 The account pro- ceeding from the pen of the first is short and concise ; the other two authors, while obviously indebted to him, supplement his narrative both with sources to which he had no access, and with personal knowledge of the localities to which he refers. Occa- sional information, to be accepted with some caution, may be obtained from Daniele Barbaro, from Sauger, from Cornaro, from the Vituri group of chronicles.2 and from a chronicle bear- ing the name of Zancaruol,3 which does not belong to the group. Stefano Magno is occasionally useful from his habit of collecting references to particular events from all the sources available to him ; but there is often difficulty in discovering the authors, who are cited, as a rule, only by their initials. Much may be learnt from the documents preserved in the second volume of Tafel and Thomas ; 4 especially from the agreement between Sanudo and Tiepolo, to which reference will be made below.
It was soon evident that the natives would prove no more submissive subjects of Venice than they had been of Genoa. Possibly the sudden strictness of the Venetian rule was unex- pected, and the Greek gentry resented the loss of their ancient prestige and independence. It was over the question of coloniza-
1 There is a copy of Calergi's Cretan Commentary in the British Museum (MS. Add. 8636) and two copies in the Marcian Library at Venice (Codd. Marc. It. vi. 3, 155). Reference is made throughout to the British Museum MS. 2 See pp. 61, 62 supra.
3 It. vii. 1274, ending in 1446. See p. 62 supra.
4 Cited as Tafel and Thomas, xiii.
os MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
tion that the rebellion broke out. The doge Ziani's decree was issued, as we saw, in September ian j1 and, as we noticed, it was acted upon immediately. The persons who had most cause to be offended thereat were the Greek nobility, who, if they were not deprived of their land, were compelled to hold it from foreign masters, with a consequent loss of position and power. The parcelling up of the fiefs among the new vassals caused much bad blood between Greeks and Latins, and some time early in 1 312 open resistance took the place of covert grumbling. The rich and influential family of the Hagiostephanitae, whose power lay in the extreme east of the island, were the first to rise. Their wealth and following seem to have made them the natural leaders of any movement of the native Cretans. The fortresses of Sitia and Mirabello were quickly seized by the insurgents ; and the absence of mention of anything like a siege probably indicates that they were surprised.2 Indeed, the whole course of events shows that a rising was the last thing expected by the duke, Tiepolo. His resources were no match for those of the enemy, who well understood the art of fighting in a difficult country,3 and it would be weeks before help reached him from Venice. He soon found that it was impossible to hold his own against the rebels, far less to repress the rebellion. The dis- affected Greeks were expected at Candia,4 and there seemed danger that the Venetians would be expelled from Crete, even as they themselves had expelled Pescatore. In his extremity Tiepolo bethought him of the only power from which salvation might yet come, and appealed to Marco Sanudo for assistance. Tiepolo knew his man ; he offered thirty still unoccupied knights' fees in Crete to Sanudo, and rich presents to those taking part in the expedition.5 The bait was successful. The Duke of the Archipelago came to Crete in person, accompanied by a powerful body of troops, mainly consisting apparently of his Greek subjects,6 with whom his popularity showed no signs of diminishing. Accustomed to fight under the same conditions as the Cretans themselves, Sanudo's troops made nothing of the difficulties which had placed the Venetian troops at the mercy of
1 p. 89 supra ; Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 129.
2 So Monaci, p. 154; Calergi, fo. 370 b; and Dandolo, 337.
3 So Daniele Barbaro, p. 108 infra, who, however, places this revolt after the decree of 1222.
4 A. Cornaro, Hist, di Candia, p. 104 infra.
6 So Calergi, fo. 370 b ; Daniele Barbaro, p. 108 ; A. Dandolo. Monaci does not specify what Tiepolo promised. Navagiero, 989, 990, says that Tiepolo made himself responsible for the expenses of the expedition and that the first signs of trouble broke out over his failure to pay Sanudo's mercenaries.
6 So Daniele Barbaro, p. 108 infra.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 93
the rebels. In a few weeks, it must be supposed, the rebellion was at an end ; and by the beginning of June all danger from the insurgents had ceased. The leaders of the movement were banished, and matters quieted down.
But unluckily in the hour of triumph discord broke out among the victors. Cornaro ascribes it to jealousy between the two commanders, each of whom claimed to be the only saviour of Venetian rule in the island : Andrea Dandolo and Daniele Bar- baro say specifically that the trouble began by the failure of Tiepolo to carry out his promises. But it was through the skilful management of the Cretans themselves that the discord between the two Venetian leaders developed into open warfare ; * and a certain Sevasto Scordili is mentioned as being pre-eminently responsible for the final breach.
That Sanudo was a party to any deep-laid plot against Venetian dominion in the island may well be questioned : indeed more than one authority implies that he was little better than a tool in the hands of Scordili. But having, as is generally admitted, a cause of grievance against Tiepolo, and knowing that he himself was as popular with the Greeks as Tiepolo was unpopular,2 he probably considered the opportunity a good one for paying off old scores. That which stands out quite plainly from amid the confusions of the chroniclers is that the first movement towards fresh trouble emanated from the restlessness of the Greeks, and not from the ambition of Marco Sanudo.3
How much careful preparation had gone on beneath the surface before that June day in 1212 4 when open hostilities broke out we have no means of determining. As to the occasion of the new revolt there is virtual unanimity among the best
1 Monaci, p. 154.
2 So the Vituri group, p. in infra. If Sanudo was already married to a Greek princess, his popularity with the Greeks is easily explicable. Boniface had, in like manner, found his Greek marriage a useful means of attaching the Greeks to his cause. For Tiepolo's cruelties see p. 108 infra.
3 For the contrary view see the Cronica Antica, p. no infra, and more explicitly the chronicle ending in i486, Marc. It. vii. 54, fo. 165 a.
* Hopf, p. 242, places the revolt in June 1213. Dandolo's evidence (seventh year of Pietro Ziani), 337, is not conclusive. This was the date of the decree establishing the colony, but not necessarily of all the events re- corded under the year. Tafel and Thomas date the treaty between Tiepolo and Sanudo in 12 13 ; but cite no authority. Cf. Gerola, pp. 151, 152. The date depends on whether the actual division described in Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 145, is anterior or subsequent to the intervention of Sanudo. That docu- ment is dated 1212, Indiction 1, and therefore falls not earlier than September 121 2 nor later than February 1 2 13. If the division was completed before Sanudo's revolt, that revolt must fall in June 121 3, but if, as seems more probable, the division had to be revised after the Civil War, the final dis- tribution cannot have taken place till after the revolt, which must therefore be placed in June 1212.
94 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
authorities. A sudden scarcity of bread in the market-place of Candia, and perhaps a shortage of pay,1 led to a riot among Sanudo's troops. Scordili, who had perhaps planned the whole thing, having harangued them on the evils of the government of Tiepolo, led them to Sanudo's house. On the way they were joined by immense numbers of Greeks, and the whole multitude demanded that Sanudo should put himself at their head. He agreed, and the insurgents made straight for the ducal palace. According to the best accounts2 Tiepolo fled to the house of a friend, one Marco Tonisto, and, after assuming female garb, made his escape from the city and reached in safety the strong fortress of Temenos, where he was sub- sequently joined by his supporters in considerable numbers. Candia remained entirely in the hands of Marco Sanudo and his followers.
As to the motives which induced the Duke of the Archipelago to assume arms against the accredited representative of the Venetian government there has been much speculation. Setting aside the obviously interested attempts of Marino Sanudo3 to prove that his kinsman pretended to accept command of the rebels, and, indeed, the title of king, as the only method of pre- serving Venetian rule in the island, the general consensus of opinion seems to be in strong condemnation of Sanudo's action. The best authorities4 consider that he was influenced rather by his grievance, real or fancied, against Tiepolo than by deliberate ambition ; among these, Monaci and Calergi, while they admit that he had cause for discontent, cannot find words strong enough to express their abhorrence of the method he chose for venting his spleen. His proper course was to bring his grievance before the home authorities, and not to imperil by rash action the security of the government to whose goodwill he owed his own prosperity. On the other hand, three chronicles5 at least put forward the view that the whole affair was a piece of diabolical machina- tion on the part of Sanudo, deliberately designed to withdraw the island from the control of Venice. This view may contain an element of truth. Sanudo may have expected the home
1 So Navagiero, 989.
2 Monaci and Calergi. Dandolo and the Cronica Antica and Vituri groups of chronicles assert that Tiepolo was actually imprisoned. Dandolo men- tions that he escaped, while according to the Vituri group he was rescued by faithful adherents. Sauger has a rather different account, and makes the affair happen at night and originate in a deep-laid plot between Sanudo and the Genoese.
3 545.
4 Cornaro expresses this point of view most strongly : but he is supported by Monaci, Dandolo, and Calergi.
5 Codd. Marc. It. vii. 51, fo. 76 a ; 54, fo. 165 a ; Navagiero, 990.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 95
government to recognize the fait accompli, and to permit Crete, like other eastern possessions, to be ruled by a feudal vassal rather than by a magistrate sent out from Venice. On the whole it seems reasonable to believe that he was mainly actuated by hostility towards Tiepolo, and perhaps also by flattered pride at the thought that he had been chosen as leader by the Cretans themselves.
Whatever may have been the exact motives of Sanudo, there can be no doubt as to the vigour of his action. The flight of Tiepolo had, as has been seen, left Candia in the possession of the rebels ; but Marco Sanudo had no notion of being content with this measure of success. Leaving the capital in charge of Stefano Sanudo and Diotisalvi of Bologna he proceeded to the systematic reduction of all the country to the south and west. His hold upon the latter district was, as subsequent events showed, particularly strong ; and was probably based quite as much upon his popularity among the Cretans as upon his pos- session of the fortresses. Meanwhile Tiepolo was still holding out in Temenos, and being unmolested1 had made his position very secure. His supporters had had time to recover confidence, and flocked to join him in large numbers. The fact that Sanudo had reduced the whole island before turning his attention to Temenos may be explained by the difficulties that attended the siege of fortified places. Temenos might have proved a second Palaeocastro. Perhaps Sanudo also wished to point the contrast between his own power and the insignificance of the nominal ruler of the island. He probably expected that the Venetian republic would reward him for his services by confirming him in possession of the whole island.
When Sanudo considered himself in a position to reduce Tiepolo to terms the decisive moment had passed. Tiepolo knew of his advance from Candia, and made ready to receive him by posting some troops on the flank of his line of march. Sanudo unsuspectingly encamped before the fortress, and the night passed quietly ; but in the morning a sudden sortie threw the camp into confusion. Sanudo retired precipitately, straight into the ambuscade, and in the skirmish which followed suffered considerable loss. Among the dead are mentioned four of his captains : Nicolo Sevasto, Stefano Scordili, Marco Cavallaricei, and Theotokes Hagiostefanites. The consequences of Tiepolo's victory were immediately apparent. Many Greek families, after remaining in hesitation which side to take, now decided for the
1 So Calergi, ff. 373, 374, who has a full account of the progress of hostilities, which seems based upon local tradition. Monaci, pp. 154, 155, is also particularly valuable. The annals of 'P.T.', quoted by Stefano Magno, state that Mirabello also held true to Tiepolo.
96 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
official ruler of the island. So great was the reputation of the Duke of Crete that he was able, in a short while, to recapture Monforte and Sitia, situated as they were in the district which had been the first to revolt.
Matters were in this condition when there arrived from Venice the armament which had been gathered and dispatched, perhaps by Tiepolo's request, on the first news of the Cretan revolt.1 It was well supplied with horse and foot, with money, and with munitions of all kinds, and was commanded by Domenico Querini and Sebastiano Bethani. It landed at Fair Havens (Chalili- miones), in the south of the island, and almost before it got into action it had decided the fate of the war. Tiepolo determined on a bold stroke. Slipping out of Temenos with a handful of men some time in November 121 2, he took up his position in the region of Apanosivrito, in the province of Amari, thus getting between Sanudo and the western districts upon whose support "he especially relied. He fortified a camp in an inaccessible situation, but was surprised in the middle of the operations by Sanudo, who was hard on his heels. Sanudo, in his haste to reply to Tiepolo's new move, had pursued him with a com- paratively small force — so small indeed that Tiepolo attempted to bring about an engagement. Sanudo declined the combat, and fortifying himself strongly in the hilly country of Apano- sivrito, settled himself to await reinforcements from his Greek supporters and from his own duchy. He still held the bulk of the island and the capital itself, and evidently counted upon wearing out Tiepolo until his fresh troops came up. But the Duke of Crete showed himself fully a match for his adversary. In the beginning of December 121 2, Tiepolo left a small force to watch Sanudo and hurried back to Temenos, where he seems to have been joined by the bulk of the new troops. With equal swiftness the whole army marched on Candia by night and took it completely by surprise. There was no bloodshed, but the town changed hands and Sanudo's lieutenants were made prisoners. ' Thus after the sixth month of the occupation of the City of Candia by the confederates, it was recovered by Tiepolo. This was in the beginning of the month of December.'2 The energy of Tiepolo had changed the whole situation, and doubtless the recovery of Candia was followed by the surrender of strong- holds in other parts of the island. Despite the fact that Belvedere and six other castles still held out for Sanudo, and that the whole country from Milopotamos to Cape La Spada '•' remained true to him, he saw at once that his case was hopeless and asked for terms of peace.
1 Cornaro, p. 104 infra. 2 Calergi, fo. 374 b.
3 See p. 8y5 supra.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 97
The articles of agreement have been printed by Tafel and Thomas,1 and their general tenor is at once apparent. Tiepolo desired at all costs to get Sanudo out of the country, and iccordingly granted him very easy terms. An amnesty was sworn by both sides : Sanudo was allowed to select from among the followers of Tiepolo seven castellans who were to be installed an his seven castles, and who were to restore them if Tiepolo broke the terms of the agreement : twenty of the native nobility were allowed to depart with Sanudo, taking with them the price of their possessions : Tiepolo was to provide the vessels for the embarkation of Sanudo's company, and was to pay him 1,500 hyperpers,2 3,000 measures of wheat and 2,000 of barley. In addition, Sanudo was to levy another 1,000 hyperpers from the Greeks inhabiting the lands he held in Crete. Other payments were made to Sanudo and certain prisoners were released in exchange for the surrender of Milopotamos, S. Nicolo, and S. Giorgio. The prisoners held by Sanudo were to remain in his hands until exchanges had been arranged.
With a golden bridge thus built behind him, Sanudo can have had little hesitation in terminating his sojourn in Crete. He retreated in good order, and for some fifteen years the island knew him no more.
A word must here be said about a story told by Sauger 3 to the effect that in 1216 Sanudo was summoned by the Emperor Henry to aid him in his war against Theodore Angelus, the Despot of Epirus. The duke welcomed the opportunity of getting into the good books of the emperor, and arrived with his son Angelo and 1,500 men at Thessalonica, the appointed meeting-place. Here he saw the emperor and bluntly warned him of danger from domestic enemies. But Henry was careless, and before any joint operations had been undertaken, his death had been compassed by poison. He did not die, however, until he had recognized Angelo as his father's heir in the Duchy of the Archipelago.
1 xiii. 159-66. Hopf, p. 242, places this treaty in June 12 14, but does not state his evidence for the date. It seems more reasonable to adopt Calergi's statement that the treaty was drawn up quite soon after the recapture of Candia— that is to say, in December 1 212 or January 1213. We see no reason for tacitly assuming, as Hopf does, that 'the feast of St. Peter next' means St. Peter in Vinculis (Aug. 1). If the treaty were concluded at the beginning of the year, any of the dates Jan. 18, Feb. 22, or (more probably) April 16 might be referred to ' as the feast of St. Peter next '. The fact that Sanudo is given fifteen days' grace if he cannot leave Crete by the time in question seems to imply that there was no long interval between the conclusion of the treaty and the date of the particular feast of St. Peter to which reference was made.
2 About ^675. See Schaube, p. 812. 8 pp. 119-121 infra.
P 29C1 H
98 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
After the election of Peter of Courtenay, Marco sailed home, leaving Angelo and the bulk of the troops to perform the due service to the new emperor, who, however, never reached his new dominions. If Angelo remained to do homage, the homage would have to be done to the Emperor Robert, and it is in- teresting to observe that Duke Marco II refers to the homage done by Angelo to Robert, though he places it after Marco's death.1 The part taken by Marco Sanudo in the European campaign rests on no authority but Sauger, who may have worked it in to glorify his hero, but the presence of Angelo on the continent is clearly historical, though it is not contained in any literary source accessible to Sauger. It appears therefore that in this respect his Naxiote tradition is reliable, and it is therefore possible that the tradition is also reliable in making Marco himself take part in the campaign.
As to the policy of Tiepolo after the departure of his adversary, we have no evidence. He continued to hold the office of Duke of Crete until 12172 — a fact which perhaps serves to show that his methods met with the approval of the home government. The Venetian colonists settled down upon their possessions and outwardly all was peace. But the submission of the Greeks was deceptive. Abandoned by Sanudo to the mercy of their Venetian conquerors, they remained in a state of discontent which only needed a sudden stimulus to break once more into open rebellion. Early in 1317 Tiepolo was succeeded by Paolo Querini : and from the first it was apparent that the days of the new duke would be troublous. Genoa was not yet prepared to rest content with her defeat in Crete. The famous Genoese pirate, Alamanno Costa, Count of Syracuse, suddenly appeared in Cretan waters, and after various exploits seized Fraschia as a base from which he preyed upon the Venetian shipping. The new duke took vigorous action, and his measures against the pirate were sup- ported by the native nobility : an expedition was fitted out from Candia, manned by Greeks and Latins, and after a long and bloody battle, Alamanno was captured and his flotilla destroyed 3 with the exception of a single vessel. The prisoners were dispatched to Venice, and the last attempt of the Genoese to dispute Venetian domination in Crete thus miserably failed. But the island was not long to remain in peace. From an injury done by Pietro Filacanevo, Castellan of Belriparo, to Joannes Scordili and certain other Greeks, there grew a quarrel which
1 Hopf, Sitzungsberichte, xxi. 243.
2 Dandolo, 341, twelfth year of Ziani. On the other hand, Cornaro, It. vi. 286, fo. 120 b, dates Querini's succession in 1214, shortly after Sanudo's departure.
3 Pane, p. 144; Dandolo, 341; Monaci, p. 155.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 99
set the west of Crete in a blaze of revolt. Failing to obtain redress as quickly as they desired, the injured Cretans raided the possessions of the castellan, and refused to submit to justice. A small force under Pietro Tonisto and Giovanni Gritti, which was dispatched against them by the duke, was attacked as it was struggling in the hilly country round Sivrito/and all but annihilated. The quarrel dragged on till the next duke, Domenico Dolfin, on September 13, 121 9, conceded to the ringleaders certain knights' fees on the western side of the River Musella.2
But in 1222 there was fresh trouble, apparently caused, like the outbreak of 121 2, by the dispatch of a new body of Venetian colonists to a disaffected district. The country forming the seat of the late trouble — Milopotamos, Belriparo, Apanosivrito — was in June 1222 divided into sixty knights' fees, held by fifty-seven Venetians.3 As to the form which the disaffection of the natives assumed, we have no information: but the duke, Dolfin, by a skilful policy of bribes and persuasion, succeeded in reducing the island to order once more.4 In January 1224 5 the terms of the agreement were confirmed by Paolo Ouerini, who is again found occupying the place of duke:6 and the two influential brothers, Theodoros and Michael Milisino, were won over to a temporary fidelity to the government by the concession of two knights' fees.
For some five years the island appears to have remained quiet. Querini, after his second term of office, was succeeded by Marin Soranto, according to Cornaro's list,7 and Soranto by Zuan Michele, who was duke in March 1226.8 As to the period of his tenure of office, there is no evidence. We know, however, that in 1230 Giovanni Storlato was duke in his stead:9 and it was in the beginning of that year10 that a fresh rebellion broke
1 The ' Psicro ' of Monaci is certainly the same as the ' Pyschro ' which with Calamona and Catosivrito forms a single sestiere (Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 145). Gerola, p. 152, erroneously places the defeat at Sfachia. The former district was the very seat of disaffection; the latter, too far to the south to be the scene of any engagement which resulted from an aggressive movement against the rebels.
2 Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 210-13; Monaci, pp. 155, 156.
3 Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 234-49 ; Dandolo, 341 ; Hopf, p. 312.
4 Dandolo, 341.
5 Wrongly dated by Tafel and Thomas 1223 (xiii. 251).
6 Tafel and Thomas, ibid. ; Monaci, p. 156.
7 Cod. Marc. It. vi. 177, fo. 145 a.
8 A letter from the doge Ziani to him is printed by Tafel and Thomas, xiii. 260-4.
9 Dandolo, 346; Monaci, p. 156; Calergi, fo.381 b. Storlato does not appear in the list of dukes given by Cornaro, in which the two successors of Michele are Zuanne Dandolo and Nicolo Tonisto. Hopf, p. 313, gives Michieli 1226-8 and Storlato 1228-30, but does not state his evidence.
10 Dandolo and Monaci, ubi supra ; Cod. Marc. It. vii. 51, fo. 78 b.
H 2
ioo MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
out in Crete which affords a setting for the last known incidents in the career of Marco Sanudo.
A preliminary difficulty of some magnitude must, however, first be encountered. Does a date so late as 1230 put Marco Sanudo out of the question entirely ? Sauger's statement * that he died in 1220 need hardly trouble us, for in the matter of dates the Jesuit's reputation is not of the highest. But, as we have seen, Duke Marco II in his letter to the Venetian republic2 refers to Angelo Sanudo, Marco's eldest son, doing homage to the Emperor Robert after his father's death. Now the Emperor Robert died in 1228, which means that the homage (and hence the death of Marco) took place at some prior time. Hopf frankly confesses himself puzzled by the difficulty, and unable to determine whether the mention of Marco in 1230 is a mistake for Angelo or a mere misplaced recollection of the affairs of 1212.3 But the explanation of the apparent contradiction be- tween Hopfs quotation and the united testimony of Dandolo,4 Monaci,5 Calergi, Marcantonio Erizzo,6 and the chronicles ending in 1475 7 anc* i4868 is not, after all, so difficult. It is only necessary to assume a blunder on the part of Duke Marco II, who assumed that because Angelo Sanudo did homage to Robert, therefore Marco, his father, must have been dead at the time. As we have seen above, there is reason for supposing that Angelo did homage to Robert as his father's deputy during his father's lifetime.9 There thus appears to be no sufficient evidence for convicting the best Venetian authorities of error when they state that Marco Sanudo was still alive in 1230. This granted, all difficulty vanishes.
In this second great Cretan rebellion trouble began as usual with the powerful families of Scordili and Milisini, who, not content with receiving pardon and reward in return for their misdeeds of 121 7 and 1222, still refused to conduct themselves as peaceable subjects of Venice. Having failed to secure by open rebellion the withdrawal of the obnoxious colonists from their territory, they proceeded to institute a policy of terrorism, murder, and pillage. The duke, Giovanni Storlato, like his predecessor Tiepolo, found himself utterly unable to put down the malcontents. He therefore resorted to the very same ex- pedient which had produced such unfortunate results in 121 2. He summoned Marco Sanudo to his help, and this time we hear nothing of any covenant. Sanudo duly arrived, however, well supplied with munitions and men to the full extent of his resources,10 and
1 p. 122 infra. 2 Hopf, Sitzungsberichte, xxi. 243. 3 Hopf, p. 313.
4 Ubi supra. 5 Ubi supra. 6 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 56, fo. 124 b
7 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 51, ubi supra. 8 Cod. Marc. It. vii. 54, fo. 165 a.
9 See pp. 67, 98 supra. 10 ' Potenter', Dandolo, 346.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 101
once again his coming changed the whole aspect of affairs. To overawe the disaffected districts, the fortress of Suda was built : and so energetic was the policy of Sanudo that the rebels de- spaired of being successful through their own resources. They determined to take a leaf out of Storlato's book, and to call in outside help. Accordingly, they appealed to John Doukas Vatatzes, the Emperor of Nicaea (1232-55), offering him the lordship of Crete in return for help against the Venetians. The emperor, eager to extend his authority, accepted the proposal, and dispatched the considerable force of thirty-three galleys under his admiral Aussentio.1 This was a double disaster to the Venetians. In the first place the Cretans took heart, and in the next place Sanudo withdrew from the contest altogether, abandoned the unhappy duke, and sailed home. Thus a second time did Sanudo's help bring disaster upon those who had in- voked it. Only with the greatest difficulty and after much fighting were the invaders finally repulsed and the rebellion suppressed.
As to the motives which induced the Duke of the Archipelago to abandon his allies at the crucial moment, the chroniclers are in no doubt at all. They are unanimous in attributing it to bribery on the part of the Greek emperor. But there is another side to the transaction which ought in fairness to be remembered. In the first place Sanudo was brother-in-law, and John Vatatzes was son-in-law of the late Emperor Theodore Lascaris; and the influence of the duchess, and perhaps Sanudo's own feeling, would be against an open quarrel with a kinsman so nearly related. He had been invited to wage war on the Cretan rebels, not on the Emperor of Nicaea, and it is doubtful whether his Greek levies would have been willing to fight against the Greek emperor. Moreover, it must have been a matter of no small importance to Marco, now that his duchy was organized and in peace, to abstain from provoking hostilities with a foe who had it in his power to destroy all security and reduce the coasts of the islands once more to desolate wastes. It may be rejoined, with truth, that these considerations are not such as should induce a man to abandon in the time of greatest need the allies who trust him : but they are none the less somewhat different from the unthinking greed with which Sanudo is usually taxed. Out of mere fairness they should be reckoned with when we are forced to rely upon accounts which display obvious hostility.
With his disappearance from Crete under a storm of obloquy from patriotic Venetian historians, Marco Sanudo vanishes from history. We know nothing about the date of his death, though it is natural to suppose that he died not long after 1230, since
1 Calergi, fo. 382 b, alone preserves the name of the official.
102 MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE
Sauger and Duke Marco II, as we have noticed, speak of him as then already dead. Sauger asserts that the duke was sixty-seven when he died in 1220, and this may be correct, even though the date assigned to the death is an obvious mistake. But as neither Marco's entrance into the world nor his departure from it can be placed with anything approaching certainty, speculation is likely to be fruitless. Nor can any help be derived from Sauger's statement that Angelo Sanudo was twenty-six when he succeeded to the duchy, for we have seen some reason for believing that he was the son of an earlier marriage than that which followed his father's capture by the Emperor Theodore Lascaris.1 If the same authority is correct in making Angelo Sanudo distinguish himself in defending Constantinople against the attack of Greeks and Bulgarians in 1 236,2 we have a terminus ad quern for his father's death. But for sheer lack of evidence the exact date will have to remain uncertain.
So the conqueror of the Archipelago disappears. No vivid portrait of his personality has come down to us, and we can only reconstruct his likeness from his exploits. He was such a man as an aristocratic republic tends to produce, a man who can take his turn and discharge efficiently any public duty that falls to him. To command a galley or a fleet, to try in a Venetian colony the causes that affect his native city, to repre- sent that city in a negotiation with a foreign prince, to represent the colony in a negotiation with the mother city, to share in the election of a doge, were duties that might have fallen to any of the more prominent Venetian nobles of his day. And in most of these acts we see nothing of his individuality. His most brilliant performance outside the Archipelago was certainly the negotiation of the treaty of Adrianople. As much here may have been due to personal charm as to diplomacy ; for personal charm seems to have been the secret of his success in his own duchy, and the same gallantry that won the heart of Theodore Lascaris, as of many an unknown Greek or Latin warrior, may easily have appealed to the chivalrous soul of the Marquis of Montferrat. He never appears again as a diplomat unless it be in the bargain that he concluded with Tiepolo on the price of his retirement from Crete. His courage is beyond question, even though the story that he attacked a fleet of Lascaris four times as great as his own may be apocryphal. As a soldier he had an eye for strong positions, as his castles at Naxos and Suda witness. Vigour of action and quickness of decision are not less clearly marked. The whole story of his first attack on the Archipelago, but especially the burning of his boats at Potamides, his rapid victories over the obstinate Cretan rebels, the sudden 1 PP- 67, 68 supra. 2 Sauger, tr. Karales, p. 28 ; Miller, p. 573.
MARCO SANUDO AND CRETE 103
dash with which he turned on his Venetian rival, Tiepolo, all bear witness to these qualities. His contemporaries knew him as the organizer of the company of adventurers that conquered the Archipelago ; later generations revered him as the founder of the city, the port, and the cathedral of Naxos, and the organizer of a state in which Greek and Latin dwelt together in a harmony which contrasted sharply with the age-long discord in Crete. It says something for his power of managing men that we hear of no dispute with either the Greek Church or the Latin. A generous lord, who nevertheless enriched his state by the suppression of piracy and the construction of a port, he could please his vassals at small expense to his own government. So he passed away, a capable leader, a capable ruler, a man of winning ways that attached to his person both subjects and adventurers, who founded a dynasty and converted a desert into a fruitful plain. One stain there seems to be on his fair fame. The Venetian historians regard him as unscrupulous in his treachery to their dukes in Crete. It is not always easy to attach the blame when allies fall out. The clear-cut theory of a later date would make it the worst of crimes to levy war on the authorized representative of the Venetian state. But the prin- ciples that were to govern the duty of Venetian subjects in Venetian colonies were still undetermined, and it is easy to forgive a man who combined a sense of indignation at a private wrong with a sense of capacity to govern for Venice better than his rival could. The charge of unscrupulousness is one to which few of the adventurers of the age could plead not guilty ; what seems to tell against Sanudo's fame is that his unscrupulousness was displayed in his actions towards the government of his own city. And yet his countrymen were proud of him. By valour more than by any other quality he founded the largest of all the Venetian vassal states, a state that survived when the Latin and Greek empires had alike crumbled into dust, and when, after nearly four centuries, his duchy fell in its turn before the Turkish conqueror, the families of the Venetians and their allies still con- tinued to hold their lordships for another century and a half. Even to-day, as we have seen, the last relics of the Latin nobility dwell within the massive walls of his Castro at Naxos. His cathedral church is still thronged by ardent worshippers, the endowments of his cathedral chapter are intact, while the es- cutcheons, new and old, of families extant or extinct adorn the houses of his capital, and make the traveller feel that there is one spot in Greece where the memory of the Middle Age is cherished, where it is recognized that 'Vixere fortes post Agamemnona \
APPENDIX I EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES
Cornaro's History of Crete.
Codex Marcianus, It. vi. 286, entitled Historia di Candia di Andrea Corner q. Giacomo Nob. Ven°. Abbitorre nella Citta di Candia.1
The First Intervention of Marco Sanudo. Tom. i, f. 120 a [Lib. xi].
II che sapato dal duca, et dubbitando che non uenissero a conbater Candia et facdsero Patroni di tutta 1' isolla mise con triplicate lettere immediate a Marco Sanuto detto da alcuni Marino, che, si ritroua al- 1' hora nelle sue isole dell' Arcipelago perche uenisse a socorrere et liberare V isola trauagliata per non hauer il duca forze sufficient di resistere.
II Sanudo riceuete le lettere immediatamente si inbarc6 con le sue zenti et a momenti arriud a Candia e sbarcatoli conbate* con li Greci per terra et per mare, el sotomise e sopi immediatamente la ribelione hauendo re'cuperato il tutto con mortalita et castigo delli ribeli priuandoli dell' loro beni, liberando li prigioni Vene'tiani e cosi aquieto tutte le cose.
Ma fra il duca et esso Sanudo ui era qualche poca d' inuidia ne uoleua Y uno crede'r all' altro stimandosi ogni uno d' esser stato causa del mantenimento del isola al dominio Veneto . sucesero percio tra essi mold disgusti, et un giorno essendo andata la gente del Sanudo per conperar pane e non trouandone, ne poco ne molto, cominciorono ad infuriarsi fortemente e far strepito con sdegno contro il duca, e dubi- tando di qualche insulto il duca, che gli fosse trouato dal Sanuto, la notte fugi dal palazzo et con una Corda si Call6 dalle muri della Citta.
Altri dicono, che uestitosi in habito di dona per non eser conosiuto usci fori della Citta, et ando con alcuni suoi confedenti al Castel Temene luogo sicuro e si fortificb in quelo per resister ad ogni inpeto del Sanudo, il quale rimane nella Citta et haueua la diretione di quella, e staua V isola quieta per tema delle forze del Sanudo.
Auendo pero andato a Venetia 1' auiso della ribelione dell' isola spedi con celerita la republica un corpo d' armata sotto il gouerno di Sebastian Betoni e di Domenico Querini con molta gente da mar e da terra nella quale era anco imbarcato il sucesore del duca Tiepolo, che si parti, e fece ritorno alia patria.
1 This is the only complete manuscript of this work in St. Mark's library. An autograph manuscript (It. vi. 154) which breaks off at 1203 bears on the fly-leaf the date 1620. The manuscript from which this extract is taken belongs to the seventeenth century.
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 105
(f. 120 b.) Sono alcuno d' opinione, che il Sanudo (il quale hauuta la nuoua dell' armata s'inberco colle sue genti, e parti di Candia) facesse questa nouita per rdstar assoluto signore di Candia con detrimento del dominio Veneto, et altri per far dispeto al Tiepolo e per mostrarsi mag- giore di lui e che difendese 1' isola per seruitio della republica Veneta, essendo incredibile che uolese geregiar contro la sua patria per arris- chiar il certo che da quella riconosceua ch' erano le sue isole per aquistar 1' incerto . ch' era il dominio dell' isola di Candia il che con- pranssi raggionamente perche la republica non fece contro lui alcuna dimostratione.
Giunta 1' Armata a Calus limiones e partito il Sanudo, il Tiepolo parti dal Temene e andb a Surito e di la in Candia doue pochi giorni doppo arriu6 1' armata, et barco Paolo Querini duca sucesore del Tiepolo del 1214.
'Daniele Barbaro.'
Codex Marcianus, It. vii. 790, entitled Cronica del Triuisano della Citta di Venezia.1 See above, p. 40°.
f. 147 a. Essendo adonque per tanti acquisti fatti nella Grecia et nell' Imperio oriental molto accressiudi del nome i Venetian]', de repu- tation', et di ricchezze mossi (f. 147 b) li Zenouesi da inuidia de tante prosperita per parezzarse, et star al paragon dei Venetiani comenzorno a praticar col marchese di Monferra di comprar da lui 1' Isola di Candia, la qual aspettaua a lui, come herede di sua madre che fu fiola d' Alesio Imperator ; Ma questo trattamento non fu cosi pero occulta- mente, che il Dose non ne hauesse notitia, onde per impedir questo negotio a Zenouesi, mand6 subitamente in Andrinopoli Marco Sanudo suo neuodo a (al. et) Roman, alcuni dicono, Rauandolo Carcere amigo et compagno de Calla del marchese ditto, azoche non solo disturbasse la compreda che trattauano Zenouesi ma anche con ogni industria operasseno se li peruenisse quell' Isola nel commun di Venetia. Andadi adonque questi nuntii, et molto amoreuolmente raccolti da Bonifacio, hauendo comenzado a trattar sopra il negotio di Candia senza alcuna difficolta, uenneno nella conclusion' che desiderauano che essendo all' hora il marchese bisognoso de danari, et uedendo di non poderse conseruar quell' Isola, che in gran parte ghe era usurpa da alcuni Greci, se non con grande dispendio et difficolta per non hauer muodo di tegnir li legni armadi sul mar, consent! uolentiera di uenderla a Venetiani, et discesi a piu strette pratiche concluseno il mercado in
M
— marche d' arzento sopra la qual uendida ne furno poi fatti instrumenti
publichi del tenor infrascritto.
[Here follows an Italian abstract of the document in Tafel and Thomas, but without reference to the surrender of any territory except Crete.]
1 This MS., which appears to give the best text of those which I have had the leisure to inspect closely, belongs to the seventeenth century.
io6 APPENDIX I
f. 148 b. Rimaseno i Zenouesi molto confusi et pieni di grandissimo sdegno, poiche furono fatti certi della sorascritta uendida. Ne podendo contegnir 1' odio di che ardeuano, armorno subito alcune galie et le mandorno nell' Arcipellago per ueder di farsi patroni de alcune di quell' isole et principalmente per impedir et desturbar li felici progressi di Venetiani. Haueua poco tempo prima che queste cose accadessero manda la mazor parte della so' armada a, desarmar a Venetia, che uedendo la solleuation' dei Greci, et la creation fatta in Saloniechi de Theodoro Comino, altri dicono Comero Lascari, nell' imperio come s'6 detto, per opponerlo all' Imperator Balduin tutti li Principi colle- gadi de comun consentimento giudicorno che se douesse lassar 1' im- presa di Hierusalem, per fin' a tanto, che le cose di Constantinopoli si redusesseno in stado quieto et seguro che tutti stimorno che fosse non sauio conseglio il metter in pericolo le cose acquistade per quelle che se doueuano acquistare. Essendo adonque romaso el Dose con puoche galie et tanti chi appena ghe bastauano per la sua guardia, hauendo inteso V apparecchi fatti da Zenouesi staua con qualche pinsier' in che muodo podeua ai insulti fatti da essi far resistenza. Ma Marco Sanudo so nouodo fiol d' una soa sorella huomo de corazo et de grand' anemo ghe domand6 (f. 149 a) arsili che senza zurme erano romasi a Constanti- nop'li, digando di uolerli armar' de suoi proprii denari, et con quei d' opponersi all' impeto de Zenouesi, la qual cosa concessa dal Dose al neuodo molto uolontiera, el Sanudo subito con molta prestezza ne armo, et remesse in ordine otto, et inuiadose con questo numero di galie al primo uolo uerso Nicsia, trouado molta difncolta nell' acquisto di quella per esser ghe alcuni Zenouesi che fauano spalle et la dofendeuano, per metter necessita alle so zente de douerla prender in ogni muodo, tirado dall' ardimento del so anemo uiril, fece una deliberation' forse de non esser imita da altri ancora chi a lui ghe seguisse buon efTetto, fece Marco desmontar' tutte le sue zente in terra et inanemandole al- P acquisto di quell' isola ghe mostraua che della presa di quella re- seguiua la ricchezza et honor et la gloria di tutti, et fatte subito affondar' in mar le le (sic) galie dette con tant' impeto poi 1' assalto alia citta, che i Greci et li Zenouesi che la difendeuano non potendo risistere si messeno tutti in fuga, chi in una parte chi in un' altra, et alcuni di quei et massime li Zenouesi saluadisi su certi pizzoli legni furono tutti gli altri mandadi a fil di spada. Romase adonque Marco Sanudo uittorioso et insignoridose pienamente dell' isola di Nissia desideroso che tutto V Arcipelago uegnisse sotto il dominio de Venetiani poiche 1' haue ben fortificado quell' isola et messo ghe sufnciente presidio con intelligenza et conseglio del Dose suo barba se ne uenne a Venetia (149 b) per causa di indur il commun a douer far armada per quella impresa. Ma in questo tempo et prima che queste cose seguissero essendo uegnudi alcuni legni de Zenouesi nel nostro Golfo et trattando con trattamenti occulti . . . etc. [Genoese attack on Corfu and Durazzo\
f. 150 b. Ma in questo mezo essendo zonto a Venetia Marco Sanudo et essendo uegnuda nuoua certa della morte del Dose, il qual' fo seppolto nell' atrio della Giesia di Santa Soffia in un seppolcro eminente et molto honorato con lettere che feuano mention' delle lodeuole et
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 107
egregie opere fatte per lui . . . etc. \Election of Doge. Marco Samido named last among the forty electors.]
f. 153 a. Erano in questi tempi molte dell' isole dell' Arcipelago et alcune altre parti della Grecia respetto ai tumulti seguidi in quel- 1' imperio redutto in man di male persone et de ladri che non obedendo alcun infestauano et dannificauano tutti, donde ne seguiuano et et (sic) spogli et rapine, et spesso anche occision', et morte di quei che naui- gauano per quei mari, et non solamente costoro infesti ai nauiganti, ma tra loro medesimi quei d' un isola et d' un luogo et 1' altro se dauano molestia et se trauagiauano, et ogni cosa era piena dei insulti et desturbi, de lagrime e de querele. Ne podeua Balduin, per la sua impotentia et per esser tegnudo in continue- (153 b) trauagio da Theodoro nel qual ghe bisognaua hauer sempre i occhi, far alle predette cose alcun rimedio che fosse bastante a metter in pase quel paese, ne similmente li Vene- tiani occupadi nel posesso dell' isola di Candia come di sotto si dira se toleuano quella cura, ma attendendo cadaun alle soe cose particolar- mente se lassauano da parte et se transcurauano le altre. La qual cosa tegniua la prouincia inquietissima et quei popoli in infinita miseria et all' hora accadete che molte di quelle zente ascondeuano nelle uiscere della terra li suoi tesori et le soe cose piu care, le quale poi sono sta trouade nei tempi sussequenti et se ne trouano ancora. Hora essendo in questi termini la Grecia Marco Sanudo neuodo come s' 6 detto di Rigo Dandolo Dose premorto fatta compagnia con alcuni altri Vene- tiani et anche con alcuni forastieri, tutti insieme deliberomo con buona licenza pero del Dose d' assaltar' cadaun d' essi priuatamente et con le sue forze proprie et particular' 1' isole del Leuante che za erano sotto- poste all' Imperio de Greci, et quelche ogn'un d' essi acquistaua fosse so proprio dandone pero una certa recognition' all' Imperio. Per la qual cosa mandorono nuntii a Constantinop'li, et hauendo il consenso di Balduin se preparorno all' impresa con molta sollecitudine. Era Marco Sanudo (154 a) come quelche haueua puoco auanti acquistado la isola di Nicsia, et non solamente si daua titolo di Duca di quel- 1' isola ma per reputation' se appellaua Duca dell' Arcipelago a un certo muodo come capo de tutti quei che aspirauano a quella impresa, et ancora che tutti s' ordinassero con le soe forze priuate, nientedimeno tutti guardauano a Marco et a lui et a suoi andamenti adheriuano; forno costoro de Venetiani oltre il Sanudo predetto, Marin Dandolo, Andrea et Girolamo Ghisi fradelli, Piero Zustignan, Domenigo Michiel, Filippo, alcuni Filocali, Nauagoioso, Giacomo Viaro, et Rauan dalle Carcere con un so neuodo. Li forastieri veramente furono alcuni de Toschi fiamenghi, et alcuni Conti della Ruosa d' Irlanda, et diuersi altri caualieri et gentilhuomini lombardi. Andadi costoro in Leuante, et sparsesi con le loro hoste 6 sigondo 1' occasion' chi qua e chi la li fiammenghi acquistorno le isole della Zaffalonia del Zante et di Santa Maura, quei della Ruosa se fecero signori d' alcune terre della Morea, Marco Sanudo occupo Pario Antipario Milo et Santirin, Rauan dalle Carcere Negroponte, Marin Dandolo (sic), Ghesi fratelli predetti Thine Meole Schiati Scopole et Schiro, Piero Zustignan, Domenigo Michiel insieme 1' isola di Zia, et Filippo Nauigoioso Stalimene il qual impetio
108 APPENDIX I
anche dall' Imperator titolo di priuilegio di Megadiua dell' Imperio. Feceno poi (154 b) trouandosi in sul fatto nuoua compagnia insieme el marchese di Monferra Marin Dandolo, et Giacomo Polani, li quali andadi all' acquisto delli Gallipoli con puoca fadiga la preseno, ma non solamente in particolar come s' e detto, alcuni Venetiani andauano nella Grecia ad acquistarsi dominii et signorie, ma anco publicamente il com- mun di Venetia armo 31 galie et mandandole sotto Ranier Dandolo et Ruzer Premarin all' impresa di Corfu, in poco tempo quei capitanii felicemente s' impatronirno di quell' isola, la qual cosa significada al Dose subito furono eletti per il mazor Consiglio noui cittadini et mandadi con titolo di Gouernadori et custodi di Corfu, ma non contenti li capitani predetti dell' acquisto fatto procedendo animosamente piu auanti, pre- seno su la Morea Modon et Coron onde ghe fo poi mandado Rafael hora il primo chi ghe andasse per castellan' et conseruador' di quella citta et trouarno li detti capitanii nel castel di Modon Leon Capo- uetrano Zenouese famosissimo corsaro, il qual con quattro galie et cin- que naui si ghe era fortificado, ma non hauendo possudo all' impeto di Venetiani resister', li capitanii el preseno, et poi nel ritorno il feceno impiccar per la gola . . .
(170 a) Ma pero dapb pochissimo tempo molti vellani Candiotti fortificandose su le montagne in alcuni luoghi fortissimi infestauano et dauano molto trauaglio a quei Venetiani che ghe erano andadi ad habitar', predauano et brusauano le posession', predeuano et amaz- zauano Y huomini et animali et per tutti i modi che podeuano li dauano molta molestia, onde fatte dal Duca molte esperienze per domar quei ladri, ne reuscendoghene alcuna perfettamente, desideroso de tuorse quel fastidio zb dauanti i occhi, chiamo in suo soccorso per metter fin' a quella irnpresa Marco Sanudo Duca dell' Arcipelago . Ando il Sanudo con molte delle sue zente in Candia, et essendo costoro Greci, come i Candiotti, et per questo sapiando i costumi e i andamenti di quei, et essendo assai piu atti che i nostri a montar in quei diruppi doue coloro se ascondeuano in pochissimi zorni et col fumo et col fuogo sforzandoli ne amazzorono gran parte, et parte anche presene uiui, le detteno in poter del Duca di Candia, il qual poi fatti li morir tutti con crudelessimi tormenti come si conueniua alii molti et enormi soi delitti, resto per all' hora in quieto et tranquillo posesso di tutta quell' isola, ma perche il Sanudo pretendeua per premio della sua opera di hauer alcune iurisdition' su 1' isola di Candia, al che non uolendo per alcuna maniera acconsentir' il Tiepolo come quel che stimaua questa cosa douer' esser' indanno del comun de Venetia, nascete subito alcuna discordia tra loro, onde (170 b) fortificadose il Sanudo con le sue zente nel castello de Temano se temeua che da questa dissensione ne douesse riuscir' qualche scandolo, ma interposti alcuni fidelissimi al comun di Venetia et di molta autorita et amici et parenti, et del Tiepolo et del Sanudo, talmente operorno che il detto Sanudo hauuti alcuni danari per le spese che haueua fatte in quella impresa senz' altro si parti con le soe zenti di Candia.
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 109
Codex Marcianus, It. vii. 91, a miscellaneous manuscript of the seventeenth
century.
The City of Candiana,
f. 447 a. .Similmente quelli della citta di Treuiso ditta Amorosa, della qual erra conte uno nominate) Marcello, insieme con quelli di Ciuidal, di Belum, et di Ceneda, abandonorno tutti i sui luochi et uenero alii lidi ditti Cundinea, et li edificorno una citta, et la nomi- norno Erachliana per honore di Heracleo imperator ditta dopoi Citta Nuoua . . .
Codex Marcianus, It. vii. 798. Cronaca Veneta sino al 1428, described in Catalogue as ' secolo xiv \
The Building of the City of Candiana.
f. 5 b. [The people of Concordia and Altino out of fear of Altila] fuzi ale lagune del Mar, cercando de trouar qualche reduto chi in una parte e chi in unaltra, ma fra le altre cosse li edifica una cita che se chiama Cauorle et unaltra cita che se chiama Candiana, emo se chiama Cita Nuoua . . .
Partise adoncha el re Ianus da Padoa et ando con le suo zente verso Arimano.
Codex Marcianus, It. vii. 37, entitled Cronica Antica di Venetia. See above, p. 62, described in Catalogue as ' secolo xiv \
f. 1 a. ... rezendo la sua republica Galdano Fontana, Simon di Glanchoni, et Antonio Corluo consuli citadi del ano in anno . . .
Constituirno i nobel homeni Albertto Falier et Ttomaxo Candian per do anni consoli sopra la ditta fabricha (i.e. of the city of Venicer on the occasion of Alarics invasion).
f. 30 a. Alora el serenissimo messer lo doxe (Piero Ziani) sinmagino di riquperar lixola per ogni modo, la ueritta sia che a quel ttempo di bona raxon la doueua eser del marchexe da Mon fera che fo re de Salonich come per auanti ho trattado, ma per uno messer Zuane da Verona da lixola da Negropontte a pregierie et ttrattado duno Ser Marcho Sanudo el grando la ditta ixola per certta quanttita de moneda a canbio de la ttera del chomun de Veniexia e le vero che una gran partte di lixola per Ser Marcho Sanudo per ditto el qual dominaua chome i patti se conttenia coe di la partte di ocidente in fina per ttuto Chao Spada el fexe edifichar el ditto Ser Marcho Sanudo la citta dela Chania.
In ttenpo del ditto doxe in Veniexia fu aparechiado grande exercitto in nel qual aparechio ne ando luno in questta armada e fo armado galie 50 et molti nauilii per poser pasar chauali e fo armado naue 7 grosse per porttar uituaria.
Anchora in tenpo di questto doxe fo manda naue 30 in marchadantia le qual se chiamono la charauana et andono in le partte di Egitto et a lixola di Grede di la qual fo chapitanio Mr. Ruzier Pixani et Mr. Renier Dandolo et andono in nalttri molti luogi et ando in Nachra
no APPENDIX I
auendo parte conssi 600 lonbardi da chaualo et fexe gran battaie et duro gran fadiga perche Zenouexi se choreua el ditto el Conte Rigo da Maltta ben che Zenouexi receuesse moltti dani tra le qual di galie 7 sue 3 ne fo prexe. Da poi moltti zorni gie fo fatto moltti dani per uno Ser Anzolo Querini chapitanio di unalttra armada e ttute le chastele di lixola fono reschatatte e similmente la citta di Candia, ma uno fortte chasttelo ne per mar ne per ttera non potteno auer. Vedendo el ditto non posendo auerlo ne conttesttar contra Veniciani dimando patti et fo li fatti in questto modo saluo lauer e le persone e doueage dar la fortteca e darge dn. otto milia per che fono 15 milia a chanpo e questto fexe Veniciani amanttegii che finita fose la ditta ostte per che Zenouexi non metesseno piui pe in la dita ixola.
(30 b) Ma el dito conte Rigo da Maltta ttorno con molte ttrauaie se prexe lixola di Crede per Veniciani fu reqperatta. Veramente el ualoroxo Mr. Marcho Sanudo fexe de infitte prodece in la quisttacion di quela . poi se partti Mr. Anzolo Querini per uegnir a Veniexia. el ditto Mr. Marcho Sanudo rimaxe dominador e chapitanio di ttuta quela ixola per fin che Mr. lo Doxe el chomun di Veniexia che mando ducha e chapitanio e prima fo ducha Mr. Jachomo Ttiepolo et chapitanio fo Mr. Marcho Sanudo di lalttra partte che li ttochaua.
Questto Mr. Marcho Sanudo fo di tanto ualor che pasando pocho ttenpo ttuta lixola in si ttolsse e prexe Mr. Jachomo Ttiepollo e meselo in prexon, ma pur con sui boni patti lixola ttorno in suo primo sttado, coe sotto el dominio del ditto Doxe et chomun de Veniexia ; fo mandato a dir al ditto Mr. Marcho di infinite parole e saria ttropo attedioxa chossa. Qusttui fo fio di una sorela di Mr. Enrigo Dandolo che fo doxe, el qual fo con el dito a prender Zara e Chosttantinopolli el qual fexe di marauilioxe chosse per Mr. Enrigo Dandolo datto gie fo galie 8 armade di ualentissimi homeni da Veniexia, el qual quaxi ttute lixole di larcipielego le qual fo per contto tra chasttole e cittade i numero 18 e gran forttece sopra di quele rechonquisttando el duchado di Nechesia et andono a uno chasttolo fortissimo el qual i Greci el ttegiano ed era moltto sechorsso da Zenouexi ttene questto modo. Conco sia chossa che con 8 galie osidio e conbatte quelo per uno zorno e non siando ttuta la sua zente in tera per che dubittaua che la sua zente non fuziseno sil fatto non li fusse andatto per paura di queli denttro con la iutto di Zenouexi non insiseno fuora e che chacatto fuogo fusse in le sue galie.
Per la qual chossa feua bixognio eser uiguroxi di lixola in sir fuora non poseuano che ttanto li stteteno che li se rendeno a lui questto qussi domino in quele partte per moltto ttenpo dapoi uoiando contrasttar ad uno exercitto di lo imperador di Chosttantinopoli el qual iera con galie 30 e lui iera con galie 7 ouer 8 e fo prexo per la qual chossa le Smire et ttute quele contrade e fege forco di decharsse sotto al dominio di lo inperador el quale per la sua (f. 31a) nobilittade ge dette una sua sorela per moier di la qual una gran partte di queli da cha Sanudo sono disexi, di quelo e fin al prexentte alguna di quele ixole coe di larcipielego sono sue e domina alguni disendenti di quelo Mr. Marcho Sanudo predito.
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES in
The Vituri Chronicle.
Codex Marcianus, It. vii. 2051, entitled on cover, Vitturi Cronica di Venezia MSS., see above, p. 61. At the end, Chonpito per mi Antnonio Vituri de Misr Andrea 1464 del mexe de Nouembrio in Veniexia}
f . 22 a. Chome fo prexo Nicosia et la ixola de le Smire e molti altri castelli et ancora de queli erano reuelati fono scossi con molle alire bele cosse.
Dapoi partido el conte Rigo de la dita ixolla fo mandado da Veniexia misier Marco Sanudo capitanio dela dita ixolla e misier Nicoleto Vituri retor et entro misier Marco Sanudo capitanio et ando molti zentilomeni con le suo fameje con lui ad abitare. E misier Jacomo Tiepollo era ducha el qual fo el primo ducha che fosse mai in lixolla di Crede. Et esendo sta algun tenpo misier Marco Sanudo se party de la dita ixolla e mena con si molti caualieri e de nobilli homeni et ando a una ixola che a nome Nichusia et ando a molte altre ixolle che carente (sic) quelle lequal ixolle lui dono ala sua zente et dapoi ando a Lastre doue era linperio de i Grifoni. E a una ixolla che se chiama (f. 22 b) le Smire e quela prexe e uadagno molto trexoro el qual tuto parti per la sua zente. E in quel tenpo reuello una ixolla che a nome Simone al ducha di Candia e grande parte di Grifoni et auendo reuelata la dita ixolla misier Jacomo Tiepollo ducha si mando per misier Macho Sanudo prometandolli grande auere che lui vignise in suo susidio. E subito uene el dito misier Marco con molta nobel zente a lixolla de Crede contra quelli che erano reueli de la dogal signoria, e requisto tuty i castelli erano reuelati ai Grifoni contra misier lo ducha e pazifico tuta lixolla. E pasando alguno tenpo el dito misier Marco era ben uoiuto da tuto el puouollo per modo chel fo tentado da molti che luy se douesse far signor abacheta de la dita ixolla . E uedendo luy esser se ben uoiudo e faorizado da tuta lixolla se delibero de farsi signor, e ando al palazo doue era misier lo ducha con molta zente, e prexelo et menolo in prixon in sua balia et poi ando per tuta lixola requirendo tuti castelli . E tuti se resse a luy et dapoi se asuno tuta la zente de Veniziani e ando doue era el e tolselo de prixon e anda a uno chastello che si chiama Temano. E poi pasando alguni zorny come dio piaque per forza deschazo el dito misier Marco Sanudo de lixolla. E torno el ducha in Candia, E tute zitade e chastelli retorno al dominio dogal come era prima.
Codex Marcianus, It. vii. 51. Cronaca Veneziana sino al 1475. Described in St. Mark's Catalogue as ' secolo xvi'. See pp. io5, 14, 15 et passim.
The Expeditions of 1206 and the Conquest of the Archipelago.
f. 72 b. ... Auendo li Turchi per lo pocho prouedimento dello Inperio de la Romania prexo Modon et Choron e dominando quelli et tuta la Morea e fazando de grandissimi dani alii Christiani e principal- mente ali Veniziani che continuamente con legni picholli passauano da
1 The Chronicle professes to have been originally written in 1396.
113
APPENDIX I
quelli luogi, el fo deliberado al tuto de tuorli li diti luogi delle mani e de la suo dominazion e fo prexo che con grandissima solizitudine elsse {sic) douesse meter in ponto gallie xxxta e quella del chapettanio a numero de gallie xxxjna e fo fato capetanio delle dite gallie Ser Renier Dandollo e da poi fato paresse al conseio de fame un alltro et sfessero doi chapetanii e fezeno Ser Ruzier Premarin : li sopachomiti foron li infrascritti zoe
Ser Zuan Baxeio Ser Zuan Nauazoxo Ser Piero Dolfin Ser Zuan Gradenigo Ser Domenego Querini Ser Nicolo Fradello Ser Iacomo Iustignan Ser Piero Francho Ser Tornado Fallier Ser Vidal Foscarini Ser Piero Michiel Ser Marco Sanudo Ser Otauian Fermo Ser Marin Mastropetro
Ser Aluixe Morxini Ser Nicolo Zopollo Ser Marco Falmaillo Ser Zuan Soranzo Ser Nicolo Pollani Ser Anttonio Contarini Ser Stefano Velglioni Ser Nicolo Salamon Ser Tribuno Memo Ser Andrea Benbo Ser Iacomo Istigo Ser Renier Zeno Ser Borttolo Zorzi Ser Iacomo Dauro Ser Matteo Corner
La quell armada ando a Modon et Choron e quelli luogi conbate . . . etc. [taking of Methone and Corone).
In ello dito tempo la dita armada partida da Choron sme ando a Spinalonga doue trouo gallie . . .
In ello dito tempo uedando quelli da Venizia che Hi Zenouexi li pareua esser sta ofexi et mormorauan de far molte chosse i delibera de proueder a molti mormori perche molti dubitauan de nauegar el suo auer per la nouita iera sta fata a Zenouexi e prexo de far zoe de armar gallie 20 delle quelle fo fato capitanio Ser Iacomo Baxeio : li armadori forono li infrascritti zoe
Ser Iacomo Baxeio capitanio
Ser Ordelafo Falier
Ser Polio Barbo
Ser Nicolo Chaxollo
Ser Zuan Contarini
Ser Nicolo Dolfin
Ser Iacomo Premarin
Ser Zuan Dauro
Ser Grazian Zorzi
Ser Nicolo Pentollo
Ser Marco Fermo Ser Bellin Dandollo Ser Piero Souranzo Ser Nicolo Lugnian Ser Marco Gradenigo Ser Franco Dandollo Ser Piero Mastrorso Ser Domenego Michieli Ser Candian Sanudo Ser Renier Zeno
(f. 73 b) La qual armada usi de Venizia del dito milessimo de agosto et chapitando nell porto de Famagosta troua naue 3 de Zenouexi le quelle lole conbate e prexe le quelle ierano de marchadantie e quelle remando a Venizia et haue honor et grandissimo utelle.
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 113
Sauger's Histoire de l'Archipel. Second edition, 1699. Livre premier, pp. 1-32.
La conquete que les Francois firent de PEmpire Grec Fan mil deux cens quatre, est une chose si connue & si bien ddcrite par tant de fameux historiens, que je me puis dispenser d'en faire ici le recit, quoique ce soit cette glorieuse entreprise qui a donne" lieu a l'e'tablisse- ment de la Souverainete dont j'ecris l'histoire. II me suffit de dire, qu'apres la prise de Constantinople, Baudouin Comte de Flandre ayant este* elu Empereur avec Papplaudissement de l'armee victorieuse, plusieurs Seigneurs Grecs voulant profiter de la confusion ou se trouvoit alors tout cet Empire, s'erigerent en Souverains, sans que Baudouin, encore trop foible dans sa nouvelle conqueste, put s'opposer a. ces invasions. Quelques uns se jetterent sur les cotes de la mer Eg6e, ou ils se fortifierent ; & quelques autres dans les Isles de l'Archipel, d'ou ils faisoient des courses continuelles sur les Latins, dont ils ne pouvoient supporter la domination.
Ce desordre dura autant que le regne de Baudouin : mais Henry son frere ne luy eut pas plutot succede\ que ce nouvel Empereur forma le dessein de ddtruire tous ces petits Souverains. Le moyen dont il se servit pour y re\issir, fut de permettre aux principaux Seigneurs de sa Cour, qu'il vouloit d'ailleurs recompenser pour les grands services qu'il en avoit recus, d'armer contre ces rebelles, & de leur abandonner toutes les conquestes qu'ils pourroient faire. Le Comte de Blois s'empara d'une partie de la Bithynie ; le Seigneur de Champlit conquit le Pelo- Villehard. ponnese ; Othon de la Roche Gentilhomme Bourguignon jetta ses vues Alberic. sur Athenes, dont il se rendit maitre, de mSme que de la ville de Thebes, Jacques d'Avenes & Ravin Carcerio prirent Negrepont : & c'est ainsi que les Francois formerent divers petits Etats dans la Grece, ou ils se maintinrent longtems sous la protection de l'Empereur.
Les Venitiens qui avoient assiste les Francois a la prise de Constanti- Blond, in nople, & qui avoient eu en partage la Thessalie avec une partie de la brev- ser- Macedoine, ne s'appercurent pas plutot des grandes conqultes que les J ^V D d Seigneurs Francois faisoient chaque jour dans la Grece, qu'ils voulurent lm ^ g." aussi e*tendre plus loin les bornes de leurs Etats. Ils permirent done Rhamn. 1. 6. aux plus considerables d'entr'eux d'equiper des vaisseaux ; & a l'exemple de l'Empereur, ils leur donnerent aussi toutes les conquetes qu'ils pourroient faire. Plusieurs se mirent en mer ; Marc Dandolo surprit Rhamn. Gallipoli ; Andre Gizi se rendit maitre des Isles de Tines, de Miconi, de Schiro & de Scopelo. Marc Sanudo l'un des plus accomplis Capi- Sanut. 1. 1. taines qu'eut alors la Republique, ne fut pas moins heureux que les part. 4. c. 7. autres. C'est celui-la meme qui engagea Boniface Marquis de Montferrat, Rllama- *• 4- a faire ^change de l'Isle de Candie qu'il avoit eue en partage, avec le Royaume de Thessalie qui etoit soumis aux Venitiens. Ce brave „ Sanudo tourna ses armes contre l'Isle de Naxe, & s'en rendit maitre p*"tu ' 'c*' avec assez de facilite. Comme cette Isle est la capitale du Duche de idem, epist. 3. l'Archipel, & pour ainsi dire, le theatre des principaux eVenemens de 8- 12. cette histoire, je croy qu'il est a propos d'en faire ici le plan, afin d'en P^ c- 2I- donner une id£e au Lecteur. Sabell. dec. 1.
p296i I 9. dec. 2. 1.6.
ii4 APPENDIX I
Lisle de Naxe est situee au milieu de l'Archipel a trente-sept degrez d'e*levation : son circuit est de plus de cent milles, c'est a dire de pr^s de trente-cinq lieues Franchises ; sa largeur est de trente milles qui font dix lieues de France. Elle est la plus grande, la plus fertile, & la plus agreable de toutes les Cyclades. Les anciens l'appelloient Dionysiay soit qu'elle ait 6t6 le lieu de la naissance de Bacchus sumomme Dionysius, soit parceque ce Dieu y estoit particulierement adore\ On l'appelloit encore Strongili, a cause de sa figure ronde.
Les principales choses qui rendent cette Isle tres celebre, sont la hauteur de ses montagnes, la quantite de marbre blanc qu'on en tire, la beautd de ses plaines, la multitude des fontaines & des ruisseaux qui arrosent ses campagnes, le grand nombre de jardins remplis de toutes sortes d'arbres fruitiers, les forests d'oliviers, d'orangers, de limoniers & de grenadiers d'une hauteur prodigieuse. Tous ces avantages qui la distinguent de toutes les autres, luy ont acquis le nom de Reine des Cyclades. Cependant, cette Isle n'a jamais eu que peu de commerce, par le defaut d'un bon port ou les batimens pussent etre en surete" ; car quoiqu'outre le port ordinaire qui est audessous de la ville, il y en ait quatre autres, qui sont Driagatha, Agiasso, Panermo, & les Potamides, ce ne sont a proprement parler que des rades ou les galeres & les vaisseaux peuvent estre a l'abri du vent du Nort : outre que ces ports £tant directement opposez a l'Orient ou au Midi, il est impossible d'y etre a couvert contre le vent de Siroc, autrement Sud-Ouest, qui excite souvent de violentes tempestes sur toutes ces mers.
Quatre cens soixante & quatre ans devant la naissance de Jesus- Christ, Naxe etoit une Republique, dont celle d'Athenes ne m^prisa Herodote en pas l'alliance. Son gouvernement e'toit Democratique. Ces deux Etats son histoire. subsisterent quelque terns en bonne intelligence ; mais les Naxots n'ayant pas voulu contribuer aux frais de la guerre que les Atheniens avoient entreprise contre Artaxerxe's, autrement Assuerus, Roi de Perse, ces fiers Republicans choquez de ce refus entreprirent de leur faire la guerre, & les rendirent enfin tributaires. Les Atheniens furent deux ans devant Naxe avec une puissante armee navale, avant que de la pouvoir soumettre, & on peut dire a la louange des Naxots, que ce ne fut pas la valeur, mais la multitude & l'opiniatrete de leurs ennemis qui les vainquit.
Les Atheniens s'e'tant rendus maitres de l'lsle, y batirent un aqueduc long de deux lieues, qui portoit l'eau en abondance jusque dans le fameux temple de Bacchus ; & parceque deux differentes sources d'ou sortoit cette eau dtoient eloignees l'une de l'autre, il falut pour la jonction de ces eaux percer une prodigieuse montagne avec un artifice & un travail surprenant. lis batirent encore a l'extremite' de lisle, qui regarde celle de Delos, un temple magnifique a Apollon, dont il ne reste plus aucun vestige. lis y dtablirent le culte des Dieux, qui e"toient en veneration dans leur pais : & ainsi l'idolatrie s'y augmenta tenement, qu'on ne voioit partout que des temples & des idoles.
Les habitans de Naxe demeurerent dans les tenebres de l'idolatrie jusqu'a. Parrivee de Saint Jean l'Evangeliste dans lisle de Patmos. Ce grand Apotre se voyant dans le voisinage d'une Isle si peuple*e,.
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 115
y envoia un de ses Disciples pour y precher la Foy. C'est pour cela que ces peuples reconnoissent S. Jean pour leur Apotre, & qu'ils celebrent sa fete avec beaucoup de magnificence.
Naxe par la succession des terns a ete obligee de recevoir la loi de diverses Puissances, qui s'en sont emparees. Les Romains l'ont posse- dee longtemps ; les Empereurs Grecs s'en sont ensuite rendus maitres, & l'ont conservee jusques a l'arrive'e des Francois en Orient.
Marc Sanudo entreprit done, ainsi que je l'ai ddja dit, la conqu£te de cette belle Isle l'an 1207. Elle dtoit encore alors fort peuple'e: on y comptoit plus de cent Bourgs ou Villages, outre plusieurs chateaux & forteresses que les Empereurs Grecs y avoient fait batir.
Ce fut dans le port des Potamides que l'arme'e de Sanudo vint mouiller; ses troupes debarquerent heureusement malgre' la resistance des Insulaires. Sanudo mena d'abord ses gens droit au chateau d^Apaliri ou de Paleon-Oros, qui e*toit alors la plus forte place de l'lsle, dloigne seulement de deux lieues de la mer. Elle est situe'e sur la cime d'une haute montagne escarpee de tous cotez, & ou Ton ne peut arriver que par des sentiers fort etroits. Elle avoit trois enceintes de murailles, soutenues de plusieurs boulevars dont les mines font encore assez voir quelle en etoit autrefois la force.
Sanudo ne fut point rebute, ni par cette situation si avantageuse, ni par toutes les fortifications que l'art avoit ajoute* a la nature. II tint la place assiegee pendant cinq semaines, & l'attaqua si vigoureusement, que les assiegez furent enfin obligez de se rendre. Apr£s cette conquete tout plia sous le vainqueur, qui se vit aussitot en etat de donner la loi a toute l'lsle.
Apre*s que Sanudo se fut ainsi rendu maitre de la plus celebre des Cyclades, il ne pensa d'abord qu'a s'y etablir solidement, afin de pouvoir ensuite s'emparer plus facilement de toutes les autres Isles de la mer Egee. II fit batir plusieurs forteresses en divers endroits avantageux, pour tenir en respect ses nouveaux sujets. II commenca par le chateau qui fut appelle Naxe, du nom de l'lsle, & qui est encore aujourd'hui le plus considerable de tout le pais. II le choisit pour le lieu de sa demeure, a cause de sa situation. C'est une enceinte de muraille flanqu^e de grosses tours, distantes seulement l'une de l'autre de vingt-cinq ou trente pieds, laquelle contient environ trois cens maisons. II paroit dans le milieu une grosse tour quarre"e, dont les murs sont d'une epaisseur extraordinaire. Ce chateau est situd au bord de la mer sur une petite colline du cdte* du couchant ; il a au levant une belle campagne large d'une grande lieue & longue de deux, termi- nee de plusieurs petites montagnes remplies de villages & de hameaux qui font comme une perspective tres agreable.
Le Due y fit faire un port assez commode, feruie* du coste du Nort par la petite Isle, sur laquelle e"toit autrefois bati le fameux temple de Bacchus, & du cote du couchant par un mole qu'il fit elever avec beaucoup de depense; & afin que rien n'y manquat, on y pratiqua plusieurs remises de galeres, 011 elles pussent egalement etre a couvert des insultes de l'ennemi & des gros terns de l'hiver.
Sanudo ayant ainsi affermi son nouvel etablissement, mit tous ses
I 2
n6 APPENDIX I
soins a se gagner l'affection de ses sujets, dont il connoissoit l'antipatie naturelle contre les Latins. II voulut qu'ils eussent la meme liberte qu'auparavant d'exercer leur Religion suivant leur Rite : il confirma l'Archeveque Grec, les Pretres, & les Religieux, dans tous leurs privileges : il exemta tous les Monasteres de l'Ordre de Saint Basile, de tailles & de toutes sortes d'impositions ; ce qui lui gagna si fort l'esprit de ces schismatiques, qu'ils ne pouvoient assez temoigner leur joie, de se voir sous la domination d'un Maitre si modere.
Le nouveau Due, autant par politique, que par reconnoissance, pensa a. recompenser les Officiers de son armee qui s'etoient distinguez a l'expedition ; & afin de se les attacher encore davantage, il leur distribua plusieurs terres qu'il ennoblit & qu'il erigea en Fiefs, dont ils jouirent eux & leur posterite plus d'un siecle entier : mais enfin par la succession des terns ces memes Fiefs se sont trouvez r£unis au domaine des Dues.
Dans ces premieres prosperitez, l'lsle de Naxe fut bientot peuple'e d'un grand nombre de Latins, tant de la suite du Due, que de plusieurs etrangers, qui y accoururent de toutes parts dans l'esperance de faire fortune au service d'un si bon Prince ; de sorte que le Rite Latin commenca a se rendre considerable, tant par le nombre, que par la distinction des personnes qui en faisoient profession. Cela obligea Sanudo a demander un EvSque au Pape, qui le lui accorda volontiers ; & afin qu'il fut dans l'lsle avec dignite, il lui fit batir une Cathedrale dans le chateau joignant son palais, & lui assigna des fonds assez considerables pour son entretien. Le revenu de ce Prelat s'est depuis beaucoup augment^ par la piete* & la liberality des Catholiques, comme je le dirai dans laisuite. Le Chapitre de la nouvelle Cathedrale fut peu apr^s compose* de six Chanoines, d'un Doyen, d'un Chantre, d'un Prevost, & d'un Tresorier. qui tous subsistent encore aujourd'hui malgre la persecution des infideles.
Sanudo, apres avoir ainsi affermi sa domination, & mis tout le bon ordre possible dans l'interieur de son Etat, entreprit la conquete des autres Isles voisines qui dtoient le plus a sa biensdance. II se mit en mer avec toute sa flote, & conquit en assez peu de terns les Isles de Paros, d'Antiparos, .de Sentorini, de Nio-d'Anafi, de Cimulo, de Milo, de Siphanto, & de Policandro, ou il laissa des Gouverneurs & des garnisons.
Toutes ces conquetes parurent peu de chose a Sanudo : enfl£ de ses succe's & de sa fortune, il meditoit la conquete de la belle Isle de Candie, & tourna desormais de ce cote-la tous ses efforts & tous les expediens de sa politique. D'abord il songea a se rendre souverain dans son Etat, & inddpendant de sa Republique, qui avoit deja concu beaucoup de jalousie de la trop grande puissance d'un de ses sujets.
Pour cela il envoia des Ambassadeurs a l'Empereur Henry & a Boniface Roi de Thessalie. Ces Princes n'eurent garde de le refuser : Sanudo s'estoit fait une reputation trop eclatante; & d'ailleurs il se trouvoit en £tat de les servir ou de leur nuire. Henry se declara son protecteur; il erigea Naxe en Duche*, & donna a. Sanudo le titre de Due de l'Archipel & de Prince de l'Empire. Le Roi de Thessalie de son cote lui accorda volontiers son amitie & sa protection. Ainsi, 3e Due appuie des deux plus redoutables puissances de l'Orient, appliqua
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 117
tout son esprit a l'execution de son dessein : il en trouva peu de terns aprds une conjoncture des plus heureuses, quoique peu honorable. La voici telle que les historiens Venitiens la racontent.
La Republique de Genes, jalouse de voir un Royaume aussi florissant & aussi riche que l'etoit celui de Candie, sous la puissance des Venitiens, & le regardant d'ailleurs comme un poste tres-avantageux pour le commerce du Levant, pensa aux moiens de les en chasser. II n'etoit pas aise d'en venir a bout par la voie des armes ; elle crut qu'il etoit plus a • propos d'avoir recours a l'artifice, de gagner sous main les Candiots, & de les porter peu a peu a la revoke. Pour cet effet, Pierre Maille surnomme' le Pescheur, qu'on appella depuis le Comte de Mailloc, fut envoie d'abord avec six galeres bien arme'es, pour commencer l'entreprise. La premiere chose qu'il fit, fut de s'emparer d'un Port, ou il se fortifia de son mieux : de la il negocia si adroitement avec les principaux Seigneurs Grecs, deja fort enclins a la revoke, qu'il les d^baucha tous, tant par les riches presens qu'il leur fit, que par les belles esperances qu'il leur donna d'une entiere liberie.
Les Venitiens, tous sages politiques qu'ils etoient, firent en cette occasion une faute qui pensa les perdre; car aiant pris dans une embuscade Veterani Genois Chef de cette expedition, & l'aiant fait pendre comme un brigand, le peuple en concut tant d'indignation, qu'il courut aux armes de toutes parts ; ce qui rendit la revoke presque generale.
Le Senat de Venise apprenant ce soulevement, envoia en Candie des troupes conduites par Tepulo, celui-la meme qui le premier prit le titre de Due de Candie. Mais Tepulo ne se voiant pas des forces sufiisantes pour dissiper cette multitude de rebelles, appella a son secours Sanudo Due de Naxe, se persuadant que comme ancien sujet de la Republique il l'assisteroit puissamment en cette rencontre.
Sanudo embrassa d'abord une occasion qui paroissoit si favorable a ses vues particulieres; il fit voile vers Candie, oil il fut recti avec beaucoup d'honneur de tous les Venitiens, qui le firent entrer avec toutes ses troupes dans la Ville capitale, pour tenir en bride les habitans, & les empecher de se joindre aux conjurez.
A peine le Due de Naxe fut-il arrive, qu'il trouva moien de traiter secretement avec le Comte de Mailloc. L'accord qu'ils firent entr'eux, fut qu'ils diviseroient le Roiaume en deux parties. II retint pour lui la partie superieure qui regarde le Levant, & ceda aux Genois celle qui est exposee au Couchant. Si cet accord fut avantageux aux interets de Sanudo, il ne fut gueres glorieux a sa memoire ; & la perfidie, quoi qu'heureuse, est toujours digne du blame des gens de bien.
II y avoit dans la Ville un Grec des plus qualifiez du Roiaume, nomme Sevaste, ennemi cache des Venitiens, & qui n'attendoit que l'occasion de se joindre aux autres rebelles ; il etoit suivi de plusieurs habitans qu'il entretenoit fort secretement dans cet esprit de revoke. II eut plusieurs conferences particulieres avec Sanudo, qui l'engagea sans peine dans son parti. Sevaste done bien instruit de ce qu'il avoit a faire, parut peu de temps apres sur la fin de la nuit, a la tete d'une grande multitude de Grecs bien armez; & pour mieux tromper les Venitiens, il se mit a crier lui & sa troupe, Vive Saint Marc; allons,
n8 APPENDIX I
camarades, marchons droit au Palais de Sanudo ; c'esi un traitre qui nous veut vendre aux ennemis de notre Republique.
Le Due de Naxe qui etoit arme, & qui pour sauver les apparences attendoit ce pretexte d'attentat contre sa personne pour se declarer, courut lui & les siens par toute la Ville, faisant main basse sur tous les Soldats Venitiens qu'il y rencontra. Ce stratageme eut tout l'effet que les conjurez s'en etoient promis ; car les Venitiens qui occupoient les postes les plus importans, saisis de crainte, les abandonnerent pour se sauver, & les troupes de Sanudo s'en emparerent. A ce tumulte Tepulo eveille comme d'un profond sommeil, & surpris d'entendre de toutes parts les voix confuses du peuple & des soldats qui crioient, Vive Sanudo Roi de Candie^ sortit de son Palais, & se cacha chez Marc Tonison, ou ne se trouvant pas en surete, il prit le parti de sortir de la Ville, pour ne pas tomber entre les mains de ses ennemis. S'etant done deguise' en femme, il gagna le rempart a la faveur des tenebres, & se fit descendre le long d'une corde dans le fosse, d'oii il se rendit a Rethimo place tres- forte, dans la resolution de s'y defendre jusqu'a l'extremite.
Le Due de Naxe apprenant avec chagrin la fuite de Tepulo, laissa Estienne Sanudo son cousin dans Candie en quality de Gouverneur, & aiant joint a ses troupes celles des rebelles, se mit en campagne pour le chercher. II se rendit maitre de plusieurs places ; & portant par tout la terreur, il alia mettre le siege devant Rethimo, qu'il eut sans doute prise d'assaut, si elle n'eut recti un puissant secours, que Do- minique Quirini y fit entrer fort a propos. C'etoit de nouvelles troupes que le Senat envoioit en Candie, sous la conduite de ce noble Venitien, pour s'opposer plus vigoureusement aux entreprises du Comte de Mailloc. Tepulo, qui se croioit perdu, se vit tout a coup en etat, non seulement de resister a l'ennemi, mais meme de l'attaquer jusque dans ses retranchemens. II le fit, en effet, & avec tant de succes dans plu- sieurs sorties, que Sanudo se vit oblige' de lever le siege pour s'aller retrancher sur une eminence fort avantageuse, en resolution de s'y defendre. Tepulo & Quirini vinrent pour le forcer dans son camp : mais le voiant si bien postd, manquant eux-memes de vivres, ils re- tournerent dans Rethimo pour y prendre de nouvelles mesures. Ils Etoient en deliberation, lorsqu'ils recurent avis que la Ville de Candie, etoit negligemment gard£e ; que les soldats ensevelis dans le vin & dans la debauche n'etoient nullement sur leurs gardes. A cette nouvelle Tepulo concut l'esperance de les surprendre; il fit faire plusieurs echelles de corde, & partit de nuit avec une troupe d'eiite. II arriva a la pointe du jour sous les murailles de Candie ; ses gens monterent sans resistance, & s'emparerent d'une des portes de la Ville, par ou Tepulo entra avec cinq ou six cens hommes qui l'accompagnoient. Estienne Sanudo ne se reveilla qu'a la nouvelle qu'on lui porta, que les ennemis etoient dans la Ville, qui se mettoient en etat de le forcer dans son palais. II se mit d'abord en defense avec tous ses domestiques & quelques soldats de sa garde : mais se voiant hors d'etat de resister, il prit le parti de se rendre, aimant mieux etre fait prisonnier de guerre, que de s'opiniatrer en temeraire a un combat si inegal.
Sevaste au premier bruit de cette surprise, eut assez de temps pour
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 119
se sauver : il avoit eu la precaution de s'assurer d'une des portes de la Ville, par le moien de deux compagnies de ses gens qui en avoient la garde ; il porta au Due de Naxe la triste nouvelle de la prise de Candie, & de la captivite* de son parent.
Cette disgrace fut suivie d'une autre : le Comte de Mailloc se retira avec ses six galeres, pour retourner dans le Peloponnese, ou il possedoit de grands biens & des places considerables.
II apprit peu de temps apres, que Sevaste meme traitoit sous main de son accommodement avec Tepulo ; ce qui l'obligea enfin d'entendre aussi a quelques propositions de paix que lui fit faire Dominique Quirini. II convint de rendre les places qu'il occupoit & de sortir incessamment du Roiaume. Quirini s'engagea a, lui rendre ses prisonniers, & a lui fournir toutes les choses necessaires pour son retour a, Naxe.
Des que Sanudo y fut arrive, il depecha a Venise un de ses confidens, pour se justifier aupres du Senat des reproches qu'on lui faisoit de s'etre voulu faire Roi de Candie. Son envoie protesta qu'il n'avoit ete que sur la defensive ; que Tepulo son ancien ennemi, ne l'avoit appelle a son secours, que pour le faire perir avec toutes ses troupes; & que d'ailleurs il avoit ete tres-bien informe, que toute cette intrigue aboutis- soit a le chasser de tout FArchipel, aussi-tot que les Candiots auroient 4t6 remis sous l'obe'issance j qu'au reste Sanudo etoit & seroit toujours tres-affectionne au service de la Republique, pour laquelle il sacrifieroit volontiers ses biens & sa vie.
Le Senat dissimula sagement, & parut content de ces soumissions, ne jugeant pas a. propos pour lors de rompre ouvertement avec un Prince belliqueux, allie de l'Empereur & du Roi de Thessalie.
Sanudo quelque tems aprds son retour a Naxe recut un envoie & des lettres de l'E<mpereur, qui le prioit instamment de le venir joindre a Thessallonique, avec le plus de troupes qu'il pourroit, pour s'opposer a, Theodore Comnene Prince d'Epire, qui lui avoit declare* la guerre. Ce fut en cette occasion que parut le zele du Due pour la gloire de l'Empire, & son attachement particulier au service de l'Empereur. II partit avec Ange Sanudo son fils, suivi de mille hommes de pied & de cinq cens chevaux : il arriva au rendez-vous quinze jours avant Henri, qu'une sedition excite*e par les Grecs schismatiques retenoit a Constan- tinople. On a cru que l'lmperatrice qui suivoit opiniatrement le Rite Grec, n'avoit pas peu de part a. ces troubles : en voici l'occasion.
L'Empereur, Prince extremement pieu, avoit regu quelques jours auparavant un Nonce que le Pape lui avoit envois, pour mettre ordre aux affaires de la Religion, & pour tacher de ramener les Grecs au sein de l'Eglise. Les Schismatiques s'imaginerent qu'on en vouloit a leur Rite, & que l'Empereur d'intelligence avec le Pape, pretendoit les obliger a, suivre le Rite Latin. Dans cette pensde les Moines & les Pretres animerent par leurs discours seditieux plus de vingt mille hom- mes, qui se mirent a. crier en tumulte devant la grande porte du palais, 1 qu'ils £toient Grecs, & qu'ils vouloient vivre & mourir dans la religion de leurs peres ; qu'il falloit que l'Empereur gouvernat son Etat, & non pas les consciences de ses sujets, & qu'ils ne souffriroient jamais, quoi qu'il en put arriver, qu'on fit aucun changement dans leur Rite.'
120 APPENDIX I
Henri surpris d'entendre ces bruits seditieux, fit ce qu'il put pour les appaiser, sans toutefois oser paroitre. II se contenta de leur envoier deux de ses principaux Officiers, qui remontrerent doucement aux plus echauffez, qu'on n'avoit jamais eu dessein de les contraindre dans l'exercice de leur Religion ; que le Nonce n'etoit venu a, Constantinople que pour les affaires des Latins, &: qu'ils auroient tout sujet de se louer de la sage conduite de l'Empereur, de qui ils avoient recu jusqu'alors tant de marques de tendresse.
II y a toute apparence que la Religion n'e'toit qu'un pr&exte, & que les seditieux auroient porte' plus loin leur ressentiment, s'ils n'eussent eu quelque apprehension de Parmee Imperiale. qui n'etoit campee qu'a. trois lieues de Constantinople, &: qui n'attendoit que Pordre du Prince.
Ces troubles etant heureusement appaisez, Henri a la t6te de son arme'e, prit la route de Thessalonique j ce voiage lui fut funeste, puisqu'il y perdit l'Empire & la vie, par la perfidie de PImperatrice sa femme. Ce Prince quelque terns apr£s son avenement a. l'Empire, avoit epouse' la fille du Marquis de Monferrat: mais cette Princesse dtant morte sans enfans, il epousa en secondes noces la fille de Jean Roi des Bulgares. II est vrai qu'Henri aide" de ce Roi son beaupere, reprit en peu de terns les Villes dont les Grecs s'&oient emparez a la mort de Baudouin ; mais le gendre & le beaupere qui avoient des interets bien differens, ne furent pas longtems en bonne intelligence. En e'tant done venus a une guerre ouverte, PImperatrice qui ne put souffrir que son mari fCit Pennemi de son pere, en temoigna du ressentiment en diverses rencontres ; mais son chagrin n'avoit aucun effet sur Pesprit de l'Empereur. Elle prit enfin la cruelle resolution de travailler secretement a se defaire de lui. Pour y re'ussir, elle gagna les Officiers Grecs qui approchoient de plus pr£s sa personne, &: ausquels Henri par inclination, ou par politique se confioit davantage, quelque raison qu'il eut de se ddfier de cette nation, apres avoir assez reconnu dans la derniere sedition son penchant a la revolte.
Cependant Sanudo aiant appris que l'Empereur n'etoit plus qu'a une journee de Thessalonique, alia au devant de lui avec son fils : il en fut recu avec toute sorte de temoignages d'amitie & de bienveillance ; & Henri persuade de Pattachement que Sanudo avoit pour sa personne, lui declara avec beaucoup de confiance Pembarras ou il s'etoit trouve avant son depart, par la revolte presque generale de tous les Grecs : Sanudo lui fit entendre avec sa franchise ordinaire, qu'un exces de bonte qui lui etoit naturelle, lui faisoit prendre confiance trop indiffe- remment en ceux qui avoient Phonneur de Papprocher : qu'il y en avoit meme qu'Elle admettoit en ses conseils les plus secrets, tous ennemis domestiques dont il devoit plus se defier, que de ceux qui lui faisoient une guerre ouverte.
Ces remontrances toucherent d'autant plus l'Empereur, qu'il etoit persuade qu'elles partoient d'un zele extraordinaire pour sa personne & pour son etat : il y fit des reflexions ; mais il crut qu'il falloit dissimuler jusques a ce qu'il fut de retour a Constantinople. Toutes ces mesures furent inutiles ; ce Prince ressentit peu de terns apr^s une cruelle colique, que lui causa un breuvage empoisonne qu'on lui avoit presente
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 121
dans un repas. II reconnut la cause de son mal ; mais il n'e'toit plus terns d'y remedier : ainsi il ne songea qu'a se disposer a la mort. Aiant done fait venir les principaux Officiers de son armee & les Seigneurs de sa Cour, il confirma solennellement Demetrius fils de Boniface de Monferrat dans la possession du Roiaume de Thessalie, & declara en meme-tems Ange Sanudo successeur au Duche de FArchipel, apres la mort du Due Marc son pere ; & deux heures apres il expira le onzi^me Juin l'an 12 16, apres avoir gouverne" l'Empire l'espace de dix ans. II laissa pour Regent Conon de Bethune.
Apres que les Latins qui etoient en Orient furent revenus de la consternation ou les avoit jettez une mort si soudaine & si imprevue, les Princes s'assemblerent pour proceder a. l'election d'un nouvel Empereur, Henri n'aiant point laisse d'heritier qui lui put succeder; & d'un commun suffrage elurent Pierre de Courtenay, Comte d'Auxere, qui avoit e*pouse la sceur du Prince deTunt.
Cette election faite, le Due s'en retourna a Naxe, laissant son fils a. Thessalonique avec la meilleure partie de ses troupes, pour s'opposer a, Theodore Comnene Prince d'Epire, qui s'avancoit a. grandes journees vers la Thessalie, & pour obtenir du nouvel Empereur la confirmation de l'alliance faite avec son predecesseur.
II y avoit pres d'un an que le Due etoit de retour a Naxe, lorsque son fils lui apporta la triste nouvelle de la mort de Pierre de Courtenay, qui venoit d'etre lachement assassine par Comnene.
Courtenay a la premiere nouvelle de son election etoit alle a Rome, pour y recevoir la Couronne Imperiale de la main du Pape Honorius. La ceremonie achevee, il en partit pour se rendre a Constantinople avec toute sa famille. II etoit accompagne du Cardinal Colonne, que le Pape envoioit Legat en Hongrie. Etant a, Brinde il fit embarquer sa femme & ses enfans pour Constantinople, ou ils arriverent heureuse- ment ; & lui se mit sur une galere Venitienne qui le porta en Dalmatie, pour continuer de la son chemin par la Thessalie, par la Grece & par la Thrace. II visita en passant quelques places de l'Empire, & assiega la Ville de Duras a la priere des Venitiens, qui lui fournirent quelques troupes, avec lesquelles il esperoit se rendre maitre de la personne de Comnene qui s'y e"toit renferme. Mais apres divers assauts inutiles, il crut ne devoir pas rejetter les propositions de paix que lui faisoit Comnene qui avoit de'ja pris le titre d'Empereur d'Orient, pretendant qu'en qualite de plus proche parent d'Emmanuel Comnene, il avoit droit de lui succeder a l'Empire. Ce Grec fourbe & dissimule' invita Courtenay a un grand repas, sous pre"texte d'etablir entr'eux une etroite amitie & une paix solide : mais ce perfide au milieu de la fete, & lorsque tout le monde dtoit en joie, fit entrer dans la salle plusieurs meurtriers qui le poignarderent inhumainement aux yeux des conviez.
Quelques historiens racontent cet assassinat d'une autre maniere; ils disent qu'il se fit proche les bois de Thessalie, qu'on appelloit anciennement Temp/, ou l'Empereur etoit alle* prendre le divertisse- ment de la chasse : ce qui est certain, e'est que les Venitiens £tonnez de cette mort tragique, conclurent une treve de cinq ans avec Comnene, dont la puissance commencoit a etre redoutable dans l'Orient.
122 APPENDIX I
La mort du Due Sanudo suivit de pres celle de Pierre de Courtenay : il fut attaque* d'une fieVre violente dont il mourut age de 67 ans l'an 1 220, apre*s avoir gouverne son Etat fort heureusement pres de douze ans.
Ce Prince avoit d'excellentes qualitez, parmi d'autres qui ne l'etoient gueres. II etoit prudent, courageux : mais il se laissa trop emporter a son ambition, & a la passion de s'agrandir; temoin la trahison de Candie, que la posterity ne lui pardonnera jamais. Au reste, il etoit d'un temperament robuste, d'une taille majestueuse, d'un esprit vif & penetrant, magnifique, bienfaisant, liberal en vers ses sujets. II laissa pour successeur Ange Sanudo son fils unique, age* de 26 ans.
GRIMALDI'S HISTORY OF NAXOS
'laropia rrjs Na£ou, by Jacopo Giuseppe Grimaldi, written 187-, manuscript in the possession of Madame della Rocca of Naxos.
. . . 'O Aoi>£ MapKOS SavovSos tVa c^apta-T^OT? rov<s d£ia)/xariKOus avrov, KO.L tovs euyeveis rovs KaraKrj(ravT€<i iv Na£a>, Stypeae riqv Na£ov eis TrtvrrjKOVTa e£ T07rap^tas, TL/xaptd (fiefs) rj koivws tottovs KaXov/xevovs, $i€<pvXa£av Se ^XPL o-rjfiepov nqv dpxaiav ovo/xaatav avr&v. TtyvoicrKo/xivoiv Se on Kara to 1670 6 'OOuifJiavos Ta^ipt^S, e<popos wpLcre rrjv (popoSoatav cKaa-TOv Tifxapiov, iv Se t<o (popokoyLKip tovtu) KardKoyo} e7riypa<£op,eVw fiovvd Hdo~KoXa /cat 'Ei/rpme's 1670, Matov II, Kara to NeoV, ifXKpaiverai. to 6vopiaT€7ro)vvfiLov tov Kara to eVos 1 670 l&loktltov iKacrTOv Tip,apiov. 'Ev rai 7rapa 7roSas ttlvolkl o~r] u,€LOv fX€v rrjv ovofxacrtav kKaarov TL/xaptov, Kara ttjv V7ro tov Aovkos Siaipeo-iv. To Se 6vofxaT€7r(i)W(JLOv tov ISlokttJtov Kai rrjv (popo8oo~iav avrov o-^peiou/xev Kara tov euro II Matou 1 6 70 cpopoXoyiKov KardXoyov avvTa- )(6evTa.
°"°A«"™ , dvopaTen^vfxov "°™v
ripaptov Kara IhoKT^ov i°Pov
Aovkikt)v Otaipeaiv acrrrpa
1. SruXiSa 0€o0tXa*cros 1,400 „ „ , f'Avrcoi/ios 5o/XUapi7T775 Kai )
2. no\OT {MTOpy.aW? I *'«°
3. ' 'AftoXtavrj "I£°P 'I^€tos 2,450
4. 'O Skc'Aos 'IepoAupos Kdvres 550
5. SiS^poVeTpa Xpovarjs KopoWAAos l>5°°
6. 'Aytao-oi Srais M7rapaX^s 1,000
I 4>pavT^e'o-Kos M-n-apoT^s ]
7. 'IdXXrj - Map/cos ' Ava7rXio)Tr)S j- 1,000
( Kat 'A vto)vlos Mai>pop.p.aY??s ) [ *Avt(i)vio<s Ma^8pop,par>7s 1
8. MeydXrj BiyXa J&pavT&o-Kos MTrapoT&s Kai'y 85 O
J ^r)jX-i]TpLOS Kokkos J
9- *%- {ffisiScI 95°
10. TptVos <l>avTaK7;s 250
11. Ke^tat 'Aviwios MTrapdr^s 7°°
12. 'E/jpiaKe's <l>tA.i7r7ros TpvfxdXSrjs I,6oo
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES
123
2Y2TA2I2 TOY AOYKATOY TH2 NH20Y.
Ka^' ov KatpoV 6 ©cdScopos Ado-Kap^s iKrjpv-^d-q avTOKparoip rfjs NtKatas a.7r€<pd(riore vd Kvpievo-r] Tas KvK\d8a<s /cat vd a7ro/3dXXr) tov Sovkcl, ol Nd£tot TrpoeTOipcdcrOrjo-av 7rpds V7repd(nrL<nv rov ^yc/xdvos tu)v KatVot ertpoOprjcrKoi. Kara toijtous rov? xpdvous 6 Sov£ Sicra£c vd KTrjcroxjL <ppovpiov eis r^v Kopvcprjv puKpov fiovvov 7rpo<s 6W/xds ttjs ApvxiaAatas {Slotl Kara tovs Xpovovs tovtovs rd 7rapdAta rfj<s Nd£ov rjcrav aKaTOLKrjra, cvcKa tu>v Truparuiv) /cat cts T~qv oTTOtav 6 8ov£ Karw/cct, Kat rJTO 7rpa)Tcvoucra, d<pov cKTtcrav to T€L)(o<s, Bvo Trpop:a)(<i)va<z, Kat Ttvas otKtas rd cc/>o8tao-av pe dAa rd 7rpds VTrepdcnno-iv, iKaT(x)K7]cr€V eVct 6 Sou£ p,c#' oAcov tgjv d£i(op,aTtKa>v, to (ppovpiov /xe^pt aypitpov /caAetrat cVdvco Kaarpo. Mcra 7rapiX(.vj-iv dAtycov cYaiv, 6 Map/cos 25avouSos StcVa^c Kat toKoSdp^crev eva Svuarov irvpyov TrXy]o~'iov tov vqaihiov BaK)(ov liri Ttvos Xocpov tov ottoIov 7rept€KVKAtoo-av p,e 8(ijSc/ca 7rupyous, Kat TrpOKvprj^av otl hvvaTai 6 Ka0eis vd OLKo8op.rjo-r] cts avrrjv rqv 6eo-LV otKtav Kara to o-^cStov Stopioyxevou pvq^aviKov, oOw ol cvyevets Kat d^toD/jtartKot 'EveTot (.ktyjo-ov otKtas ttXy]o~lov tov Sovklkov irvpyov ws tppovpiov p.erd Tavra €KTto~av Kat dAAas otKtas TrXrjo-iov tov <f>povptov, cts Ta epct7ria T^s dp^atas Ilpawcuoucr^s KaXovpLevrjs Ata. MoAovoTt 7roAAot to>v euycvuiv 'Evctgjv Kat Tevo/3aL^o)v rjX6ov cts Nd£ov 8cv c^ao-av to StKatw/xa tou 7roAtTou dAA' a7reAdp,/3avov oXwv tcov StKatopaTcov a>s ot Xouttol cuycvcts tt/s 'EvcTtas. IIA.770-10V rot) SovKiKoi) Trvpyov u)K<D$6p.r)o-av £KKXf)cria,v Sta tous Autikovs, cKaAeo-av a7ro t??v 'Pw/tijv Ittlo-kottov SwptVas ixavd ctcroS^paTa 8ta va ^17. Mcrd raura 6 Aov^ StTypecrc r?yv Na^ov cts 56 T07rapp(tas, Kat Tas cSwo'c cts tous cuyevcts vd Tas StotKouv. Y7roo-r)p,€LOvpL€v Ta 0^0/x.aTa twi/ T07rap\ioiv <ov at 7reptcroTcpai 8t€<pvXa^av Ta dp^ata toov ovop,aTa.
SrtAtSa. IIoA^^vt. A/JoAtavTts- "OotkcAos. 2tScpo7rcTpa. Aytacrora). TaAt.
McydAr; BtyAa. Stdyptov. TptVos. Kexptcs. 'E^ptaKc's- 'ApxaTos. Mapa^ds. 'Apyta.
MtKpa 'Apyta. 'ETcpa 'Apyta. Aattaptwras. 'AttAvki.
"ETcpo 'A7rA^Kt. ndvopp,os. Xct/xapos. AvaKta. XaAdSpt. KaAto-Tot^td. ^toToSoTTys. Mi;po"tV^. AaKos. Apvs.
'Ayta KvpiaKTy. 'Atidp,a^. Bd^pot. Mco-77. Kcop,taK7y. 'Ayta. Kavd.
^KlTTtOVOt.
XapdSpa.
r/Aytov IIj/ci}p:a.
Tpaj3ovTL<s.
Ktv^Sapos.
KcpapcoTT/.
^v/xcpovcs.
<$>avdpr).
QavlXia.
<&lX6tt)s.
'Ap.cAa^ctov.
'Pdx^
^>Acptd.
'ATrdvco Kdo-Tpo.
McAavats.
McydAats 7rcTpats.
"Aytos ArjpLrJTpLOS.
"Aytos Md/x/xas.
KopaKta.
HcpoKap.7ros.
E7rctS>y Kat 6 Aov£ c8oo-«/ Tas 7rpoavac/>cp(iop.cvas T07rap^tas Kat Ttvcs cuycvcts 17 c/»7p.?7 toutt; €K7)pv)(0r) cts t^i/ E^po^i/, Kat 7roAAot 'iTaAot ^A^ov
134 APPENDIX I
cis Tas vrjaovs Kai iKaroiicrjo-av, e<p6acre Aot7rov /car' airof rov rporrov, ojcttc ol KaTOLKOi rrj<s Nd£oi> rjcrav 'lraXoi Kai ''EAAyyvcs dAA' cVeiS^ BUcpepov ava/£€Ta£v tojv Kara rd rjQr) Kai rrjv OprjcrKeiav Bcv rjaav cis Tas dpvds ets KaXrjV op-ovetav, dAA' ^ (ppovvcrts rov Sovkos tovs cvojo-c Ka#' oka Kai Bie/jLoipao-e rd v7rovpyrjpLara cis tov<s evyevets "EAA^vas /cat cis Tors 'Evctovs, Sioti ot 'Evctoi 6p.ota>s Kai ol Nd£iot avrax^ojvcs "EAA^ves Birjpovvro cis cvycvcis /ecu xojptKOi's, Kai cis to koivov ttAi^os.
Ot IraAot a)s cuyevcts EAA77VCS ojp,i'Aow cis irav ciSos Trcpiordo-cojs rrjv IraXiKrjv StdAcKTOv, rrjv oTroiav 01 "EAA^vcs cKaAow yAojcrcrav " QpdyKiK-qv". O a7rAds Aaos S' <hpLr]Xovo~e ert p.tav SidAcKTOv tTaAocAA^viK^v, 7rA?yv 7roAAd fX€Taj3ef3Xr]fjL€vr]v Kai Bi€<p6appLevr]v, €KaraXdpij3avov p.6Xov rovro dp.<po- Tcpa rd p^ipr) avrrjv rrjv SidAcKTOv, Kai ol 'IraXoi ireXovv #ctas TcAerds Ko.rd rrjv rd^iv rrjs AvriKrjs 'EKKA^crtas Kai ol "EAAryvcs Kar eKeivrjv rrjs dva- toXiktjs. 'Ecucmycrcv 6 Sov£ Kai hiKao~rrjpiov cis t^v Nd£ov /cat ot BiKaarai rjo~av eKct tic 8vvap.iv Kai Kvpos, Kai cSt/ca^c eVt 7ravTos ciSous uv0poj7rojv, O7rotas 8^7rorc Ta^ews /cat v7rovpyrjpiaro<s Kai dv i)ro Kai cktc'Aow rrjv Si/caio- crvvrjv fxi. rd ovopta Kai Bvvapuv rov Aoukos, l^aKoXovOovvres rd d/xc/>ic;(oju.evov cis rovs vdpiovs rrj<s Srjp.oKpareia<s tojv 'Evctojv. Mcrd rov Bovko<s r)ro 6 Meyas Ka7r€Tavios rrj<s vrjaov p\zrd rov brroiov Bvo avpb/SovXoi Kare^covrcs tov rpirov f3a6p:6v cis rd fiovXevrrjpiov crvveBpia^ov Sid vd eVcpywcri rrjv Ai/caio- o~vvr]v pet tcro§vvap,ov i£ovo~iav, p.€r airov<s rjro 6 ra/xeias, c/cAey/xeVos pcera^v tojv cvyevojv, eppovri^wv rd c£oSa Kat rd ccroSa rov Aovkos, tier' avrov ^to 6 rpa/jtarcus. Ot yoaynarets ct^ov X/°eos vc^ Se^ojvTat rds 7rpocrrayds raw. O 7rctt7TTos j3a0ftos rjro 6 <ppovpap)(os. cO Sov^ (.Koirre vopirjo-ptara KaXovpceva SovKara.
OXiyovs xpovovs e7rctTa 17 TcVova dp^ticracra vd dvaiTvir] diro rds ip:<pvXiovs crrdcrcts Kat a7ro tovs atcovtbv? 7roXepiOv<s tu>v c^oj i^Opijjv otrtves tt^v KaTccnrd- parov, Kai p,rj viro^iipoiv vd Oeo)prj rrjv SrjpcoKpariav rwv 'Evctojv vd c^a7rAtovcrc, io-KecpOrj 7rto9 vd i-n-ervxy tov o-kottov rrjs, dOev ccrrctAe KaTa Trpiorov rov' Herpov MatA cts r^v vrjo-ov Kprjrrjv Std vd htavao-rario-r) rovs Kprjras Kara tojv 'Evctojv. JlXr]po<popri6(.io-a r) o-vyKXrjros rrj<: 'Evertas 7rcpt tojv 8ta- rpe£dvro)v ets Kprjrrjv corciAe ckci tov nco-oAov /xe orrparevp^ara Kai Oewpovvres on 8cv ct^c tKavds 8wdp.€ts Sid vd r)o~vydo~ri TOvs €7ravaardras, MdpKov ^avovBov 7rpo<s /SorjOecav. <$>0do~as cts tt^v Kprjrrjv 6 Aov^ ccrup.- c/xovtcre Kpvcpd) to> TpoVa) p.c rov Kopcr/v Be Ma'/'AAov vd Biap-oipdo-ovv rrpv vrjo-ov Kprjrrjv Kai vd Xd/3r) avros oXov rd dvaroXiKOV /xcpos tt}s v?;o-ov, Kat ot rcvouiycuot oAov to Bvtlkov, aXXd Scv lirirvx*. Kara rrjv dpeo-Keiav rov Kai 6 2,avovSo<i i7r€arpeif/€v aTrpaKTOs cts rrjv Nd^ov, Kat ccnrctAcv a7ro tous 7rAcov cvvotKOvs rov cts t^v 'EvcTtav Sid va SiKaiuXoyeOrj cts tovs cAey^ovs oVov tov c7rpocra7rTOv, 17 2vyKA>jTos kirpocnrotrjO-q on Scv lySaAcv ySdcrtv cts toiovtods cAcy^ous Kat oTt c^ct Ka^c ipL7TLo-Toavvr]v cts tov AovKa. "Eojs vd CTrtTvxct tt^v dppioSiav irepio-racnv vd ckSik^c^t} Kat ovtojs 6 Aov^ ^X^PV T(* AovKaTov cojs rov Odvarov rov octtis awe/St) Kara to 12 20 ctos Kat a7rc- ySicocrc cts r)XiKiav 67 ctojv.
McTa t^v d7ro/3tojcrtv tov Aovkos tovtov StaSc^cTC to BovKarov 6 vlos rov "AyycAos SavovSos Kat cStot/c^crcv p.c rov tBtov rpoirov tov IlaTpos rov. Etti tojv r)p.€pu)v rov 6 c7rtcrK07ros tov Avtikwv XpicrTiavojv co-i/crricrc p.tav dBzXtporrjTa evXa/3eia<s cts riprrpv rov ko-ravpop.ivov 2oj/xaTOS, T)yv oVotav 6 IId7r7ras Pojp^s e7reKrpojo"€ p.e StaTay^v "Bulla "Kara to 1 664. McTa
EXTRACTS FROM AUTHORITIES 125
tov ptOevros Aov/cos 7rapeAa/?€ to Sovkoltov 6 vlos rov Map/cos %avovho<s B' /<at ycvo/x-cvos t/jitos Sov£ rrj<s Na£ou.
('H ava) dScA.^xoT'^s cive 17 SiaTrjpov/xevr) p-^XP1 o!"QH-€Pov Kcu' XapifSdvovcra /xepos €ts ras lepag TcAeras rfjs //eyaA^s e/?So/xa8os.)
APPENDIX II
LIST OF WORKS TO WHICH REFERENCE IS MADE
Abbioso Camillo, Cronaca di Venezia, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 2052.
Abu' 1-Faraj, Chronicon Syriacum, ed. Bruns and Kirsch (1789).
Agnellus, Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis, ed. Holder-Egger, in Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores Rerum Langobar- dicarum et Italicarum, saec. vi-ix (1878), pp. 277-391.
Albertus Miliolus, Cronica Imperatorum, ed. Holder-Egger, in Monu- menta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores, xxxi (1902), pp. 580-668.
Altinate Chronicon ; Chronicon Venetum quod vulgo dicunt Altinate, ed. Simonsfeld, in Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scrip- tores, xiv (1883), pp. 5-69.
Ansbert, Ystoria de Expeditione Friderici Imperatoris, ed. Tauschinski and Pangert, in Osterreichische Geschichtsquellen, ie Abth., Scrip- tores, v (1863), pp. 1-90.
Augustinus, S., De Cura Pro Mortuis Gerenda, in Migne, Patrologia Latina, 40 (1861).
Barbaro, Daniele, Cronica del Trivisano della Citta di Venezia, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 790.
Barbaro, Marco, Genealogie, Codex Vindobonensis Foscarini, 6155, 6156, and under title Discendenze delle famiglie patrizie, Codex Venetus, Musei Civici, Cicogna 570.
Bent, James Theodore, The Cyclades, or Life among the Insular Greeks (1885).
Benvenuto Sangiorgio, Cronica, ed. Vernazza (1780).
Berti, Giuliano, Antichi porti militare e commerciale, antico andamento del mare e dei fiumi, e minori porti ed approdi nel circondario di Ravenna, in Giornale del Genio Civile (1879).
Bertolotto, Girolamo, Un genovese in Bisanzio, Guglielmo Cacallaro oppure Cavaliere? in Giornale ligustico di Archeologia etc., xxii (1897), pp. 347-56.
Biondo, Flavio, De Origine et Gestis Venetorum, in Thesaurus Anti- quitatum et Historiae Italiae, torn, v (1722), part I.
Bohmer, Johann Friedrich, Acta Imperii Selecta (1870).
Bovvd, Udo-KovXa koll IvrpiriaL, Bvpwv, Top., a (1874), cited from P. G. Zerlentes, Byzantinische Zeitschrift xi. 497, 498, xvi. 285.
Brunacci, Storia Eccles. di Padova, MS. in the Museo Civico, Padua, cited by Gloria, Codice Diplomatico Padovano.
126 APPENDIX II
Buchon, Jean Alexandre, Histoire des conquetes et de l'etablissement des Frangais dans les etats de l'ancienne Grece sous les Ville-Har- douin, a la suite de la quatrieme croisade (1846). Caballino, Bernardino, Cronicha, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 48, quoted by Gerola, Monumenti Veneti in Creta, i (1905), p. 93 ; Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 168. Calergi, Antonio, Commentari delle cose di Candia fatte dentro et fuori, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vi. 3, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vi. 155, and Codex Londinensis Musei Britannici Add. ^ 8636. Canale, Martino da, Chronique des Veniciens, ed. Polidori, in Archivio
Storico Italiano, viii (1845), pp. 268-707. Capellari, Girolamo, Campidoglio Veneto, Codex Venetus Marcianus
Italicus, vii. 15-18. Carden, Robert W., The City of Genoa (1908).
Cassiodorus, Chronica, ed. Mommsen, in Monumenta Germaniae His- torica, Auctores Antiquissimi, Vol. XI, Chronica Minora, ii (1893), pp. 1 20-6 r. Cervellini, G. B., Come i Veneziani acquistarono Creta, in Nuovo
Archivio Veneto, xvi (1908), pp. 262-78. Chalandon, Ferdinand, Jean II Comnene et Manuel I Comnene (19 12). Chronica Anonyma Veneta : —
(i) Codex Venetus Marcianus, Amadeo Svajer 1618, quoted by Filiasi, Memorie de' Veneti, iii. 74.
(ii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 30, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 166.
(iii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 37, ending in 1360. (iv) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 38, ending in 1388, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 168.
(v) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 39, ending in 1405, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 168.
(vi) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 40, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), pp. 168-170.
(vii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 45, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 171.
(viii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vn. 46, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 171.
(ix) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 51, ending in 1475- (x) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 53, refers to 1469 as the present time.
(xi) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 54, ending in i486, (xii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 89, ending in 1410.
LIST OF WORKS REFERRED TO 127
(xiii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 91, a medley of chronicles.
(xiv) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 95, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), pp. 168, 171.
(xv) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 104, ending in 1443.
(xvi) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 162, ending in
I457-. (xvii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 163, ending in
(xviii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 323, ending in 1528.
(xix) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 519, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 170.
(xx) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 550, ending in 1442.
(xxi) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 704, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902),
P- I7I-
(xxii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 791, quoted by
Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902),
p. 170.
(xxiii) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 798, ending in 1428.
(xxiv) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 1274, ending in 1446.
(xxv) Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 2034, ending in 1452, quoted by Gerola, Monumenti Veneti in Creta, i (1905), p. 93 ; Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), pp. 168, 171.
(xxvi) Codex Venetus Marcianus Latinus, x. 36a, and Codex Venetus Marcianus Latinus, x. 237, ending in 1360. See Valenti- nelli, Bibliotheca MSS. ad S. Marci Venet, Cod. MSS. Lat., vi (1873), pp. 169-73.
(xxvii) Codex Venetus Musei Civici, Correr 443, quoted Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 168.
(xxviii) Codex Venetus Musei Civici, Correr 1013, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 168.
(xxix) Codex Venetus Musei Civici, Correr 1499, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 168.
(xxx) Codex Venetus Musei Civici, Cicogna 21 13, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), pp. 168, 170.
(xxxi) Codex Venetus Musei Civici, Cicogna 2831, quoted by Gerola, Atti dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto (1902), p. 168.
128 APPENDIX II
(xxxii) Historia Ducum Veneticorum, ed. Simonsfeld, in Pertz, Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores, xiv (1883), pp.
72-97-
(xxxiii) Origine delle Famiglie nobili venete, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, iii. 954. Cigogna, Emmanuele Antonio, Inscrizioni Veneziane, Vol. IV (1834). Cinnamus, Joannes, in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, 133 (1864), coll. 299-
694. Clary, Robert de, La prise de Constantinople, in Hopf, Chroniques
Gr^co-Romanes (1873), pp. 1-85. Codinus, Georgius, in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, 157 (1866), coll.
25-740. Consularia Italica, ed. Mommsen, in Monumenta .Germaniae Historica,
Auctores Antiquissimi, Vol. IX, Chronica Minora, i (1892), pp.
274-339- Cornaro, Andrea, Historia di Candia, Codex Venetus Marcianus
Italicus, vi. 286. Cornaro, Andrea, Istoria di Candia, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus,
vi. 177. Cornelius, Flaminius, Creta sacra (1755), cited as 'Flaminius Cornelius'. Cornelius, Flaminius, Ecclesiae Venetae (1749). Coronelli, Vicenzo, Atlante Veneto, Tom. ii, Isolario, parte i (1696). Damianus, S. Petrus, Vita S. Romualdi, in Migne, Patrologia Latina,
144 (1853), coll. 953-1008. Dandolo, Andrea, Chronicon Venetum, in Muratori, Rerum Italicarum
Scriptores, xii (1728), coll. 13-514. Dandolo, Enrico, Cronaca veneta sino al 1380, Codex Venetus Mar- cianus Italicus, vii. 102; Codex Vindobonensis Foscarini, n. 6220;
Codex Venetus Musei Civici, Cicogna 3423. Delfino, Pietro, Cronaca di Venezia, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus,
vii. 559- Desimoni, Cornelio, I Genovesi ed i loro Quartieri in Constantinopoli,
in Giornale ligustico di Archeologia, iii (1876), pp. 217-74, v (1878),
pp. 241-71. Documenti degli Archivi toscani : — Documenti sulle relazioni delle
citta toscane coll' oriente cristiano e coi Turchi, ed. G. Miiller (1879). Dolfin, Piero, Cronaca di Venezia, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus,
vii. 794. Doni, Giovanni Battista, Inscriptiones antiquae, ed. Gori (1731). Dorasius, Epist. de fam. Candiana (1760), quoted by Filiasi, vi. 131. Erizzo, Marcantonio, Cronaca Veneta, Codex Venetus Marcianus Itali- cus, vii. 56. Eustathius Thessalonicensis Metropolitan De Thessalonica urbe a
Latinis capta, in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, 136 (1865), coll. 9-140. Filiasi, Jacopo, Conte, Memorie storiche de' Veneti, 7 volumes (181 1-
14)- Finlay, George, A History of Greece from its conquest by the Romans to the present time, ed. Tozer (1877), Vol. IV, Mediaeval Greece and the Empire of Trebizond.
LIST OF WORKS REFERRED TO 129
Fotheringham, John Knight, Genoa and the Fourth Crusade, in English
Historical Review, xxv (1910), pp. 26-57. Gaieotto del Carretto, Chronica di Monferrato, ed. Avogadro, in Monu-
menta Historiae Patriae, Scriptores, iii (1848), coll. 1 082-1 300. Gerland, Ernst, Geschichte der Frankenherrschaft in Griechenland,
Band I, Geschichte des lateinischen Kaiserreiches von Konstanti-
nopel, Teil I, Geschichte der Kaiser Balduin I und Heinrich, 1204-
16 (1905), cited as 'Gerland'. Gerland, Ernst, Neue Quellen zur Geschichte des lateinischen Erzbis-
tums Patras, in Scriptores Sacri et Profani, Fasc. V (1903). Gerola, Cavaliere Giuseppe, La dominazione genovese in Creta, in Atti
dell' I. R. Accademia degli Agiati in Rovereto, Anno 1902, Fascicolo
ii, pp. 134-75, cited as 'Gerola'. Gerola, Cavaliere Giuseppe, Monumenti Veneti nelP isola di Creta,
i (1905), cited as ' Gerola, Monumenti '. Gesta Henrici II et Ricardi I, ed. Stubbs, in the Rolls Series (1867),
Vol. II. Gfrorer, August Friedrich, Byzantinische Geschichten, Band I, Ge- schichte Venedigs bis 1084 (1872), cited from the Italian translation
in Archivio Veneto, xii (1876), pp. 7-28. Gibbon, Edward, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, ed. Bury, vi
(1898). Ginanni, Conte Francesco, Istoria delle Pinete Ravennati (1774). Gloria, Andrea, Codice Diplomatico Padovano in Deputazione Veneta
di Storia Patria, ia serie, Documenti ii (1877). Grimaldi, Jacopo Giuseppe, 'Icrropta tt}s Na£ou, MS. in the possession
of Madame della Rocca at Naxos. Halberstadensis, Anonymus, in Riant, Exuviae Sacrae (1877), i, pp.
10-21. Hasluck, Frederick William, Depopulation in the Aegean Islands and
the Turkish Conquest, in The Annual of the British School at
Athens, xvii (1910-n), pp. 151-81. Headlam, Cecil, Venetia and Northern Italy (1908). Henri de Valenciennes, Histoire de l'Empereur Henri, ed. De Wailly
(1874). Heyd, Wilhelm, Histoire du Commerce du Levant, 2 vols. (1885, 1886). Hodgkin, Thomas, Italy and her Invaders, Vol. I (1892). Hodgson, F. C, The Early History of Venice from the Foundation to
the Conquest of Constantinople, a. d. 1204 (1901). Hopf, Carl, Geschichte der Insel Andros, in Sitzungsberichte der kaiser- lichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, xvi (1855). Philosoph.-hist.
Classe, pp. 23-131, cited as 'Hopf, Sitzungsberichte, xvi'. Hopf, Carl, Geschichte Griechenlands vom Beginn des Mittelalters bis
auf unsere Zeit, in Ersch und Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopadie,
lxxxv, lxxxvi, Griechenland (1867); vol. lxxxv is cited as 'Hopf'. Hopf, Carl, Ghisi, in Ersch und Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopadie, lxvi
(1857), pp. 336-45. Hopf, Carl, Giustiniani (Venezianer in Griechenland), in Ersch und
Gruber, Allgemeine Encyklopadie, lxviii (1859), pp. 303-8.
130 APPENDIX II
Hopf, Carl, Nachlass, MSS. in Konigliche Bibliothek, Berlin.
Hopf, Carl, Urkunden und Zus'atze zur Geschichte der Insel Andros, in Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, xxi (1856), philosoph.-hist. Classe, pp. 221-62, cited as c Hopf, Sitzungsberichte, xxi '.
Hopf, Carl, Veneto-byzantinische Analekten, in Sitzungsberichte der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, xxxii (1859), philosoph.- hist. Classe, pp. 365-528, cited as 'Hopf, Sitzungsberichte, xxxii'.
Ilgen, Theodor, Markgraf Conrad von Montferrat (1880).
Innocentius III, Epistolae, in Migne, Patrologia Latina, 215 (1855).
Jacobus Aquensis, Chronicon Imaginis Mundi, ed. Avogadro, in Monumenta Historiae Patriae, Scriptores, iii (1848), coll. 135 7- 1626.
Jacopo d' Oria, at the end of Regni Iherosolymitani Brevis Historia, in Belgrano, Annali Genovesi di Caffaro e de' suoi Continuatori, i (1890), p. 141.
Jacopo da Varazze, Chronica de Civitate Januensi, in Muratori, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, ix (1726), coll. 5-56.
Joannes Diaconus, La Cronaca Veneziana, ed. Monticolo, in Istituto Storico Italiano, Fonti per la storia d' Italia, No. 9, Scrittori Secoli x-xi, Cronache Veneziane antichissime (1890), pp. 59-171.
Jordanes, De Origine Actibusque Getarum, ed. Mommsen, in Monu- menta Germaniae Historica, Auctores Antiquissimi, V. i (1882),
PP- 53-I38- Jorga, N., Byzantine Empire (1907). Konrad II, Diplomata, ed. Bresslau, in Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
Diplomatum IV (1909), pp. 1-4 17. Kretschmayr, Heinrich, Geschichte von Venedig, Band I (1905), cited
as 'Kretschmayr'. Lenel, Walter, Die Epochen der alteren venezianischen Geschichte, in
Historische Zeitschrift, 3e Folge, viii (1910), pp. 237-77. Liber Iurium Reipublicae Genuensis, ed. Ricotti, i (1854), in Monu- menta Historiae Patriae. Liber Pontificalis, ed. Mommsen, in Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
Gestorum Pontificum Romanorum I (1898). Lichtle, Ignace, Description de l'ile de Naxos, British Museum, MS.
Add. 36538 ; Greek translation, 'Io-ropta kcu Heptypacfrr) Trj<s Na^or,
'AttoAAwv, trt] £', rf (1891, 1892). Litta, Pompeo, Celebri Famiglie Italiane.
Magno, Stefano, Annali Veneti, Codex Vindobonensis Foscarini, n. 6239. Magno, Stefano, Cronaca Magno, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus,
vii. 513-18. Manfroni, Cavaliere Camillo, Le relazioni fra Genova, 1' Impero bizan-
tino e i Turchi, in Atti della Societa ligure, xxviii (1898), pp. 575-858. Marini, Gaetano, Papiri diplomatici (1805). Marucchi, H., Bibliotheca Vaticana, Monumenta Papyracea Latina
(l895)- Menke, Theodor, Spruner-Menke's Hand-Atlas. Vorbemerkungen
(1880).
Michael Acominatus, ed. Lampros, ii (1880).
LIST OF WORKS REFERRED TO 131
Miklosich et Miiller, Acta et Diplomata Graeca Medii Aevi, iii (1865). Miller, William, Der alteste Stammbaum der Herzoge von Naxos,
Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xvi(i907), pp. 258-61. Miller, William, The Latins in the Levant (1908), cited as 'Miller'. Mittarelli, Giovanni Benedetto, Annales Camaldulenses Ordinis S. Bene- dict^ Vol. I (1755). Molmenti, Pompeo, Venice, The Middle Ages, Part I, English Trans- lation (1906). Monacis, Laurentius de, Chronicon de Rebus Venetis, ed. Flaminius
Cornelius (1758), cited as 'Monaci'. Morea, Chronicle of the, ed. Schmitt (1904). Morosini, Antonio, Cronaca Veneta, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus,
vii. 2048. Muralt, Edouard de, Essai de Chronographie Byzantine, Vol. 1 (187 1). Muratori, Ludovico Antonio, Antiquitates Italicae (1739). Navagiero, Andrea, Storia della Repubblica veneziana, in Muratori,
Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, xxiii (1733), co^- 923-1216. Nicetas Acominatus Choniates, Historia, ed. Bekker, Bonn (1835),
also in Migne, Patrologia Graeca, 139 (1865), coll. 309-1444 ;
extracts in Recueil des historiens des croisades — Historiens grecs —
Tom. i (1875), parts 3 and 4. Otobonus Scriba, Annales, in L. T. Belgrano, Annali Genovesi di
CarTaro e de' suoi Continuatori, ii (1901), pp. 1-66. Otto I Imperator, Diplomata, ed. Sickel, in Monumenta Germaniae
Historica, Diplomatum I (1884), pp. 322-638. Otto III, Diplomata, ed. Sickel, in Monumenta Germaniae Historica,
Diplomatum II (1893). Pane, Ogerio, Annales, in' L. T. Belgrano, Annali Genovesi di Caffaro
e de' suoi Continuatori, ii (1901), pp. 67-154. Paulinus, S. Pontius Meropius, Epistulae, ed. von Hartel, in Corpus
Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, xxix (1894). Paulus Diaconus, Historia Langobardorum, ed. Bethmann and Waitz,
in Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores Rerum Langobar-
dicarum et Italicarum, saec. vi-ix (1878), pp. 45-187. Pears, Sir Edwin, The Fall of Constantinople (1885). Pegues, Abbe*, Histoire et phenomenes du volcan et des iles volcaniques
de Santorin (1842). Pinton, Pietro, Idrografia e Toponomastica dell' antica Saccisica, in
Bollettino della Societa Geografica Italiana, Serie 3, Vol. 7 (1894),
PP- 556-7o? 887-914. Ramnusius, Paulus, De bello Costantinopolitano et imperatoribus
Comnenis per Gallos et Venetos restitutis historia (1634). Regesta Chartarum Italiae, iii (1907), ed. Federici. Riant, Count, Exuviae Sacrae (1877). Robert of Torigni, ed. Howlett, in Chronicles of Stephen, Henry II,
and Richard I (Rolls series), iv (1889); also ed. Delisle, in Societe
de l'Histoire de Normandie (1873). Rodd, Sir Rennell, The Princes of Achaia and the Chronicle of the
Morea (1907), Vol. I.
k 2
13a APPENDIX II
Romanin, Samuele, Storia documentata di Venezia. Vols. I and II
(1853-4). .
Rossi, Giovanni Battista di, Inscnptiones Christianae Urbis Romae, i
(i857). Sabellicus, M. Antonius Coccius, Rerum Venetarum Decades (17 18). Sacerdoti, A., Le colleganze nella pratica degli affari e nella legislazione veneta, in Atti delle adunanze del R. Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, lix (1 899-1 900), Parte II, pp. 1-46, quoted from Schaube, p. 265. Salimbene de Adam, ed. Holder-Egger, in Monumenta Germaniae
Historica, Scriptores, xxxii (1905-8), pp. 1-652. Sanguined, Angelo, and Bertolotto, Gerolamo, Nuova serie di docu- ment sulle relazioni di Genova coll' impero Bizantino, in Atti della Societa ligure, xxviii (1897), pp. 343~573- Sanudo, Marino, Vite de' Duchi di Venezia, in Muratori, Rerum Itali-
carum Scriptores, xxii (1733), coll. 405-1252. Sanudo Torsello, Marino, Istoria del Regno di Romania, in Hopf,
Chroniques Gre*co-romanes (1873), PP- 99-I7°-
Sauger, Robert, Histoire nouvelle des anciens Dues de l'Archipel, Paris
(1688, 1699), partly reprinted in this work, pp. 113-122; elsewhere
cited from the Greek translation by A. M. Karales (1878), entitled
'Ioropia twv apxaioiv Sovkuv kcu twv Xoittow yye/jiovoiv rov Alyaiov 7T€\dyov<s.
Savj-Lopez, Paolo, La Lettera epica di Rambaut de Vaqueiras, in
Bausteine zur romanischen Philologie, Festgabe fiir A. Mussafia
(1905), pp. 177-92-
Schaube, Adolf, Handelsgeschichte der romanischen Volker des Mittel-
meergebiets bis zum Ende der Kreuzziige (1906). Serra, Marchese Girolamo, Storia dell' antica Liguria e di Genova
(1835), Vols. I and II. Sicardus Cremonensis, Cronica, ed. Holder-Egger, in Monumenta Ger- maniae Historica, Scriptores, xxxi (1902), pp. 78-183. Sidonius, C. Sollius Apollinaris, ed. Mohr (1895). Simonsfeld, H., Andrea Dandolo e le sue Opere Storiche, in Archivio
Veneto, xiv (1877), pp. 49-149. Simonsfeld, H., Textvarianten zu Andrea Dandolo, in Neues Archiv
fiir deutsche Geschichtskunde, xviii (1892), pp. 336-46. Tafel, G. L. F., Symbolae criticae, partes i et ii, in Historische Abhandlungen, Munich, 2te und 3te Abth. v (1849), cited as ' Tafel, Symbolae criticae '. Tafel, G. L. F., and Thomas, G. M., Urkunden zur alteren Handels- und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig mit besonderer Bezieh- ung auf Byzanz und die Levante vom neunten bis zum Ausgang des fiinfzehnten Jahrhunderts, in Osterreichische Geschichtsquellen, 2te Abth., Diplomataria et Acta, xii und xiii (1856), cited as 'Tafel and Thomas, xii, xiii '. Toeche, Theodor, Jahrbucher der deutschen Geschichte, Heinrich VI
(1867). Tolosanus, Chronicon, in Mittarelli, Rerum Faventinarum Scriptores (1771), coll. 11-218.
LIST OF WORKS REFERRED TO 133
Tournefort, Joseph Pitton de, Voyage into the Levant, English transla- tion (1741). Troya, C., Storia d' Italia del Medio-evo j iv, Codice Diplomatico Longo-
bardo (1852-53). Villehardouin, Geoffroi de, La conquete de Constantinople, ed. De
Wailly (1874). Vituri Cronica, Codex Venetus Marcianus Italicus, vii. 2051. Willermus (or Guillelmus) Tyrensis, Historia rerum in partibus trans-
marinis gestarum, in Migne, Patrologia Latina, 201 (1855), coll.
209-891. Zabarella, Giacomo, Tito Livio Padovano (1669). Zerlentes, Pericles G., Bu^ama;^ k-mypaspr] Ik Na£ov, Byzantinische
Zeitschrift, xvi (1907), pp. 285, 286. Zerlentes, Pericles G., TpapLpLara ®payKu>v Sovkuv tov Alyatov TreXdyovs
(, avXy '- a<£$> '), Byzantinische Zeitschrift, xiii (1904), pp. 136-57. Zerlentes, Pericles G., Aia/m^ iv Nd^u Kao-rpivuv kcu Ncoxoptraii/,
JIapvao-o-os, xi (1888), p. 408. Zerlentes, Pericles G., Na£ia vrjo-os kol ttoAis, Byzantinische Zeitschrift,
xi (1902), pp. 491-99-
INDEX
(« = note ; m = margin.)
Aboliane. See Naxos.
Abu'l-Faraj, 28 n.
Abydos, 13, 36, 67.
Achaea, 81 n.
Achaeans, the, 81 n.
Acominatus, Michael, archbishop of
Athens, 19 «, 59- Acre, 45 n. Adige road, the, 23. Adria, 7. Adrianople (Andrinopoli), 36, 44, 57;
siege, 32 ; treaty of, 32 n, 47, 102,
105. Adriatic coast, the, 36. Aegean Sea, the, 36, 46 n, 49, 50, 56,
60,70,73,78, H3, 115- Aegina (Egina), 19 n, 36. Agiasso. See Naxos. Agilulf, king of the Lombards, 3. Agnellus, Liber Pontificalis, 4, 5. Agnes, French princess, 27. Agnes of Montferrat, empress of
Romania, 24, 120. Agrestius, 11. A'imamas. See Naxos. Alaric, king of the Visigoths, 4, 12 «,
109. Albania, 37, 48. Alberic of Trois Fontaines, Chronica,
113 n. Alexander VII, pope, 124. Alexandria, 52. Alexius II (Alesio), eastern emperor,
19 n, 27, 28, 29, 30 n, 105 ?. Alexius III, eastern emperor, 16, 18,
19, 24, 47- Alexius IV, eastern emperor, 20, 21,
31,33, 35-
Alexius V (Murzuphlus), eastern em- peror, 21.
Alexius, protosebastos, 28.
Altino, 109.
Altino, Chronicle of. See Chronicle of Altino.
Amari. See Crete.
Amelatheiu. See Naxos.
Amomaxe. See Naxos.
Amorgos, 59, 68.
Amorosa. See Treviso.
Anacia. See Naxos.
Anaphe (Anati), 59, 78, 1 16.
Anapliotes, Marcos, 122.
Andre. See Andros.
Andronicus I, eastern emperor, 19/*,
28. Andros (Andre, Antrus), 36, $7, 57,
59, 60 n, 61. Angeli emperors. See Isaac II,
Alexius III, Alexius IV. Angelo, castle of St., 18. Angelo, Leonardo Pelegrin da S.,
82. Anna, empress, 66. Ansbert, 28.
Antioch, prince of. See Bohemund. Antiparos (Antipario), 59, 68, 76, 78,
107, 116. Antrus. See Andros. Apalire. See Naxos. cinaXipia, scrub, 43. Apanocastro. See Naxos. Apanosivrito. See Crete. Aplyci. See Naxos. Apolenaris, pons, 4. Apollinare in Classe, S., church of
(near Ravenna). See Churches. Apollinare Nuovo, S., church of (in
Ravenna). See Churches. Apollinaris, S., church of (in Rome).
See Churches. Apollinaris Sidonius, 8. Apollo, 114. Apulia, 23 n. Aquileia, 3.
New Aquileia. See Grado. Archatos. See Naxos. Archipelago (Arcipelago, Arcipellago,
PArchipel, larcipielego), the, 13,
56, 60, 61, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 85,
86 n, 88, 91, 104, 106, 107, no,
HI, 113, 114, 119. Archipelago (Naxos), Duchy of, 1,
14, 36, 37, 38> 44, 60, 61, 64 n, 66,
68, 78, 89, 97, 101, 103, 107, 108,
no, 113, 116, 121. Argia. See Naxos. Argos, 58. Ariminum. See Rimini.
136
INDEX
Armador. See Offices and Titles.
Artaxerxes (Assuerus), 114.
Asia Minor,' 25, 66, 67.
Aspra. See Money.
Astypalaea, 59.
Ataulf, king of the Visigoths, 8.
Athenians, the, 81 n.
Athens, 58, 113, 114.
Athens, archbishop of, 59.
Attica, 19 n.
Attila, 109.
Augustine, St., 8.
Aussentio, admiral, 101.
Avesnes (Avenes), Jacques d', 57,
"3-
Avvogadore. See Offices and Titles. Avvogadore del Comune. See Offices and Titles.
Bacchus (Dionysius), 114.
Bacchus (Palati), isle of. See Naxos.
Badalenus, river, 5.
Baldwin (Balduin, Baudauin), count of Flanders, afterwards Baldwin I, emperor of Romania, 22, 25, 29, 3h 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, 4©, 44, 49, 5o, 56, 106, 107, 113, 120.
Barbaro, Daniele, Cronica del Trivi- sano, &c, 40, 41, 43, 44, 49, 56, 57, 58, 86«,9i, 92«, 93, 105.
Barbaro, Marco, Genealogie, 58 n, 66, 69.
Barbo, Polio, 112.
Barbolani, family, 9.
Barozzi (Mparotzes), Antonios, 122.
Barozzi (Mparotzes), Francesco, 122.
Barozzi, Jacopo, 59.
Barozzi, brother, 39 ; family, 76.
Baseio (Basegio, Baseggio, Basilio, Baxeio), Jacopo (Giacomo, Iacomo, Jacomo), 52, 53, 54, 58 n, 85, 88, 112; family, 76, 87.
Baseio (Basegio, Baxeio), Zuan, 53 n, 112.
Basil, Order of St., 72, 116.
Bayazid, sultan, 78.
Beirut, 52.
Bela III, king of Hungary, 28.
Belamuto, Enrico, 39.
Belluno (Belum), 11 n, 109.
Belriparo. See Crete.
Belvedere. See Crete.
Benbo, Andrea, 112.
Benevento, 58.
Bent, J. T., The Cyclades, 71.
Berlin, 17, 58^.
Berti, Giuliano, Antichi Porti mili- tare e commerciale, 6.
Bertolotti, Girolamo. 6V<?Sanguineti.
Bethani, Sebastiano (Betoni, Sebas- tian), 96, 104.
Bethune, Coenon of. See Coenon of Bethune.
Bidentum, river. See Candidiani.
Biondo, Flavio, De Origine, &c, 36, 41, 49, 113 m.
Bithynia, 113.
Blois, Louis, count of. See Louis, count of Blois.
Bohemund, prince of Antioch, 45 «.
Bohmer, Acta Imperii Selecta, 5 n.
Boniface (Bonifacio), marquis of Montferrat, afterwards king of Thessalonica, 18 n, 22, 23, 24, 25 », 26, 27, 29, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 48 n, 61, 87, 93 n, 102, 105, 1085 109, 113, 116, 120, 121.
Bonifacio. See Crete.
Borgo. See Naxos.
Bothroe. See Naxos.
Bovva, IldcrKovXa Kal evrfiiriai, J J n, 122.
Branas, Caesar Theodorus, 57.
Brenner road, the, 23.
Brindisi (Brinde), 17, 121.
Brunacci, Storia Eccles. di Padova, 7-
Buchon, J. A., Histoire des con- quetes, 60.
Bulgarians, the, 102, 120.
Burdino, Arnaldo, 84.
Burgo. See Naxos.
Burgundy, 113.
Caballino, Bernardino, Chronicle of,
17 n, 81 n, 84 n. Cacallaro, Guglielmo, 18;;. Caesena, 8, 9. Caesarea, 30. Cagli, 7. Calergi, Antonio, Commentari, &c.,
17 n, 53, 84 », 85, 86 «, 87, 88, 89,
91, 92 n, 94, 95 n, 96 n, 97 n, 99 n,
100, 101 n. Calistoechia. See Naxos. Callipolis (Gallipoli), 50, 58, 59 »,
108, 113. Calus limiones. See Crete. Camardino, Enrico di, 24. Camarlingo. See Offices and Titles. Camerino, battle, 26, 27 n.
INDEX
137
Camillo, Abbioso, Cronaca di Venezia
of, 61, 64/2. Campi, De, family, 76. Cana. See Naxos. Canale, Martino da, Chronique des
Veniciens, 36, 52 n, 55, 81 n, 83 n,
85, 87, 89. Candia. See Crete. Candiam, Piero, 10 n. Candian, Tornado. See Candiano,
Tomaso. Candiana. See Heraclea. Candiana, ladies, 8,11; ' nacio ', 3, 4,
8, 9, 10; ' pars', 3, 9, 10; prata,
6 ; valle, 5 ; village, 7. Candianaccio, orma del, 5, 6. Candiano, Domenico, 12 n. Candiano, Giovanni (Johannes Can-
dianus), bishop, 3, 9, 11. Candiano, Petrus, II. Candiano, Pietro, 11. Candiano, Pietro I, doge, II, 12.
Pietro II, doge, II, 12.
Pietro III, doge, II, 12.
Pietro IV, doge, 11, 12. Candiano, Stefano, 2, 11. Candiano (Candian), Tomaso (To- rnado, Ttomaxo), 10, 12, 62, 109. Candiano, Vitale, doge, 11, \in. Candiano (Chandian), family, 1, 2, 3,
8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 66. Candiano (Candinea, Cundinea), lidi,
10, 11, 109. Candianum (Cantiano), village, 7. Candianus, Magnus, 3. Candianus, Sanutus, 2. Candidiana, colonia, 6, 7. Candidiani (Candiani, Candiano,
Candianum, Candianus), campus
(canpus), 4, 6 ; fiumen (Bidentum),
5, 6 ; pons, 4, 5, 6 ; porta del, 6 ;
portus, 5, 6; prata, 6; torre del,
5, 6 ; via al, 6 ; vicus, 4. Candidianus, family, 7, 9. Candidianus, general, 6. Candidianus (Candianus), patriarch,
3. 4, 8, 9-
Candidianus, presbyter, 8. Candidianus of Caesena, 8. Candidianus of Ephesus, 8. Candidianus, son of Galerius, 8. Candidianus, VL, 8. Candilianus (Candianus, Cantius,
Cantianus), river, 7. Candinea. See Candiano. Canea. See Crete.
Canisia. See Konitza. Cantiano (Candianum, Luceoli), vil- lage, 7. Canuto, 12.
Caorle (Cauorle, Cavorle), 10, 109. Capellari, Girolamo, Campidoglio
Veneto, 12, 50 n, 5872, 59 n, 63. Capitanio. See Offices and Titles. Capouetrano, Leon. See Vetrano,
Leone. Carceri (Carcere, Carcerio), Ravano
(Rauan) dalle (Rauandolo, Ravin,
Roman) (Zuane da Verona da
lixola da Negropontte a pregierie),
32, 33, 49, 57, 58, 105, 107, 109,
113. Carceri, dalle (Carcero,della), family,
76. Carden, Robert W., The City of
Genoa, 30 n. Caristos, 36. Carretto, Galeotto del, Chronica di
Monferrato, 27 n, 28, 29, 31 n. Cassia, 12.
Cassiodorus, Chronicle of, 4. Castellan. See Offices and Titles. Castelnuovo. See Crete. Castro. See Naxos. Castro-Apalire. See Naxos. Cavaliere grande. See Offices and
Titles. Cavallaricei, Marco, 95. Cavallario, Guglielmo, 18, 19 n. Cavisia. See Konitza. Cechiae. See Naxos. Ceggia, village, 10. Ceneda, 11 n, 109. Ceos (Zia), 58, 59, 107. Cephalonia (Zaffalonia), 58, 107. Ceramote. See Naxos. Cerigo (Cythera), 59. Cerigotto, 58, 59. Cervellini, G. B., Come i Veneziani,
&c., 33 », 34 n. Chaladri. See Naxos. Chalandon, Ferdinand, Jean II
Comnene, Sec, 26 11. Chalilimiones. See Crete. Champlitte (Champlit), Guillaume
de, prince of the Morea, 113. Chancellor. See Offices and Titles. Chandian. See Padua. Chao Spada. See Spada, Cape
La. Charadra. See Naxos. Charters, 45 n.
i38
INDEX
Chaxollo, Nicolo, 112. Cheimaros. See Naxos. Chilari. See Kjari. Chios (Chio), 19 n, 36, 78. Chirone. See Crete. Choron. See Corone. Chronicle A. N., 60 n, 62, 64 n.
F. C, 43, 60.
P. T., 95 n. Chronicle of 641, 4. Chronicle of:
Altino, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11.
the Morea, \8n. Churches :
S. Apollinare in Classe, 5, 6.
S. Apollinare Nuovo in Ravenna,
S. Apollinare in Rome, 8.
S. Giorgio in Candia, 84 n.
Sta. Maria in Porto, 6.
Sta. Maria in Porto Fuori, 5,
St. Mark in Venice, 48.
S. Raphael in Venice, 3.
St. Sophia in Constantinople, 28, 106. Cigogna, E. A., Inscrizioni, 54 n. Cimolos (Cimulo), 59, 68, 78, 116. Cinedaros. See Naxos. Cinnamus, Joannes, Patrologia, 23 71. Cittanova. 6*^Heraclea. Pattodi, 2. Cividale (Ciuidal), 11 n, 109. Civitas Nova. See Heraclea. Clary, Robert de, La prise de Con- stantinople, 22. Classe, 6. Classe Fuori, 5, 6. Cocco, family, 76. Coccos, Demetrios, 122. Cod. Cicogna :
21 13, 83 n, 84 n, 85 n, 86 n.
2831, 83 «, 85 ». Cod. Correr :
443, 84 n, 85 n.
1013, 83 71.
1499, 83 n. Cod. Marc. Amadeo Svajer, 161 8,
11 n. Cod. Marc. It. :
vii. 30, 53 n.
vii. 37 (Cronica Antica, ending 1360), 12 n, 14 n, 15 », 35, 41, 62, 64, 65, 66, 68, 83 n, 87, 93 n, 94 n, 109.
vii. 38, 83 n.
vii. 39, 83 n.
vii. 40, 81 n, 82 //, 83 n, 84 ?z.
Cod. Marc. It. (continued) :
vii. 45, 86 n.
vii. 46, 86 n.
vii. 5 1 (Cronaca Veneziana, ending 1475), 10 », 14, 15, 33 «, 52, 53, 54, 56, 58 », 85, 88, 94 », 99 », 100, in.
v". 53, 13 «, 14.
vii. 54 (ending i486), 55 n, 85, 87, 93 n, 94 », 100.
vii. 89 (Cronaca Veneta, ending 1410), 63, 67.
vii. 91, II n, 63, 109.
vii. 95, 83 n, 85 *, 86 n.
vii. 104 (Cronaca Veneziana, end- ing 1443), 61, 64 n.
vii. 323 (Zancaruola?, ending 1528), 62, 64 », 86 n, 88.
vii. 519, 84 #, 85 n. Cod. Ven. Marc. It. :
vii. 550 (Cronaca di Venezia, end- ing 1442), 61.
vii. 704, 86 n.
vii. 791, 85 71.
vii. 798 (Cronaca Veneta, ending 1428), 10, 109.
vii. 954 (Origine delle famiglie), 10.
vii. 1274 (Gaspar Zancaruol ?, end- ing 1446), 62, 86 71, 91.
vii. 2034, 17 n, 81 71, 84 n, 86 71. Cod. Ven. Marc. Lat. :
x. 36a (ending 1360), 1, 51 71, 81 n, 85 n,
x. 237 (ending 1360), 1, 51 n. Codinus, Georgius, 27 n. Coenon (Conon) of Bethune, 33, 121. Cologne standard, the, 20«, 33,
39 n. Colonna, cardinal, 121. Comes Domesticorum. See Offices
and Titles. Comiace. See Naxos. Comneni emperors. See Alexius II,
Andronicus, John, Manuel. Conchilari. See Kjari. Concordia, 109.
Conestabile. See Offices and Titles. Conrad, marquis of Montferrat, king
of Jerusalem, 24, 26, 27 n. Conseruador. See Offices and Titles. Consiglieri. See Offices and Titles. Consoli. See Offices and Titles. Constantinople (Chosttantinopoli,
Chosttantinopolli, Constantinop'li,
Constantinopoli), II, 14, 20, 26,
INDEX
139
27, 3°, 32, 33, 34, 4o, 44, 47, 49, 50, 54, 55, 56, 70, 81, 86, 102, 106, 107, no, 113, 119, 120, 121 ; com- merce, 16, 21 ; fall, 13, 15, 22 ; fire, 21 ; divisions of city, 19, 21, 46 ; siege, 20 ; St. Sophia. See Churches .
Consularia Italica, 4, 7 n.
Consuls. See Offices and Titles.
Contarina, Cronica, 89.
Contarini, Anttonio, 112.
Contarini, Domenico, doge, 12.
Contarini, Zuan, 112.
Contes, Ierolymos, 122.
Coracia. See Naxos.
Corfu, 17, 18, 31, 36, 48, 52, 54, 55, 60, 81, 106, 108.
Corluo, Antonio, 12 n, 109.
Cornaro (Corner), Andrea, Historia di Candia, 17 n, 53, 91, 92 n, 93, 94 «, 96 n, 98 n, 99, 104.
Cornelius, Flaminius, Ecclesiae Ve- netae, 2 n.
Corner, Giacomo, 104.
Corner, Matteo, 112.
Corone (Coron, Choron), 18, 36, 59 n, 81, 82 n, 108, in, 112.
Coronelli, Vicenzo, Atlante Veneto, 69, 74-
Coronellos, Chruses, 122.
Corpus Christi, Brotherhood of, 124, 125.
Cortelazzo, 10 n.
Costa, Alamanno, count of Syracuse, 98.
Costa, Benvenuto, 84 n.
Councils, Greater and Lesser, in Crete, 90 ; Ephesus, 8 ; Venetian, in Con- stantinople, 46.
Craspere, Domenico Delia, arch- bishop, 74.
Cremona, 23.
Crete (Crede, Grede), 16, 17, 31, 33, 35, 36, 48, 51, 53, 54, 55, 56, 61, 67, 72, 76, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 98, 99, 107, 116, 124; Marco Sa- nudo in Crete, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 95, 96, 97, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 108, no, in, 117, 118, 119, 122; purchase, 24, 32, 34, 39, 52, 105, 106, 109, 113; Amari, pro- vince of, 96 ; Apanosivrito, region, 96; Belriparo, castle, 82, 98; Bel- vedere, castle, 82, 96 ; Bonifacio, castle, 82 ; Candia, archbishop, 90 ; castle, 82 ; city, 83, 85 n, 90, 92, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 104, 105, no,
in, 117, 118, 119; see Churches; Canea (la Chania), 35, 87, 109 ; Castelnuovo, castle, 82 ; Chirone, cathedral, 90 ; Fair Havens (Calus limiones, Chalilimiones), 96, 105 ; Hierapetra, cathedral, 90 ; Milopo- tamos, castle, 35, 82, 96, 97, 99 ; cathedral, 90; Mirabello, castle, 82, 92, 95 n ; Monforte, castle, 82, 96; Palaeocastro (Policastro), castle, 82, 84, 85, 87, 95, no; Rethimo, fortress, 118; Retimo, cathedral, 90; S. Giorgio, castle,
82, 97 ; S. Nicolo, castle, 82, 97 ; Sithia, cathedral, 90 ; Sitia, town, 96; Sivrito(Surito),99, 105; Spada, Cape La (Capo Spada, Chao Spada), 35, 87, 96, 109; Spinalonga (Chirone), 48 n, 52, 55, 56, 81, 82,
83, 90, 112; Suda, castle, 101, 102 ; Temenos (Temano, Temene), castle, 17 n, 82, 89, 94, 95, 96, 104, 105, 108, in; Territorio di Can- dia, 82 ; Territorio di Rettimo, 82.
Crispo ducal line, 73, 76 ; arms, 74.
Croatia, 13.
Crusade, the Fourth, 13, 15, 16.
Culuris. See Salamis.
Cundinea. See Candiano.
Curato, Antonio di Matteo di, 62,
64^. Curialis. See Offices and Titles. Custodi. See Offices and Titles. Cyclades, the, 37, 38, 61, 76, 78, 114,
Ii5, 123. Cyprus, 54.
Cyriace, Hagia. See Naxos. Cythera. See Cerigo. Cythnos, 59, 69.
Dalmatia, 13, 121.
Damarionas. See Naxos.
Dambi, family, 76.
Dandollo, Bellin, 112.
Dandollo, Franco, 112.
Dandolo, Andrea, brother of doge Enrico, 63.
Dandolo, Andrea, doge, Chronicle, I, 2^,4, 9, 11, 12 n, 13, 14, 20 n, 32 n, 45 n, 47 n, 48 n, 51 n, 52 n, 54, 56, 57, 58, 59 «, 81 n, 82 n, 83, 84 n, 85, 87, 88, 91, 92 n, 93, 94 n, 98 n, 99 n, 1 00.
Dandolo, Enrico, chronicler, 14, 41 n, 62, 63, 65 n, 67 n, 89 n.
Dandolo, Enrico (Enrigo, Rigo), doge,
140
INDEX
13, 14, 15, 20, 22, 23, 32, 33, 34,
35, 41, 44, 45, 47 », 48, 5o> 54, 56>
59, 63, 105, 106, 107, no. Dandolo, Giovanni, 63. Dandolo, Marco, conqueror of Calli-
polis, 50,51, 59^, 113. Dandolo, Marco, cousin of the doge
Enrico, 59 n. Dandolo, Marin (Marino), nephew (?)
of the doge Enrico, 57, 59, 107,
108. Dandolo (Dandollo), Rainerio (Ra-
nier, Renier, Rinieri), 48, 50, 52,
53, 54, 82, 83, 84,85, 108, 109, 112. Dandolo, Zuanne, duke of Crete,
99 ?*. Dauro, Iacomo, 112. Dauro, Zuan, 112. Decurio. See Offices and Titles. Delfino, Pietro, Cronaca di Venezia,
62, 63, 65 n, 67, 83 n. Delisle, Leopold, 27. Delos, 37, 114.
Demetrios, Hagios. See Naxos. Demetrius, king of Thessalonica, 119, 121.
Deodedelo (Dodeo, Dondedeo Bos),
pirate, 40. Desimoni, C, I Genovesi, &c, 17 n, I
24 n. Dionysia. See Naxos. Dionysus (Dionysius). See Bacchus. Diotisalvi of Bologna, 95. Dodecanisos (Diodetonisus), 36, 37,
38. Dolfin, Domenico, duke of Crete, 99. Dolfin, Nicolo, 112. Dolfin, Piero, captain, 112. Dolfin, Piero (Zorzi), chronicler, 62,
63, 64 n.
Domenico, bishops of Olivolo, II.
Dominatore. ' See Offices and Titles.
Doni, G.B., Inscriptions antiquae, 7.
Dorasius, Epistola, &c, 12 n.
Dorsoduro, 3.
Driagatha. See Naxos.
Drymalaea. See Naxos.
Drys. See Naxos.
Ducas, Historia Byzantina, 113 m.
Ducats. See Money.
Duodo, Zan, 10.
Durazzo (Duras), 48, 106, 121.
Eastern Empire, the, division of, 36, 48.
Egina. See Aegina.
Egypt (Egitto), 109 ; sultan of, 20.
Eleutherius, exarch, 7.
England, 24.
Epanocastro. See Naxos.
Ephesus, Council of, 8.
Epirus, 34 n, 37, 38?/, 48; despots
of, 18, 97, 119, 121. Eracliana. See Heraclea. Eraclius, II. Erizzo, Marcantonio, Cronaca Veneta,
15, 100. Ermelo, lido, n n. Eruli, 4. Este, 9. Euboea (Euripus, Negrepont, Negro-
pont, Negroponte, Negropontte,
Nigropons), 33 », 36, 49, 57, 68,
78, 107, 109, 113. Euphrosyne, empress, 24. Euripus. See Euboea. Eustace of Saarbriicken, 32. Eustathius of Thessalonica, 28 n. Exarch. See Offices and Titles. Exulum. See Jesolo.
Fair Havens. See Crete.
Falier, Alberto (Albertto), 10, 12;?,
109. Falier, Ordelafo, 112. Falier, Vitale, doge, 13. Fallier, Tornado, 112. Falmaillo, Marco, 112. Famagosta, 52, 54, 112. Fasti Vindobonenses Priores, 4. Felix, 11. Ferentino, 54. Fermo, Marco, 112. Fermo, Otauian, 112. Ferrarius, 7. Feudal System, the, 89, 90, 92, 95,
99. See also Naxos, Feudal System. Filacanevo, Pietro, castellan, 98. Filiasi, Jacopo, conte, Memorie sto-
riche de' Veneti, 10 #, n n, 12 ?i. Finlay, George, History of Greece,
&c, 37, 60. Fiumi uniti, 5. Flaminian Road, the, 7. Flanders, 58.
Flanders, count of. See Baldwin. ' Flemings ', the, 58, 107. Fontana, Galdano, 12 n, 109. Fornaris, 40. Foscarini, Vidal, 112.
INDEX
141
Foscolo, Leonardo, 59. Fotheringham, J. K., Genoa and the
Fourth Crusade, 16 «, .44 «, 53 «i
59 ;j, 81 n. Fradello, Nicolo, 112. France, 11, 24, 76. Francho, Piero, 112. Fraschia, 16, 17, 51, 89,98. Frederick I, Barbarossa, emperor,
14, 20, 29.
Gaeta, 24.
Gafforio, Genoese pirate, 16, 18.
Galerius, emperor, 8.
Galla Placidia, empress, 6, 8.
Gallina, Alberto, 44, 45 n, 86 n.
Gallipoli. See Callipolis.
Genoa, 21, 22, 29, 32, 34, 35, 39, 44, 45 «, 5i> 52, 76, 82, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 91, 105, 106, no, 112, 117, 123, 124; archbishop, 40; cathedral, 30, 40 ; Church of Dominican Order, 40 ; commerce, 16, 23, 24; piracy, 16, 17, 18, 19, 31, 41, 54, 98, 108 ; relics, 30 ; treaty, 20.
George, duke of Ravenna, 5.
Gerland, E., Geschichte des latei- nischen Kaiserreiches, 22, 24 n,
25 », 34 «, 35. 37»4S«-
Gerland, E., Neue Quellen zur Ge- schichte, 47 n.
Gerola, Cav. G., La Dominazione genovese in Creta, 26 n, 51, 52, 53, 54 n, 55, 81, 82, 83 », 84 n, 85 n, 86, 87 n, 89 n, 93 n, 99 *.
Gerola, Cav. G., Monumenti veneti, &c, 17 n, $in, 82.
Gesta Henrici II et Ricardi I, 18 n.
Gfrorer, A. F., Byzantinische Ge- schichten, 10 n.
Ghisi (Ghesi, Gisio, Gizi), Andrea,
57.58,59, 107,113. Ghisi (Ghesi, Gisio), Geremia (Giro-
lamo), 57, 58, 59, 107. Gibbon, Edward, Decline and Fall
of the Roman Empire, 23 n. Giberto, 33 n, 107. Ginanni, conte Francesco, Istoria
delle Pinete Ravennati, 5. Giorgio, S., castle. See Crete ; church.
See Churches. Giovanni, bishop of Olivolo, n. Girardi, family, 76. Giudici. See Offices and Titles.
Giustiniani, Pietro (Zustignan, Piero), 58, 59, 107 ; family, 58 n, 76.
Glanchoni, Simon di, 12 n, 109.
Gloria, A., Deputazione Veneta, 7.
Gori, 7.
Governador. See Offices and Titles.
Gozadini, family, 76.
Grabutis. See Naxos.
Gradenigo, Giovanni (Zuan), 54, 55, 81, 112.
Gradenigo, Marco, 112.
Grado (Nova Aquilegia), patriarchs, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9.
Grasso, Guglielmo, count of Malta, 44.
Greal, the San (Sacro Catino), 30.
Great captain. See Offices and Titles.
Grede. See Crete.
Grillo, Miles., 69.
Grimaldi, J. G., 'icrropia t^p Na|ou,
60, 61 #, 69, 70, 73, 76, 77, 78, 79,
122 ; family, 76. Grimaldi (Grymaldes),Philippos, 122. Grisolera, 10. Gritti, Giovanni, 99. Guglielmo, marquises of Montferrat.
See Montferrat. Guillaume of Champlitte (Champlit),
«3-
Guy of Lusignan, king of Jerusalem, 24.
Hagia. See Naxos.
Hagion Pneuma. See Naxos.
Hagiostephanitae, Theotokes, 95 ;
family, 92. Halberstadensis, Anonymus, 18 n. Halmyros, 19, 36. Hasluck, F. W., Depopulation in the
Aegean, &c, 74 n. Headlam, C, Venetia and Northern
Italy, 6 n. Hebriaces. See Naxos. Henry of Flanders, regent of Romania,
afterwards emperor, 24, 45, 49, 50,
60, 61, 67, 97, 108, 113, 116, 119,
120, 121. Henry of Valenciennes, 25 n, 60. Henry VI, Holy Roman emperor,
24. Heraclea (Candiana, Cita Nuoua,
CittaNuoua,Cittanuova,Cittanova,
Civitas Nova, Erachliana, Eracli-
ana, Nova Civitas, Realiana citta),
1, 2, 3, 9, 10, 11, 109. Heraclius (Heracleo), emperor, n n,
109.
142
INDEX
Herinus, St. See Santorin. Herodotus, 114 m. Hetera Argia. See Naxos. Hetero Aplyci. See Naxos. Heyd, W., Histoire du Commerce
du Levant, 16 n, 2372, 36 n, 37,
48 /z. Hierapetra. See Crete. Historia ducum Veneticorum, 47 ?i,
48 n, 51 n, 52 n, 83 n, 88. Hodgkin, Dr., Italy and her Invaders,
6 n. Hodgson, F. C, Early History of
Venice, 2 n. Holy Land, the (Palestine), 24, 30. Honorius III, pope, 121. Hopf, Carl, Chroniques Greco-Ro- manes, 1 n, 22 n, 58 n, 59 n, 68. Hopf, Carl, Geschichte der Insel
Andros, 50 «, 59, 60 n, 69. Hopf, Carl, Geschichte Griechen-
lands, &c, 13, 14, 17, 24 «, 25 ?z,
27 », 37, 41 «, 48 «, 59, 83, 9o, 93 «>
97 ni 99 ?z, IOO« Hopf, Carl, Ghisi, 58. Hopf, Carl, Giustiniani, 58. Hopf, Carl, Nachlass, 58 n, 63, 66 n. Hopf, Carl, Urkunden, &c, 60 n,
67 n, 98 «, 100 n. Hopf, Carl, Veneto-byzantinische
Analekten, 58, 59. Hugh, count of St. Pol, 20 n. Hungary, 121. Hyperpers. See Money.
Ialle. See Naxos.
Ilgen, Theodor, Markgraf Conrad
von Montferrat, 26, 27 n. Imperiale, Cesare, 24 n. Incisa, marquises of, 24. Innocent III, pope, 39, 40, 45, 46, 51,
54, 74, n6, 119. Interdict, 40. Ionian Sea, the, 49. Ionitsa (Jean), Vallachian prince, 44,
57, 120. Ios(Nio), 59, 68, 78, 116. Ipato, Ortodoxio, 10 n. Ireland, 58, 107. Isaac II, eastern emperor, 19, 21,
47- Isle, Manassier de 1', 32, 33. Istigo, Iacomo, 112. Iustignan, Iacomo, 112.
Jacopo of Acqui, 29, 30.
Janus, god, 12.
Janus (Ianus), legendary king of
Padua, 10, 109. Jerusalem, 24, 106. Jesolo (Exulum), 3, 9, 10 n. Joan I, queen of Naples, 47 n. Joannes. See Montferrat, Raynero of. John, St., 114, 115. John Comnenus, eastern emperor,
77- John Doukas Vatatzes, emperor of
Nicaea, 101. John, the Abbot, patriarch of Aqui-
leia, 3. John the Deacon, 9, 10 n, 11. John IV, pope, 10 n. Jordana, legendary empress, 29, 30. Jordanes, Getica, 4, 6. Jorga, N., Byzantine Empire, 44 n. Judges. See Offices and Titles. Justinus, 7.
Kalebrisino, Dimitrio, 11.
Kjari (Chilari, Conchilari, Conchi
Latica, Concilani), 36, 37. Konitza (Canisia, Cavisia, Nisia), 36,
37- Konrad II, emperor, 5 n. Kretschmayr, Heinrich, Geschichte
von Venedig, 10 n, 20 n, 23 n, 25 n,
31 n, 33 *•
Lacos. See Naxos.
Lampardia. See Lombardy.
Languedoc, 76.
Lascaris, Theodore, emperor of Ni- caea, 56, 57, 65, 66, 68, 78, 101, 102.
Lastre (Lastra), 64, 65, III.
Lebinthus, 37.
Legati. See Offices and Titles.
Lemnos (Limni, Stalimene), 36, 59, 107.
Lenel, Walter, Die Epochen, &c., 46 n.
Lesbos (Mitilini), 36.
Levant, the, 16, 19, 39, 54, 107, 117.
Liber Iurium, 40 n, 45 n, 86 n.
Liber Pontificalis, Ravenna, 4.
Liber Pontificalis, Rome, 7 n.
Lichtle, Ignace, Description de Pile de Naxos, 42, 60, 69, 71, 73, 75» 76,77, 78.
Licinius, 8.
Ligurians, 23.
INDEX
143
Limni. See Lemnos.
Litta, Pompeo, Celebri Famiglie
Italiane, 58 n. Livius Salinator, Marcus, 12. Livy, 12.
Lombard party, the, 3. Lombards, the (Aap-napdoL, AopTrupdoi,
lonbardi), 10, 23, 55, 58, 107, no. Lombardy (Aap7rap8ia), 23, 39.
Aoyyifiapbia, 23 71.
Longo, Giacomo, 85, 89. Lopadi, 36. Loredano, family, 76. Louis, count of Blois, 32, ^3, H3- Louis VII, king of France, 27. Luceoli (Candianum, Cantiano), vil- lage, 7. Lugnian, Nicolo, 1 1 2. Lusignan, Guy of. See Guy.
Macedonia, 25 n, 32, 37, 113.
Magno, Stefano, Annali Veneti, 43, 53, 58 n, 59 n, 60, 62, 64 n, 65, 85, 91, 95 n ; Cronaca Magno, 14, 62 11.
Maille, Pierre. See Pescatore, Enrico.
Mainz, archbishop Christian of, 26.
Malamocco, 1.
Malatesta, family, 76.
Malta (Maltta), count of. See Pesca- tore, Enrico.
Manfroni, Cav. Camillo, Le relazioni fra Genova, &c, 19 n, 44 n.
Manuel Angelus, nephew of Alexius 111,24.
Manuel, eastern emperor, 20, 26, 27, 28, 33, 121.
Marathos. See Naxos.
Marcello, count of Treviso, I1 11, 109.
Marches, the, 7.
Margaritone of Brindisi, sea-robber,
17. Maria, Sta., churches of. See
Churches. Maria, princess of Constantinople,
27, 28, 29. Marini, Gaetano, Papiri diplomatici,
7, 8*. Mark's, St., church. See Churches. Marks. See Money. Markward, seneschal, 24. Marucchi, H., Monumenta Papyracea
Latina, 8 n. Mary, empress of Romania, 119, 120. Mary of Antioch, empress, 27. Mastropetro, Marin, 112. Mastropiero, Orio, doge, 2.
Mastrorso, Piero, 112. Maura, Santa, 58, 107. Maurommates (Mabrommates), An-
tonios, 122. Mazoyli, family, 9. Mediterranean, the, 54. Megaducha (Megadiua). See Offices
and Titles. Megalaes petraes. See Naxos. Megale Bigla. See Naxos. Melanaes. See Naxos. Melidissa, 10 n. Melos (Melius, Milo), 57, 59, 68, 78,
107, 116. Memo, Tribuno, 112. Menke, Spruner-, Hand-Atlas, 36,
37, 38 n. Meole. See Myconos. Mese. See Naxos. Messenia, ports of, 18. Methone (Modon), 18, 31, 36, 39,
48 n, 59«, 81, 82 n, 108, in, 112. Mezentius, 12. Michael, St., monastery, 7. Michael Angelus, despot of Epirus,
18. Michele, Zuan, duke of Crete, 99. Michiel, Pietro (Piero), 47, 48, 49,
54, 55,60, 112. Michiele (Michiel, Michiell), Do-
menico (Domenego, Domenigo),
53 *, 58,59, 107, 112. Michieli, Domenico, doge, 18 11. Micra Argia. See Naxos. Miklosich et Miiller, Acta et Diplo-
mata Graeca Medii Aevi, 18, 23 n. Milan, 23, 37. Miliolus, Albertus, 28. Milisino, Michael, 99. Milisino, Theodorus, 99 ; family, 100. Miller, W., The Latins in the Levant,
18, 31 »» 33 «» 34 »i 38 «, 41 », 46 »,
59, 60, 63, 68 n, 81 n, 102 n. Milopotamos. See Crete. Mirabello. See Crete. ( Misti ' (Venetian archives), 58 n. Mitilini. See Lesbos. Mittarelli, G. B., Annales Camaldu-
lenses, 7. Modene, Raimond de, family, 76. Modon. See Methone. Molmenti, P., Venice, 10, 14 n. < Monacis, Laurentius de, Chronicon,
&c, 50 n, 52 n, Sin, 84 n, 85, 87,
88, 91, 92 «, 93 n, 94, 95 n, 98 n,
ggn, 100.
144
INDEX
Monasteries. St. Michael in Candi-
ana, 7 ; St. Severus in Classe, 5. Money, 32 n, 86, 87, no; aspra, 77,
122 ; ducats, 80, 124 ; hyperpers,
31, 33, 35 5 marks, 20, 33, 34, 39,
40, 67, 97, 105. Monforte. See Crete. Montferrat, Agnes of. See Agnes,
empress. Montferrat (Mon fera, Monferra,
Monferra, Monferrat), Boniface.
marquis of, afterwards king of
Thessalonica. See Boniface. Montferrat, Bonifacio IV, marquis
of, 29. Montferrat, Conrad of, king of
Jerusalem. See Conrad. Montferrat, Guglielmo, marquis of,
father of Boniface, 26, 27, 29, 33. Montferrat, Guglielmo of, son of
Boniface, 24. Montferrat, Judith, marchioness of,
105. Montferrat, Raynero of (Joannes)
(Caesar), 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 34 n. Montferrat, marquisate, 23, 24. Montone, river, 6. Morea, the. See Peloponnese. Morosini, Antonio, Cronaca Veneta
of, 63,65^,67, 83 n. Morosini, Tomaso, patriarch of
Venice, 48, 52. Morxini, Aluixe, 112. Moslems, the, 45. Mparalzes, Stais, 122. Mpargiames, 122. Muralt, Edouardde, Essai de Chrono-
graphie, &c, 28 n. Murzuphlus. See Alexius V. Musella, river, 99. Myconos (Meole, Miconi), 59, 107,
113.
Myrsine. See Naxos.
Nachra, 109.
Nauazoxo, Zuan, 112.
Nauplia, 58.
Navagiero, Andrea, Storia della Re-
pubblica, &c, 36,49, 52, 59 «, 60 n,
85, 88, 92 n, 94 n. Navigaioso (Nauagoioso, Nauigoioso,
Navigajoso), Filocalo (Filippo,
Filocali, Filocarus, Philocalo), 57,
59, 107. Navigaioso, Leonardo, 86.
Naxos (Dionysia, Naxe, Nechesia, Nichusia, Nicosia, Nicsia, Nisia, Nissia, Strongili), 31, 36, 37, 38, 40, 44, 57, 60, 62, 64, 66, 67, 76, 78, 102, 106, 107, no, in, 113, 114, 115, 119, 121, 122, 123, 124. Aboliane (Aboliantis), 122, 123. Agiasso (Hagiaso), 114, 122, 123. Aimamas (Hagios Mammas), 43,
72, 78, 123. Amelatheiu, fief, 123. Amomaxe, fief, 123. Anacia, fief, 123. Apalire (Apaliri, Castro- Apalire,
Castro t'Apaliru, Paleo Kastro,
Paleon-Oros, Paliri), 19, 42, 43,
66,70,79, 115. Apanocastro (Epanocastro), 71 , 78,
79, 123-
Aplyci, fief, 123.
Archatos, fief, 123.
Argia, fief, 123.
Bothroe, fief, 123.
Calistoechia, fief, 1 23.
Cana, fief, 123.
Cechiae (Cechries), fief, 123.
Ceramote, fief, 123.
Chaladri, fief, 123.
Charadra, fief, 123.
Cheimaros, fief, 123.
Cinedaros, fief, 123.
City: borgo (burgo), 71, 75, 78; castro, 70, 71, 74, 75, 103, 115, 116, 123 ; cathedrals, 43, 72, 74, 75, 78, 103, 116, 123; Dia, 79, 123; Neochori (Neochorio), 71,
75- Comiace, fief, 123. Coracia, fief, 123. Damarionas, fief, 123. Driagatha, 114.
Drymalia (Drymalaea), 78, 123. Drys, fief, 123. Families, noble, 76. Feudal System, 43, 68, 69, 72, 73,
75, 76, 77> n6, 122, 123. Grabutis, fief, 123. Hagia, fief, 123. Hagia Cyriace, fief, 123. Hagion Pneuma, fief, 123. Hagios Demetrios, fief, 123. Hebriaces (Ebriaces), fief, 43, 122,
123. Hetera Argia, fief, 123. Hetero Aplyci, fief, 123. Ialle (Tali), fief, 122, 123.
INDEX
145
Naxos {continued) :
Lacos, fief, 123.
Language, 79, 124.
Marathos, fief, 123.
Megalaes petraes, fief, 123.
Megale Bigla, fief, 122, 123.
Melanaes, fief, 123.
Mese, fief, 123.
Micra Argia, fief, 123.
Myrsine, fief, 123.
Pachys, altar of St., 78.
Palati (Bacchus) island, 71, 79, 114, 115, 123.
Panermo (Panormos), 114, 123.
Phanare, fief, 123.
Phanilia, fief, 123.
Philotes, fief, 123.
Phlerio, fief, 123.
Photodotes, fief, 123.
Polichne (Polychni), fief, 122, 123.
Potamia, 43, 72.
Potamides, 41, 65, 102, 114, 115.
Rhache, fief, 120.
Scelos, the (Oscelos), fief, 122, 123.
Sciponoe, fief, 123.
Sideropetra, fief, 122, 123.
Stylida (Stilida), fief, 122, 123
Syagrion (Siagrion), fief, 122, 123.
Symerones, fief, 123.
Tribunal, 79, 80, 124.
Tripos, fief, 122, 123.
Xerocampos, fief, 123. Naxos, duchy of. See Archipelago,
duchy of. Nechesia. See Naxos. Nefin, castle of, 45 n. Negropont. See Euboea. Neochori. See Naxos : City. Nestorius, 8. Nicetas Acominatus Choniates,
Historia, 17, 19, 23, 27, 28, 51,
S3- Nichusia. See Naxos. Nicolo, S. See Crete. Nicosia. See Naxos. Nicsia. See Naxos. Nigropons. See Euboea. Nio. See Ios. Nisia. See Konitza. Nisia. See Naxos. Nissia. See Naxos. Noah, 12.
Nova Aquilegia. See Grade Nova Civitas. See Heraclea.
Odoacer (Odovacar), 4.
P 2961
Offices and Titles (other than eccle- siastical) :
Armador, 53 ft, 112. Avvogadore del comune, 46, 54. Camarlingo, 46.
Capitanio (capetanio, chapetanio, chapettanio, chapitanio), 85, 87,
88, 89, 90. 108, 109, no, in, 112, 113; gran capitan (ntyas Kaneravios), 80, 124.
Castellan, 59 n, 80, 97, 98, 99, 108,
124. Cavaliere grande, 13. Chancellor (ypciftarevs), 80, 124. Comes domesticorum, 8. Conestabile, 46. Conseruador, 108. Consiglieri (counsellors), 46, 80,
90, 124. Consoli (consuli, consuls), 12 n, 17,
46, 109. Curialis, 8. Custodi, 108. Decurio, 8. Doge, passim. Dominatore (dominador), 46, 47,
48, 55,87, no. Duke (of Crete), 35, 72, 85, 87, 88,
89, 90, 92, 96, 98, 99, 100, 103, 104, 105, no, in, 117.
Duke, Grand (admiral of the empire, megadiua, megaducha),
57, 59, 108- Exarch, 7.
Giudice del comune, 14, 46, 47. Giudici (judges), 46, 79. Governador, 88, 108, 116, 118. Legati, 46.
Patroni delle navi, 13 n, 15. Podesta, 18, 24, 40, 46, 47, 48, 50,
54,55- Primates, 1. Protosebastos, 28. Rettore (rector, retor), 17, 50, 61,
85,88, in. Seneschal, 24. Sopracomiti (sopachomiti) delle
galie, 13 ?i, 14, 15, 53, 54, 81,
112. Tachirizes, 76, 122. Tercier, 33 n. Treasurer, 80, 124. Tribunes, 1, 3, 10. Vicecomiti, 46. Olivolo, bishops of, 3, 9, II. Oreos, 36.
146
INDEX
Oria, Jacopo d', 40.
Origine delle famiglie nobili venete,
10. Oscelos. See Naxos. Otobon, 24 n. Otto I, emperor, 5, 12 n. Otto III, emperor, 12 n. Otto, son of Frederick Barbarossa, 14.
Pachys, St., altar of. See Naxos. Pactum Adrianopolitanum, 55. Padarenus, river, 5. Padua (Chandian, Padoa, Pattauia),
10, 109. Palaeocastro. See Crete. Palati, island. See Naxos. Paleo Kastro. See Naxos : Apalire. Paleon-Oros. See Naxos : Apalire. Palestine. See Holy Land, the. Paliri. See Naxos : Apalire. Pane, Ogerio, Annales, 24 n, 31 n,
39 nj 45 ni 51, 84 n, 86 n> 98 n. Panermo. See Naxos. Parma, 9. Paros (Paris, Parius), 57, 59, 68, 78,
107, 116. Particiaci, family, 9. Participazio, Michiel, 10 n. Patmos, 59, 114. Patriarchs, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9. Patroni delle navi. See Offices and
Titles. Pattauia. See Padua. Patto di Cittanova, 2. Paulinus, 8. Paulus Diaconus, Historia Lango-
bardorum, 4. Pavia, 9, 23. Pears, Sir Edward, The Fall of
Constantinople, 23. Pegoraro of Verona, 33 n. Pegues, abbe, Histoire du volcan de
Santorin, 60. Pelagius, nuncio, 119, 120. Peloponnese, the (Morea, the), 18,
22, 25, 58, 107, 108, ill, 113,
119. Pentollo, Nicolo, 112. Persia, 114. Pescatore (Pescador), Enrico (Rigo),
count of Malta (Petrus Mail, Pierre
Maille, le Pescheur, comte de
Mailloc), 16, 17 n, 44, 51, 54, 56,
81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89,
92, no, in, 117, 118, 119, 124. Pesolos. See Tiepolo, J.
Peter Damian, St., 7.
Peter, feasts of St., 97 n.
Peter of Courtenay, count of Auxerre,
afterwards emperor of Romania,
67, 98, 121, 122. Petrus, n.
Phanare. See Naxos. Phanilia. See Naxos. Phantaces, 122.
Philip, king of the Romans, 20, 24. Philotes. See Naxos. Phlerio. See Naxos. Pholegandros (Policandro, Polycan-
dros), 59,69, 7S, 116. Photodotes. See Naxos. Piave, river, 9. Pineta (Pinetum), 4, 6. Pinton, Pietro, Bollettino, &c, 7 n. Piove, 7. Piracy, 16, 17, 18, 19, 31, 36, 39, 40,
43, 44, 45, 50, 52, 54, 56, 57, 73, 78,
81, 86, 98, 103, 107, 108, 113, 123. Pisa, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 39,
48 n. Pixani, Ruzier. See Premarino, Rug-
giero. Po, river, 24.
Podesta. See Offices and Titles. Pola, 48 n.
Polacro, Cape, 18, 52. Polani, Giacomo, 108. Polano, Petro, 59 n. Policastro. See Crete. Polichne. See Naxos. Pollani, Nicolo, 112. Polycandros. See Pholegandros. Popillia, Via, 7. Porco (Portus), Guglielmo, 39. Porco, Ogerio, 24. Porco, Rubaldo, 24. Porsenna, 'Lucio', 12. Porto Fuori, 5. Porto Venere, 24, 40. Portus Caesaris (Classe), 6. Potamia. See Naxos. Potamides. See Naxos. Pound weight, 39 n. Premarin, Iacomo, 112. Premarino (Pixani, Premarin), Rug-
giero (Rinieri, Ruzer, Ruzier), 48,
52, 53, 54, 56, S3, 85, 108, 109,
112. Prespa, lake, 37.
Primates. See Offices and Titles. Protosebastos. See Offices and
Titles.
INDEX
147
Ouerini, Anzolo, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90,
~ no.
Ouerini (Quirini), Domenico (Do-
menego, Dominique), 96, 104, 112,
118, 119. Querini, Paolo, duke of Crete, 98, 99,
104, 105. Quirini, Giovanni, 59.
Rafael, 108. Ragusa, 48. Ramnusius (Rannusio, Rhamn.),
Paulus, De Bello Costantinopoli-
tano, 13 n, 36, 113 m. Raphael, St., church of. See
Churches. Ravenika, parliaments of, 60. Ravenna, 4, 7, 8, 9, n n ; archbishop
of, 6 ; topography, 4, 5, 6. Raynero of Montferrat. See Mont-
ferrat. Realiana citta. See Heraclea. Rectors. See Offices and Titles. Refutatio Cretae, 26, 29, 31. Regesta Chartarum Italiae, 5 n. Relics, 30 ft, 39, 40. Reparatus, 7. Retimo. See Crete. Rhache. See Naxos. Rhaedestus, 36. Rhamnus oleoides Lin., 43. Rhodes, 86. Rialto (Rivus Altus), 1, 3, 9, 10, n,
12. Riant, count, Exuviae Sacrae, 18 n,
39.*;
Rimini (Arimano,Ariminum,Rimani),
3, 4, 8, 9, 109. Robert, emperor of Romania, 67, 98,
100. Robert of Torigni, 27, 28. Rocca, Mme. della, 69, 122 ; family,
76. Roche, lords de la (Ruosa, counts
della), 58, 107. Roche, Otto (Othon) de la, 81 n, 113. Rodd, Sir Rennell, The Princes of
Achaia, 23 n, 25 n, 34 «, 37. Roger, king of Sicily, 18. Romagnolese, 55.
Romania, 33, 41, 45, 46, 47, 48, III. Romania, barons of, 45, 60. Romanin, Samuele, Storia di Venezia,
2*, 14, 15- Romans, Philip, king of. See Philip. Rome, 8, 79, 121, 123.
Romuald, St., 7. Ronco, river, 6. Rossi, G. B. di, Inscriptions Christi-
anae Romae, 8 n. Ruosa, counts della. See Roche,
de la.
Sabellicus, M. Antonius, Rerum
Venetarum, &c, 49, 113. Sacerdoti, A., Le colleganze, &c,
59 «• St. Sophia, cathedral. See Churches. Saladin, 29, 30. Salamis (Culuris), 36. Salamon, Nicolo, 112. Salimbene, 28. Salonica. See Thessalonica. Salvore, 15. Samos, 36.
Samothrace (Samandrakio), 36. Sangiorgio, Benvenuto, Cronica, 26 n,
30 n. Sanguineti, A., and Bertolotto, G., Nuova serie, &c, 18 n, 19 n, 44 n. Santorin (St. Herinus, Santirin, Sentorini, Thera), 57, 59, 78, 107, 116. Sanudo (Sanuto, Sanutus), Angelo, son of Marco Sanudo, 66, 67, 68, 97, 98, 100, 102, 119, 120, 121, 122, 124, 125. Angelo, 67. Bernardo, 13, 15. Candian, 53 n, 112. Candianus, 2. Giovanni, 2.
Giovanni (son of the conqueror), 68. 'Jacomo', 88.
Leonardo (Lunardo), 13, 67. Marco Costantinopolitani, grand- father (?) of conqueror, 1, 12, 13, 14. Marco (Macho, Marc, Marcho, Marino), conqueror of the Archi- pelago: ancestry, 1, 12, 13, 14; commands galley, 14, 15, 53, 55 » Fourth Crusade, 15, no; treaty of Adrianople, 32, 33, 35, 105, 109, 113; first expedition to Naxos, 41, 42, 43, 44, 47, 106, 107, no, 113, 115; returns to Venice, 44, 45, 47, 48, 106; giudice del comune, 47 ; elector of doge, 48, 107 ; company for conquest of Archipelago, 49, 51, 56, 57, 58, 59 60, 107 ; at Con-
148
INDEX
Sanucio (Marco) {continued) :
stantinople, 55 ; duke of Archi- pelago, 60, 61, 107, 116; con- quest of Smyrna, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, III ; marriage, 66, 67, 68, 110 ; organization of Duchy, 68. 69, 70, 71, 72, 73. 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 116, 122, 123, 124; in charge of Crete (?), 85, 87, 88, 89, 109, no, in ; first expedition to Crete, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 104, 105, 108, ill, 117, 118, 119, 124; second ex- pedition to Crete, 91, 100, 101 ; expedition to Thessalonica, 97, 98, 119, 120, 121 ; death, 101,
102, 122, 124 ; character, 102,
103, 122.
Marco II, 60 n, 67, 78, 98, 100,
102, 125. Marino, Vite de' duchi, &c, 17 n, 52, 53, 62, 64, 66, 67 n, 68, 85, 89, 94. Marino, Torsello : Epistolae, 1 1 3 m ; Istoria, &c, 1, 13 ; Secreta fide- lium crucis, 1, ll$m. Pietro, 13. Rodolfo, 15. Stefano, 95, 118, 119. Zaccaria, 15.
Family, 1, 2, 10 n, n n, 12, 66, 67, 68, 72, 73, 76, 1 10 ; origin of name, 12. Saracens, the, 29, 30. Sauger, R., Histoire nouvelle, &c, 14, 41, 43, 44 n, 56, 61, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 78, 91, 94^, 97, 98, 100, 102, 113. Savj-Lopez, P., Bausteine, &c, 18 n. Scale, Giacomo Agaddi dalle, 86. Scelos, the. See Naxos. Schaube, A., Handelsgeschichte, &c, 16 n, ign, 20 n, 23 n, Sin, 33 n,
39 n, 59 n, 97 n. Scheggia, 7.
Schiati, Raphael, archbishop, 74, 75. Sciathos (Schiati, Schiatus), 57, 59,
107. Sciponoe. See Naxos. Scopelus (Scopelo, Scopole, Scopu-
lus), 57,59, i°7, 113. Scordili, Joannes, 98. Scordili, Sevasto, 93, 94, 1 1 7, 1 1 8, 1 19. Scordili, Stefano, 95 ; family, 100. Scyros (Scheria, Schiro, Skiro), 36,
57, 107, 113.
Selvo, Domenico, doge, 12. Seneschal. See Offices and Titles. Seriphos, 58, 59. Serra, marquis, Storia, &c, 16, 17,
3i,32,39- Sevasto, Nicold, 95. Severus, patriarch, 3, 8, 9. Severus, St. See Monasteries. Sfachia, 99 n. Sforza Castri, family, 76. Sicardo of Cremona, 28. Sicily, 24, 51. Sicinos, 59, 69. Sideropetra. See Naxos. Sidonius Apollinaris, 8. Simone, in. Simonsfeld, H., Neues Archiv, 4 ny
11 n. Siphnos (Siphanto), 59, 69, 78, 116. Sirocco, the, 114. Sithia. See Crete. Sivrito. See Crete. Skiro. See Scyros. Smyrna (Alesimine, Alesmine, Alexi-
mire, la Smira, Le Simire, Le
Smire, le Smires, le Smirne, Le
Smirre, lo Smire, 61, 62, 63, 64,
65, no, in. Sollonich. See Thessalonica. Sommaripa (Sommerive), Antonios,
122. Sommaripa, Izortzes, 122. Sommaripa, Philippos, 122; family,
76. Sophia (Soffia), St. See Churches. Sopracomiti. See Offices and Titles. Soranto, Marin, duke of Crete, 99. Soranzo, Zuan, 112. Souranzo, Piero, 112. Spada, Cape La. See Crete. Spinalonga. See Crete. Sporades, the, 37. Stalimene. See Lemnos. Storlato, Giovanni, duke of Crete,
99, 100, 101. Strongili. See Naxos. Strovilia Peucodis, 4. Stylida. See Naxos. Suda. See Crete. Surito. See Crete. Syagrion. See Naxos. Sycinos, 78.
Symerones. See Naxos. Syra, 59, 69. Syracuse, 84 n. Syrian coast, the, 45 n.
INDEX
149
Tachirizes. See Offices and Titles. Tafel, G. L. F., Symbolae Criticae,
36 n, 37, 61. Tafel, G. L. F., and Thomas, G. M.,
Urkunden, &c, 13 n, 20 n, 21 n,
26 n, 33 n, 36, 37, 46 n, 47 n, 48 n,
50 n, 54 n, 55 «, 57 «, 67, 90 «, 91,
92 tz, 93 71, 97, 99 ?z, 105. Tali. See Naxos : Ialle. Tartarus, river, 89. Temenos. See Crete. Tempe, 121.
Temple, Order of the, 39. Tenos (Thinas, Thine, Tines, Tinos),
36, 57, 59, ic-7> 113. Terciers. See Offices and Titles. Thebes, 58, 113. Theodore Angelus (Comnene) (Theo-
doro Comino), despot of Epirus,
afterwards emperor of Thessa-
lonica, 97, 106, 119, 121. Theodore Lascaris (Comero Lascari,
Theodoro), emperor of Nicaea, 56,
S7 n, 65, 66, 78, ic6, 107, no,
123. Theodoric (Theodericus, Theodori-
cus), king of the Ostrogoths, 4. Theophilactos, 122. Thera. See Santorin. Therasia, 59. Thessalonians, honour of, 27, 28, 31,
34 *•
Thessalonica (Sallonich, Salonica, Salonich, Saloniechi, Sollonich, Thessallonique, Thessalonique), 1 9, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 59 «, 97, 106, 109, 119, 120, 121.
Thessaly, 38 n, 113, 116, 119, 121.
Thinas. See Tenos.
Thrace, 32, 57, 121.
Tiepolo (Pesoios, Tepulo, Tiepollo, Ttiepollo, Ttiepolo), Jacopo (Ja- chomo, Jacomo), duke of Crete, 35, 72, 85, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 102, 103, 104, 105, 108, no, in, 117, 118, 119.
Tocchi (Toschi), family, 58, 107.
Toeche, Theodor, Jahrbiicher, &c, 24 n.
Tolosano, 28.
Tonisto (Tonison), Marco, 94, 1 18.
Tonisto, Nicolo, duke of Crete, 99 n.
Tonisto, Pietro, 99.
Toparchies, 79, 122, 123.
Torcello, 1.
Tournefort, J. P. de, Voyage into the
Levant, 75. Tradonico, Pietro, doge, n. Treasurer. See Offices and Titles. Treaties, 17, 19, 20, 21, 25 ?z, 31,
32 n, 33, 34, 35, 37, 44, 47, 49, 50,
51, 61, 93 71, 97 », 102. Treviso (Amorosa, Treuiso), II, 109. Tribunes. See Offices and Titles. Tribute-list, 77, 122. Tripoli, 45 71. Tripos. See Naxos. Troya, C, Storia dTtalia, &c, 3 n,
II 71.
Turkey, 22, 45, 74, 75, 103, in, 122. Tyre, 24, 45 n.
Udine, 3.
Valentinian III, emperor, 8.
Valesii, Anonymus, 4.
Vallachians, the, 57. Prince. See
Ionitsa. Valle Candiana. See Ravenna. Vaqueiras, Raimbaud de, 18 n. Varazze, Jacopo da, 30, 40, 84 ;z. Vatican, the, 6 ; library, 6, 8. Vaux, Pierre de (Pietro Vento),
24 7Z.
Veglo, Lello, 59 71.
Velglioni, Stefano, 112.
Venice, arms, 74 ; commerce, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 36,45, 50 ; comune,46«, 47«; laws, 79; Museo Civico, 63 ; patriarchate, 3 ; St. Mark's library, 61, 62, 63, 67, 104. See also Dorsoduro, Grado, Heraclea, Ma- lamocco, Olivolo, Rialto, Torcello. Also Churches.
Venier, Marco, 59; family, 59.
Vento, family, 24 », 25 71.
Vento, Pietro. See Vaux, Pierre de.
Vento (Vens), Pietro (Pieres), 24^,
25 n.
Verona, 23, 49, 57, 76, 109. Vetrano (Capouetrano, Veterani),
Leone (Leon) pirate, 17, 18, 52, 81,
108, 117. Via Caesarea Superior. See Ravenna. Via Popillia, 7. Viadro, Jacopo (Viaro, Giacomo),
marquis of Cerigotto, 50, 58, 59,
107 ; family, 59. Vicecomiti. See Offices and Titles. Victricius, 8. Vienna, 63.
i5°
INDEX
Vigouroux, Lastic de, family, 76. Villehardouin, Geoffroi de, 32, 33,
44, 113. Villehardouin, Geoffroi de, La Con- quete de Constantinople, 22/2, 25 n,
33, 45 ^ «3 m-
Visconti, Armanno, 44, 45 n.
Vituri, Andrea, III.
Vituri, Antuonio, 61, III.
Vituri (Vitturi) Chronicle, 61, 64,
83 n, 84 n, 85, 87, 88, 91, 93 n, 94 «,
in. Vituri, Nicoleto, retor, 85, 88, III.
William II, king of Sicily, 17. William of Tyre, 26 n, 27.
Xerocampos. See Naxos.
Yolande, empress of Romania, 121.
Zabarella, Giacomo, Tito Livio Pado-
vano, 12, 13, 14, 56. Zaffalonia. See Cephalonia.
Zancaruol, Gaspar, 86 n. See Codd.
Marc. It. vii. 323, 1274. Zante, 58, 107. Zara, 15, no. Zeno (Geno), Marino, podesta, 46,
47, 49, 50, 54, 55, 57- Zeno, Renier, 112.
Zerlentes, P. G., Bv{avTiaKrj emypa(j)r),
43 n, 72 n, 74 », 77 71. Zerlentes, P. G., rpa^tjuara 8ovko>i>, 68. Zerlentes, P. G., Am/nax'?, 71 «• Zerlentes, P. G., Na£ia vrja-os, 43, 77 11. Zia. See Ceos. Ziani, Paolo, 85, 88. Ziani, Pietro (Piero), doge, 41, 48, 50,
52^, 53, 54, 55, 56, 83 n, 85 «, 89,
90, 91, 93 n, 98 >z, 99 «, 107, 108,
109, no. Ziani, Sebastiano, doge, 2, 14. Zopollo, Nicolo, 112. Zorzi, Borttolo, 112. Zorzi, Grazian, 112. Zustignan, Piero. See Giustiniani,
Pietro.
Printed in England at the Oxford University Press