Back to Geocities

Back to Yahoo

Back to Homepage Annuario 2002

Appendix. Denominations attributed to the non-Venetian crusaders by the Venetian chroniclers

p. 111

Venetian and non-Venetian Crusaders in the Fourth Crusade,

According to the Venetian Chronicles' Tradition

Şerban Marin,

Romanian Institute of Humanistic

Culture and Research,

Venice

National Archives,

Bucharest

“On the Fourth Crusade, [...],

history has not achieved and

will never achieve a final answer.”*

It is unanimously accepted that the Venetian participation to the Fourth Crusade is a decisive element[1]. The dependence of the crusaders' transportation on the Venetian fleet, the deviations of the crusader army to Zara and then to Byzantium, the installment of a crusader state in Constantinople, all these consequences of this particular crusade were not to occur without the Venetian maritime and financial assistance. Condemning or, more rarely, appreciating the Venetians, the scholars have many times underlined this idea and moreover they have indicated Doge Enrico Dandolo as the auctor rerum of the events[2]. This image is somehow directly put in connection with the

p. 112

doge’s portrait suggested by Nicetas Choniates[3] or by Gunther of Pairis[4] and is also placed on the occasion of the elections on 1204[5].

The Byzantine author at least pictures the doge as follows:

“The doge of Venice, Enrico Dandolo, was not the least of horrors; a man maimed in sight and along in years, a creature most treacherous and extremely jealous of the Romans, a sly cheat who called himself wiser than the wise and madly thirsting after glory as no other, he preferred death to allowing the Romans to escape the penalty for their insulting treatment of his nation. [...]. Realizing that should he work some treachery against the Romans with his fellow countrymen alone he would bring disaster down upon his own head, he schemed to include other accomplices, to share his secret designs with those whom he knew nursed an implacable hatred against the Romans and who looked with an envious and avaricious eye on their goods. [...]”[6]

p. 113

It is not by chance that this description was at the origin of some scholars’ viewpoint, promoting the doge as the central character of the crusade and even considering that the Venetians had the conquest of Constantinople in intention since the very beginning[7].

The superior position of the doge is also specified by the Pope Innocent III, who, beside his fury against the “deviation” of the crusade and his accusations towards the Venetians, considers that:

“[...]. Praeterea, si paterfamilias domus excommunicationis sententia fuerit innodatus, a participatione ipsius familia excusatur. Licet ergo Dux Venetorum dominus navium, tanquam paterfamilias domus, in excommunicatione persistat, vos tamen, tanquam ipsius familia, dum in navibus ejus fueritis, ipsius excommunicatio non continget, et excusabiles eritis apud Deum, si, in excommunicatorum navibus existentes, cum dolore cordis sub spe poenitentiae excommunicatis ipsis communicaveritis, in quibus communionem eorum nequiveritis evitare. [emphasis mine]”[8]

From this perspective, it is to be quite facile to accuse the Venetians and their doge as being the ones who anticipated the entire evolution of the events, so that they are the first to be responsible. Beside the common sense consideration that “the conquest of Constantinople, to be sure, requires explanation, but not, for us, condemnation or excuse”[9], the point is not that the Venetians were the main beneficiaries of the Fourth Crusade. There were all the participants to have the possibility to take advantage of it, just that the Venetians discerned better how to use on a long term those benefits[10], while their partners did not. The explanation for these consequences does not rely in the supposed Venetians’ and Doge’s premonitions, but in their more practical way of being.

I am not to get involved in the historiography of the Fourth Crusade and in the matter of “the theory of accidents” and “the treason theory”[11]. I rather prefer to take

p. 114

refuge behind the more comfortable dictum stated by Achille Luchaire, that “la science a vraiment mieux à faire qu’à discuter indéfiniment un problème insoluble.”[12]

However, the Fourth Crusade's analysts have generally relied upon different perspectives (crusader, Byzantine, papal), so that they have studied almost exclusively the respective points of view. Proportionally, they have left the Venetian tradition attitude aside[13], considering that the later sources should not be taken into consideration and be exclusively regarded as propaganda.

Even Freddy Thiriet analyzes the Venetian chronicles exclusively on the basis of the contemporanousness with the 14^th-16^th centuries, and not of the precedent events[14].

Actually, the Venetian chronicles are generally rejected by the historians of the Fourth Crusade, being regarded suspiciously, on the simple reason that they are later sources. Anyhow, such a statement seems too simplistic. As J. K. Fotheringham specified a long time ago,

"it is a curious feature of Venetian history that it has to be reconstructed from statements made by authors several centuries after the events they record"[15].

On another occasion, Fotheringham many times quoted different Venetian later chronicles along with the contemporary sources, giving them the entire credit[16]. On his turn, Robert L. Wolff completed that:

p. 115

"[...] but even if the later narrative sources are left out of consideration, the contemporary documents as they have hitherto been known lend weight [...]. The later narrative sources thus may well reflect what the contemporary documents suggest [...]"[17].

Beside this, it should not be underestimated the possibility that the Venetian chroniclers researched and detected in the archives different documents that now could be lost. Referring to the chronicle Barbaro, Wolff considers that "[...] Daniele Barbaro, who, though writing in the sixteenth century, appears to have had access to authentic materials now lost"[18]. We should add that the documents at Archivio di Stato di Venezia are only partially studied by now.

However, there are not the modern historiography’s interpretations that interest here.

Indeed, we are confronted here by a well organized propaganda. However, the study of the reconstruction of the past events is not to be underestimated. It expresses the way in which the myths had been constructed and developed. That is why my investigation is supposed to analyze exactly this tradition that allowed the appearance of different legends. In other words, I am to make an attempt to get involved in the Venetian political mythology. We particularly deal with an event that represented a glorious moment in the Venetian history, that is the Fourth Crusade.

First and foremost, I am to emphasize the Venetian position inside of this particular crusade and its relationship with the other participants. The distinction between "crusaders / pilgrims / Franks etc" and Venetians in the Fourth Crusade has always been underlined[19]. It originated in crusaders'[20] and papal[21] works and was also retaken by the

p. 116

Venetian chroniclers. On the other side of the camp, the Byzantine Nicetas Choniates regarded both of them inside of one and the same category, the one of the "Latins"[22]. These three different optics simply reflect the three different positions of the main characters participating in the crusade. The distinction operated by the non-Venetian Western chroniclers is simply due to the fact that they reflect exclusively the knights' viewpoint, which considered the Venetians as simple allies and nothing more. On the opposite, the Venetian later chroniclers put the relationship in the reverse order. The third point of view, the one belonging to the Byzantine authors, does not involve into the distinction inside of the "enemies". Actually, this latter permits a more objective attitude concerning the Western participants to this crusade.

All these cases reflect the image of the other, operating the distinction between "us" and "them". For the non-Venetian crusaders, there are "we" (the knights), "they" (the Greeks) and "our friends" (the Venetians). For the Venetians, "we" (the Venetians), "they" (the Greeks) and "our friends" (the non-Venetian crusaders). It is only in the Byzantine case that there are only the two elements that could properly characterize the deep separation between "us" (the Greeks) and "them" (the Latins, including here the non-Venetians and the Venetians).

Conclusively, the tendency to reduce the Venetians to the simple condition of "crusaders' transporters" seems somehow too facile. The Venetians were crusaders. Indeed, whether the Venetians were to assist the Frenchmen only in the sense of providing ships, food, financial aid to them, we are to add that a crusader is not exclusively the one who fights against the ‘unbelievers’, but also the one who assures the material needs[23]. Once

p. 117

again, whether the Venetians were to fight exclusively on the sea, leaving aside the mainland military operations, we should mention that a crusader is not only the one that utilize the armor and the horse, but also the one that knows how to fight in a sea battle. Moreover, whether we add in the particular Venetian case the real fact that they also participated to the terrestrial confrontations in front of Constantinople, then we could conclude that, talking about Venetians during the Fourth Crusade, we talk about crusaders in the strict meaning of the word.

The Venetians were crusaders, and not only auxiliary forces, as they are named by the Count Riant[24].

Under these circumstances, the always blamed attack against Zara is nothing more than a real crusader act, since it was done in the favor of the crusader Venetians. Actually, a person becomes crusader since the moment when he takes the Cross in his hands, as a symbolic feature. Did Enrico Dandolo took the Cross in 1201? According to Villehardouin, he did it solemnly[25]. Indeed, the Marshal of Champagne proved to be an enthusiast of the doge and attempted by all means to defend the alliance treaty with the Venetians (actually, his treaty). Consequently, one could suspect him for a supposed privilegial attitude towards Venice. Nonetheless, it seems improbable that he was to invent the respective episode. Moreover, we are to attach that the ceremony of taking the cross by the doge is also mentioned by Robert of Clari[26]. It could be only this episode taken into consideration to demonstrate at least theoretically that the Venetians were crusaders, since the taking of the Cross is regarded as an “opération essentiellement religieuse”[27].

Concerning the modern historiography, the scholars who specify the respective episode do not involve in any explanation. Some of them, subdued to the conviction around the Venetian guilty, make some hironic appreciation regarding it. For instance, both Steven Runciman and Donald M. Nicol consider the taking of the Cross by the doge as being “ostentatiously”, while Louis Halphen adopts a hironic style, since the episode happened - according to Villehardouin and Clari - just before the capture of Zara[28]. The most of the scholars mention it only en passant[29], as if it has no implication on the subsequent events. It

p. 118

is illustrative that even one of the most determined defenders of the Venetian cause during the Fourth Crusade, that is Francesco Cerone[30] also does not mention the episode at all.

Still, could there be any difference between this ceremony utilized by the Frenchmen during the tournament at Ecry and the one operated in the Basilica of St Mark[31]?

On his turn, Donald Queller insists on the episode and makes an attempt to explain it[32], but it seems that he is somehow afraid to regard the Venetians as simple crusaders. The matter had been developed only by Roberto Cessi[33].

« Per questo impegno il governo veneto e i veneziani erano obbligati a più diretta partecipazione politica, oltre che militare, alla crociata. [...]. I veneziani, nell"organisme della crociata, non figuravano più soltanto quali vettori e compartecipi militari, ma quali crociati, ed in tale veste erano imegnati su più larga sfera, anche morale, con la presenza effettiva del doge Enrico Dandolo, anch"egli crociato. [...]. »

p. 119

Anyhow, both Cessi and Queller realize that the ceremony in St. Mark’s suddenly changed the Venetian status. Such an assertions, among others that contradict these ones, is only accidentally made by some other analysts[34].

The separation between the "crusaders" and the "Venetians" should be reconsidered. At least, it seems more appropriate to name the participants to the Fourth Crusade as Champenoise crusaders, Fleming crusaders, Venetian crusaders, Lombard crusaders, German crusaders, and so on[35].

Thus, the opinions that the Venetians provoked the “deviation” of the crusaders' route, that the crusaders became nothing more than Venetians' mercenaries, that the Venetians were the central element in a well organized plot, and all the other positions that definitely blame the Venetians are only myths, for the same simple reason that the Venetians were also crusaders.

On the contrary, the modern historiography seems to rather prefer the crusading vow of the Hungarian king[36], emphasizing and deploring his situation[37]. It seems that the Venetian ceremony of taking the cross is forgotten[38]. I dare to advance a non-academic question: who was “more” crusader, the Doge of Venice who completely fulfilled his contractual obligations, or the King of Hungary who did not prove to effectively accomplish his crusader vow? The study provided by James Ross Sweeney demonstrates that the King Emeric was not quite determined to practically participate to the crusade[39]. Consequently, Enrico Dandolo himself was right to write later to Innocent III that:

“[...]. Verum quia, ut dicebatur, in vestra erant protectione, quod ideo non credebam, quia non existimo vos, nec antecessores vestros, illos sub protectione recipere,

p. 120

qui crucem accipiunt tantum, ut eam portent, non etiam iter perficiant, propter quod peregrini solent crucem accipere, sed et alienta inveniant et injuste detineant, [...]”[40]

After these preliminary considerations, I am to return inside of the Venetian vision, coming back to a subjective point of view. Thus, the separation between the Venetiani and Francesi categories appears again.

I should specify that my analysis intends to comprise exclusively the general chronicles of the City of Venice, leaving thus aside those writings that particularly dealt with the Fourth Crusade, such as the ones provided by Paolo Ramusio[41], Andrea Morosini and the anonymous chronicler who wrote Storia della Conquista di Costantinopoli[42].

First, the denomination attributed to the non-Venetian crusaders differs to a certain extent from one codex to another. They are oltramontani, francesi, latini, pelegrini, or simply conti, baroni, nobeli, signori etc.

Consulting the appendix of this article, it could be observed that the Venetian authors oscilate between some ethnic denomination and some title ones, many times combining them.

Among the title denominations, there are some more often utilized, like Prencipi / Principi[43], Signori or Baroni[44], while others appear more seldom, such as Conti[45], Nobeli[46], Pelegrini[47], magnati[48], Cristiani[49], Domini[50], Collegati[51], Capitani[52], Crocciati[53] or the generic

p. 121

terms like la liga[54], armada Christiana[55], capi della liga[56] etc.

Concerning the ethnic denominations, it is to be noticed that the alternance Francesi / Galli is easily explainable by the language of the chronicles: Francesifor the ones written in Italian (medieval Venetian)[57], Galli for the ones in Latin[58], because of the archaization tendency. Meanwhile, there are many chronicles that introduce the particular denomination of Oltramontani[59], meaning "the ones beyond the mountains", sometimes transformed in Tramontani[60], with a different connotation, that is "the Westerners". The chronicle Savina combines the two senses in the expression of "Signori Oltramontani del Ponente", which is majoritary inside of the ethnic denominations. In the case of the chronicle Barbaro, it appears the denomination of "signori Oltramontani, parte Pedemontani" in the speech of Pantaleone Barbo, during the elections on 1204.

Despite the great number of referals to these Francesi / Oltramontani, some Venetian authors realize that the crusader army was not exclusively composed of Frenchmen. Some of them, indeed, mention the Italiani / Taliani[61] or even Latini[62]. This latter represents sometimes a simple archaic form for Italiani, but it is not utilized only by the chronicles in Latin. The Italian language authors also use it ad litteram, both as general denomination for the entire army and as a separate entity, regarded separated than the Francesi[63]. On a particular occasion, that is during the imperial elections on 1204, some

p. 122

chronicles also speak about Lombardi[64], in order to denominate the sustainers of the Marquis of Montferrat, in opposition with the Francesi / Oltramontani that followed Baldwin of Flanders.

Certainly, we canot regard the two kinds of denomination (title and ethnic ones) as being separated. There are different combinations between them. Still, some authors clearly prefer one of them to the other one's detriment. For instance, the chronicles Hist. Ducum [1.], Navagero [approached to 2.], Sabellico [3.], It. VII. 71 [approached to 4.], It. VII. 793 [9.], It. VII. 2572 [approached to 9.], category 10. (excepting Abbiosi) or Barbaro [approached to 11.] accentuates the title denominations[65], while category 8. and Abbiosi [10.] only specify the Francesi. In majority, it is still in use the combination between the two kinds of denomination.

In order to have an idea about the distortions operated in the Venetian chronicles regarding the non-Venetian crusaders, I also consider the mentioning of the Oltramontani's leaders as a necessity.

Relying upon the names given to the non-Venetian crusaders arriving in Venice, we are able to establish some distinct categories. Certainly, the delimitation operated by me does not present the far-reaching undertaking of Antonio Carile[66]. I also limited my investigation to the codices at the Marciana Library in Venice, adding one from the Library of the Querini Stampalia Foundation. In comparison with us, Carile did indeed promoted a far-reaching exploration of the Venetian codices throughout the world[67]. On my turn, I could add to the impressive list of the codices studied by Carile some others personally detected at Biblioteca della Fondazione Querini Stampalia in Venice, Biblioteca Civica in Padua [note] and some others from Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana and Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale in Rome, others than Carile investigated [note]. Also, many of those that belong to Marciana and are presented by me differ than the ones that Carile took into consideration by now [note: cu cele de care Carile nu s-a atins].

It is not in my intention to operate a new grouping of the codices, but just to find examples for the manner in which a particular event was presented.

p. 123

In a first instance, we present here the well-delimited episode of the crusaders' or of their ambassadors' arrival to Venice. Relying upon this criterion, we are to distinguish 11 major categories of chronicles.

In my investigation, I left aside the chronicle It. VII. 2555 that strangely ignores the events of the Fourth Crusade and reduce the period of the Doge Enrico Dandolo’s rule to six lines[68], although other periods of Venetian history are presented in detail.

1. Presenting the crusaders' arrival to Venice, a first category mentions Baldwin of Flanders, Louis of Blois, Thibault of Champagne, and Hugue of St. Pol, in this particular order[69]:

Hist. Ducum: 92	It. VII. 2571: 98a	It. VII. 2581: 86a
Preterea currentibus annis Domini 1201, mense Marcii 4 magnati potentes et nobiles, videlicet dominus Balduinus comes Flandrensis, dominus Alvisius de Bles, dominus comes de Campania, dominus comes de Sancto Paullo, nuntios suos Veneciam direxerunt, [...].	In questo tempo, corando lo MCCJ., del mese de Mazo, iiij nobel Conti delle parte de Franza, zoe messer Balduin Conte de Flanda [sic!], messer Alvise de Ples, messer lo Conte de Campagna e messer lo Conte de San Pollo suo nuncij destina a Viniesia, [...].	In questo tempo corando 1201, del mese de Mazo, 4 nobel Conti delle parte de Franza, zoe messer Balduin Conte de Flanda [sic!], messer Alvise de Bles, messer lo Conte de Campagna et messer lo Conte d' San Polo suo nuncij destina a Veniesia [...].

2. A second group of chronicles seems to be close to the first one. The difference between this category and 1. resides in the omission of the Count of St. Pol from the list. His presence would be only subsequently noticed by the chronicles Monacis and P. Dolfin, once with the integration of the Marquis of Monferrat in the projected expedition. Regarding Louis of Blois, the chronicle P. Dolfin considers him as being also Count of Vienne. The names of the characters that sent their envoys to Venice are the same as in Villehardouin[70]. Still, an influence of the Champenoise chronicler upon the 14^th century Venetian authors (A. Dandolo, Monacis) is out of question:

A. Dandolo: 276	Monacis: 134	P. Dolfin: 322a-322b
[Unio cum Francis in recuperacione Tere Sancte] Anno ducis decimo, nuncii Balduini comitis Flandrensis, Lodovici comitis Blesensis et Theobaldi comitis Trecenensis Veneciam accedentes, cum duce et Venetis pro recuperacione Ierusalem et sancti Sepulcri confederati sunt,	Anno Domini 1201. mense Aprilis Indictione quarta, Ducis vero Anno decimo in palatio Ducali Nuntii Balduini Comitis Flandrensis, Ludovici Comities Blesensis, & Thecliadi Comitis Trecensis confoederantur cum Duce, & Venetis pro	All'Anno X del Duce, fò in 1202, i messi de Balduino Conte di Fiandra e di Lodovico Conte di Vienna, Elbensis et Tibaldo Conte de Treceno, vegnando à Veniexia, feceno pacti e convention insieme col Duce e Venitiani per la recuperation de Terra Sancta

p. 124

[...].

recuperatione Jerusalem, & Sancti Sepulcri. [...].

di Jerusalem e del Sancto Sepulcro, [...].

The same characters are present in another chronicle, although the presentation of the events is somehow different:

It. VII. 796: 71b

Nel 1202, siando stado il predito doxe X annj nel suo dogado, el vene a Venexia ambaxadorj de Franza [...] per andar al aquisto dela Tera Santa; fo lij ditj ambaxadorj Balduin Conte de Fiandra, Lodovico Conte Blesensis et Tibaldo Conte Tre Cenensis.

The chronicle Navagero should also be compared with this particular category (especially with Monacis and P. Dolfin), taking the names of the participants into consideration. As a note, there is the mentioning of the Pope Innocent III involvement in the crusade:

Navagero: 980-981

Del 1201. Baldoini Conte di Fiandra, Teobaldo Conte Palatino, e Lodovico Conte di Bles, a persuasione d'Innocenzo Summo Pontefice, pigliato il segno della Croce fecero unione per passare in Asia alla ricuperazione di Terra Santa occupata i superiori anni dagl'infedeli. [...].

3. The third group includes those chronicles that leave aside the Boniface of Montferrat's later rejoining to the crusade and settle him since the very beginning in the action, together with the counts of Flanders and of St. Pol. Another particularity is the omission of the Count Louis of Blois from the enumeration.

It. VII. 2592: 28b	Sabellico: 172	Sanudo: 528
In detto tempo li Venetiani erano molto galgiarde le forze de loro et, esendo venuto la invernata, in Venetia, Bonifacio di Monfera et Baldovino di Fiandra et Enrico di Pauli Conti et li signori Aloborgi di Monfera, i quali erano per andar nel Asia contra Turchi a guerizar [...].	[1201. Christiani duces in Turcos moturi Venetias veniunt.] Nam verno ejus anni tempore Bonifacius Monferratensis, Baldoinus Flandriae, & Henricus Pauli Comites, & cum his Allobrogum & Montisferrati Ducem in Asiam adversus Turcos Sarracenosque moturi Venetias venerant. Sunt qui legatos ab his prius missos dicant: sed plures hoc habent.	Nel 1202. volendo i Signori Cristiani di nuovo conquistare l'Impero di Romania e la Terra Santa, fecero Crociata, e mandarono a invitare il Doge a tanta opera santissima; e il Marchese Bonifacio di Monferrato, e Balduino Conte di Fiandra, Arrigo Conte di San Polo, e altri Signori e Baroni. E fatto gente e armata vennero a Venezia; [...].

Strictly in the narration of the Fourth Crusade's events, the chronicle Sanudo compiles from different other sources, without mixing them. It commences the narration many times. That is why I make a distinction between this particular chronicle, naming the respective parts as Sanudo 1[71]; Sanudo 2[72]; Sanudo 3[73]; Sanudo 4[74]. Then, it presents some documents, that is the partitio pact[75] and the pact with Boniface of Montferrat concerning

p. 125

the acquisition of the island of Crete[76]. Afterwards, the chronicle continues the narration with different less important events.

In connection to the beginnings of the Fourth Crusade's events, Sanudo 3 retakes the narration and makes reference to another interpretation, mentioning exclusively Baldwin and Boniface.

Sanudo: 531

Fecit confoederationem cum Balduino Comite Flandriae, & Marchione Montisferrati, & aliis Comitibus & Baronibus pro recuperatione Terrae Sanctae.

Concerning Sanudo 4, its presentation determined me to place it in category 7..

4. This category mentions the Count Baldwin of Flanders, the Count of St. Pol, the Count "of Savoy" and the Marquis of Montferrat, thus including the "Count of Savoy" on the list instead of Louis of Blois. The respective chronicles written after A. Dandolo (that is, E. Dandolo and pseudo-Dolfin) were clearly influenced and confused by "Louis of Savoy" that would later join the crusade, according to category 2. Although the manner of presentation of the events in the chronicle Canal is definitely different than the others and the order of the non-Venetian leaders also differs, I also include it in this category. This category seems the closest to the names advanced by Nicetas Choniates, who mentions Boniface, Baldwin, Hugh of Saint Pol and Louis of Blois[77]. Still, any influence of the Byzantine writer on this category seems inadequate.

Canal: 44	E. Dandolo: 39a	pseudo-Dolfin: 43b
Que vos diroie je? Li cuens de saint Pols et li cuens de Flandre, li cuens de Savoie et li marquis de Monferal en l'an de l'incarnacion de nostre seignor Jesu Crist .mccij. ans envoierent lor mesages au noble dus de Venise, mesire Henric Dandle, et le proierent que il lor donast navie por passer dela la mer.	Corrando anni 1202. Nel sò tempo grande ambassada venne de molti Baroni de Franza, tra i quali era el Conte Baldovin de Fiandra, el Conte de San Polo, el Conte de Savoia, el Marchexe de Monferà, li quali tutti jera appariadi di dover passar oltra mar in defension et accrissimento de tutta Cristianitade [...].	Corrando anni M°. CC. ij. Chel suo tempo grande ambasade in Veniesia vene da molti Baroni de Franza, & tra i quali iera el Conte Baldoin di Fiandra el Conte de San Pollo el Conte de Savoya el Marchese de Monfera, li quali tuti ierano apredjcado per dover passar oltra el mare in defensione & accresimento de tutta la Cristianitate, [...].

Analyzing other episodes of the Fourth Crusade, there would be added the chronicle Morosini to this category. Unfortunately, this chronicle’s pages depicting the first stages of the crusade are lost.

The same participants are also mentioned in the chronicle It. VII. 71, although in a different order and in a different context, that is the events in Zara:

It. VII. 71: 128a

Ritrovandosi à Zarra del 1201. Anrigo Dandolo Doge di Venetia, Balduino Conte di Fiandra, Lodovico Conte di Savoia, Arrigo Conte di San Polo et Bonifacio Marchese di Monferrato, d'inverno, [...]

p. 126

5. Other chronicles curiously introduce the Western Emperor Henry VI among the other participants (Baldwin, Count of St. Pol, “Count of Savoy” and Boniface, just like in category 4.). Practically, this is the only difference than category 4. I have the supposition that the Venetian authors had the so-called Henry VI's crusade (1195-1196[78]) into consideration and simply mixed the two expeditions[79]. Other explanation could be the confusion between Frederick Barbarossa’s two sons Henry and Philip of Swabia, both of them kings of the Romans, the latter being indeed involved in the Fourth Crusade events through his recommendations given to young Alexius:

It. VII. 89: 23a, col. 1-23a, col. 2	Donà: 29a	Veniera 791: 68a
Anchora in so tempo, corando anni 1202, grande inbasada vene a Veniexia da parte de Erigo sesto Inperador de Roma e de molti Baroni de Franza, tra i qual era el Conte Baldoin de Fiandra el Conte de San Pollo, el Conte de Savoia, el Marchexe de Monfera e molti alt' signori li qual tuti era apariadi por douer pasar el mar in defension e acresimento de tuta cristianitade.	Nel 1202, sotto il detto vigoroso Doxe, vene à Venetia molti ambasciatori, fra quali ni erà quelli dall'Imperator Enrigo, il Conte Balduin di Franza [sic!], il Conte di San Polo, il Conte di Savogia, il Marchese Monferà et molti altri Signori, i quali ricercavano Venetiani per andar all' aquisto di Terra Santa.	Come venenno a Venetia ambassatori de piu Signori per far armada contra Infideli In tempo de questo vigoroso Dose, del 1202, grande ambassarie veneno a Venetia da parte de messer Enrigo Imperator de Roma et da molti Baroni de Franza, il Conte Balduin de Franza [sic!], il Conte de San Polo, il Conte de Savogia, il Marchese de Monfera et molti altri Signori, li qual tutti erano apparechiati per dover passar il mar in defension et accressimento de tutta la Christianità, [...].

There could be also added the chronicle Trevisan that advances the names of Baldwin, Hugue, “Count of Savoy” and Boniface, but strangely dispersed among other characters: the Emperor Henry VI (just like the other chronicles in category 5.), Richard the King of England (participant to the Third Crusade) and Otto the Duke of Burgundy (the one who, according to Villehardouin, rejected the leadership of the crusade after the death of Thibault of Champagne[80]). Trevisan makes also clear confusions regarding the participants' title, since he oscillates to name Baldwin as Count or Duke and considers Boniface as Count :

Trevisan: 39a, col. 1

Fo fato armada per andar a Costantinopoli

Eodem anno vene a Veniexia pui ambaxarie de pui Signori, dele qual fu primi de Rigo Inperador e de Balduino Conte over Duca di Fiandra e de Ricardo Re de Anglia e de Odo Duca di Bergogna e de Rigo Conte de San Pollo e del Conte de Sovoia e di Bonifazio Conte de Monfera e di molti altri Signorj, i quali ambaxadori dixeno che i diti Signori herano apariadi con le sue zente per dover passar el mar, per defension e richresimento dela Cristianitade.

p. 127

6. There are also chronicles that mention the ambassadors' names considering them as the leaders themselves. The real captains would be only mentioned later, in other contexts. However, the names offered by this category are only four (It. VII. 2544: Conon of Béthune, the Marshal of Champagne, John of Friaise and Alard Maquereau) respectively three (It. VII. 2570, which excludes Geoffrey of Villehardouin), instead of six. From this viewpoint, this category could also include the chronicle Caroldo and the referrals that Sanudo does to "another chronicles". For their more developed presentation of the ambassadors and for many other particularities, these two latter should be regarded separately:

It. VII. 2544: 42a, col. 1-42a, col. 2

It. VII. 2570: 21b

Et come mi havemo ditto davanti, per la presa de Constantinopoli et dele Terre Sancte, molti Segnori et Baroni mandono a Venecia a domandar subsidio et favore per andare a conquistare le Terre Sancte et per la Signoria de Venecia li fo offerto galie 40 ben armate et nave 50 con tutte vittuarie et monicione che bisogne per menar quelli Signor Conti et Marchesi che dovevano venire su la ditta armata. [...] et siando venuto lo ditto tempo, lo venne à Venecia lo Conte de Bethuel, et el Marescalcho de Campagna, messer Zuan Friges, messer Aybal Marchual et molti altri Principi et Signori, [...].

De larmada che se fexe per andar aquistar Constantinopolj e le Tere Santte Abiando nuj ditto davantj per la prexa de Constantinnopolj e dele Tere Sante et per la Signoria de Veniexia li fo profresso galie 50 con tutte vituarie e munizion che bixognava per mener quelj Signorj, Conttj e Marchexi che doveva vignir suxo la ditta armada i qual Signorj doveva dar ala Signoria ducati 2000 milla doro, hover lo tterzo de tutto quelo se conquistava e tolse i dittj Signorj a vegnir a Veniexia fina uno ano proximo: Et siando venutto el ditto tenpo, el vene a Veniexia lo Contte de Betuel, messer Zuan Friges et messer Arbal Marchuale et moltj altrj asaississimj Principi et Signorj [...].

7. Some more thorough chronicles are the ones that complete the list of the ambassadors and also present the leaders they represented during the negotiations in Venice, just like in the Villehardouin's testimony, according to whom there were Geoffrey of Villehardouin himself and Miles of Brabant (for Thibault), Conon of Béthune and Alard Maquereau (for Baldwin), John of Friaise and Walter of Gaudonville (for Louis) sent to Venice[81]. There is especially the portion of the chronicle Sanudo that presents the characters clearly.

Actually, there is a developed combination between categories 2. (for the three leaders mentioned) and 6. (for the ambassadors).

This time, the influence of Villehardouin seems more appropriate than in the case of category 2., since both Caroldo and Sanudo wrote during the 16^th century.

Caroldo: 139

Sanudo: 531-532

Nel tempo di questo Ilustre Duce Dandolo vennero a Venetia Connon di Bettunia, Goffredo Marescialo, Gioanni di Frigens, Allardo Maguazello, Millon di Privino, e Gualtier di Guadonvilla, Nontij dell'Illustre Baldovin Conte di Fiandra, Teobaldo Conte di Trech e Palatino, e Lodovico Conte di Bles e di Chiarmont, esponendo per nome di questi, et altri Signori Francesi che, havendo intesa l'espeditione de

Nota de Passagio Terrae Sanctae: Tempore suprascripti Ducis, mense Aprili, Balduinus Comes Flandriae mittit duos Legatos, Zononem de Bituria & Araldum Maquatelum ad Henricum Dandulum Ducem, ad paciscendum pro passagio & favore ad expeditionem Terrae Sanctae. Eodem tempore, & eamdem

p. 128

Cristiani di Terra Santa dalle potenti forze di Saladino, il quale ogni giorno procedeva contro loro per estinguer in quelle parti il nome Cristiano, havevano perciò statuito pigliare quell'impresa di liberare Gerusaleme e Santo Sepolcro di mano d'Infedeli, pregando il Duce a far unione con essi Prencipi per questa santa impresa e prestarli in ciò favore, et aiuto.

causam Theobaldus Trecensis Comes Palatinus mittit Oratores suos Gaufredum Marescalcum & Prilonem de Privino. Dominus Ludovicus Comes Blesensis & Clarimontis, ut supra, mittit Oratores Johannem de Suesia, & Gualterium de Gandvilla. [...].

Practically, the only difference than Villehardouin's presentation is represented by the order of the ambassadors, the French chronicler beginning with Thibault's ambassadors , continuing with the ones of Baldwin and Louis of Blois. On his turn, Robert of Clari mentions only two ambassadors, that is Conon of Béthune and the Marshal of Champagne[82].

8. There is a somehow strange presentation, which is rather based upon prophecies and provokes a clear confusion of information.

It. VII. 2541: 146b	Barbo: 43a	It. VII. 67: 173b-174a
Del 1199. L’imperatore Balduin de Costantinopoli morse; la cagione fù che il detto, essendo all’assedio de Andrinopoli, fù presso et posto in ferri, et per occupationi morse, per la qual morte la Grecia stete sette anni senza Imperator, et fù trovado un verso Profetico. Il qual narrava dell’Impero de Costantinopoli ditto da una Sibilla.	Del 1199, lo Imperador Balduin de Costantinopoli moritte; et fù, che el detto allo assedio di Andernopoli fù preso è posto in ferri. Là moritte, et morto lui, la Grecia stette anni I senza Imperador; et fù trovado uno verso profetice, el qual murava dello Imperio de Costantinopoli, ditto de una Sibilla.	Del 1199 l'Imperator Balduin de Costantinopoli morse et fu che il ditto all assedio de Andrinopoli fu preso et posto in ferri; la morse et morto lui la Grecia stete anni 7 senza Imperator et fu trovado verso uno Profeticho, il qual narrava dell'Imperio de Costantinopoli ditto da una Sibilla.

The Sybyll's prophecies regarding Constantinople could also be detected in the chronicles A. Dandolo [2.] and P. Dolfin [2.][83]. They were developed in Monacis [2.], It. VII. 2592 [3.], Sabellico [3.], Marco [10.], and, in a different shape, Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.][84].

p. 129

9. There are some codices that exclude more or less definitely the non-Venetians' presence in the campaign against Constantinople. Moreover, the chronicles Tiepolo and Agostini consider that there were two Doge's campaigns against Constantinople and that the Doge’s assistance was to be personally requested by Alexius [IV] and Isaac [II], regarded as brothers, against their uncle [Alexius III]:

It. VII. 793: 70a	Tiepolo: 78b-79a	Agostini: 26b
[...], questo Doxe ando con armada in compagnia de altri Principi et prese Costantinopoli [...].	In tempo di questo Dose, essendo stà cazzadi Alessio e ...... [missing text] Imperatori de Costantinopoli da suo barba, domandorono soccorso al Papa, al Rė di franza, et a messer lo Dose, promettendoli de [?] tornandoli in casa, partir la città de Costantinopoli, e dar à cadaun de loro la parte sua, [...]. In suo tempo ancora, el barba delli Imperatori de Constantinopoli, col favor de alguni sui seguaci et patiali et de parte del popolo tornò à metter dissension et far levar la obedienza alli Imperatori et far far [repetition in text] mutation [...].	[Beyond the text: Armada per l'impresa di Constantinopoli] In tempo di questo Dose, essendo stà cazzadi Alessio et Isaacio Imperatori de Constantinopoli da suo barba, domandorono soccorso al papa, al Re de Franza et à messer lo Dose, promettendoli che, tornandi in casa, pazir la città de Constantinopoli et dar à cadauno de loro la parte sua, [...]. In suo tempo ancora, el barba delli Imperatori de Constantinopoli co'l fauor de alcuni sui seguaci et parciali et de parte del populo, tronò a metter dissension et far levar la obbedientia alli Imperatori et far far [repetition in text] mutation [...].

One could add the chronicle It. VII. 2572, for the simple lack of any particular non-Venetian participant to the crusade. It is also to be mentioned that it makes a brief referral to the precedent crusades in this context[85].

p. 130

It. VII. 2572: 13b-14a

Comparevero alcuni Prencipi Oltramontani, i quali dal Spirito Santo tocchi, haveano deliberato di passarsene per via del mare in Terra Santa, fatti accorti questa essere assai piu espedita et sicura per gl'infiniti incommodi, ricevuti dal gran Goffredo et da gli altri che se n'andarno per terra, da quelle barbare nationi, et da Greci ancora, et pero richiesero il Senato, che volesse servirli di passagio.

Later, the chronicle Sansovino would present the same attitude towards the non-Venetian participants, in the sense of mentioning them only as a whole:

Sansovino: 560

[...]. Ma quello che importò molto, fu l'occasione delle cose di Levante, per le quali la Republica & il Principe insieme diventarono gloriosi. Conciosia che venuti a Venetia alcuni Principi Francesi per lo passaggio di Terra Santa, pattuirono quella impresa col Doge.

A particular view is offered by the chronicle It. VII. 1833. Since its referrals to the non-Venetians are rather general, I consider it as being approached to this category:

It. VII. 1833: 23b

[1199] Il Papa sollecitò i Normandi, i Conti di Fiandra e crocciarsi. Vi aderirono, ma il viaggio di terra essendo incomodo, trattarono coi Veneziani per il trasporto per Marco [= mare].

[1201] Deputati giungeno a Venezia; sono bene accolti dal Doge.

There are two more consistent categories that include eight, respectively 11 chronicles, proving thus a large circulation among the Venetian milieu.

10. In the presentation of the events, this category is somehow similar with category 3., introducing Baldwin of Flanders, Hugue of St. Pol, Boniface of Montferrat. However, the subsequent descriptions convinced me to regard the respective chronicles differently. As a particularity for the chronicle It. VII. 2550, Boniface is regarded as count, while "Marchese" looks like his first name.

Marco: 43a	It. VII. 2550: 76b	It. VII. 2556[86]: 51	It. VII. 2559: 21, col. 2
Anno MCCII menses Octobris comune Veneciarum maximum exercitum preparavit causa recuperandi sepulcrum. Ducante domino Henrico Dandulo et cum societate facta cum dominis Balduino comites Flandrie et comites Sancti Pauli ac	[...]. Ancora questo Dose, desideroso cerca el crescimento de tutta la christianità, se astrense in liga con el Conte Baldoin de Fiandra, con el Conte de San Polo, con el Conte Marchese de Monferà et con molti altri baroni, per rescattar, et scoder el Santo Sepolcro, et le Terre Sante, [...].	Ancora questo doxe dexirosso […] in liga con lo Conte de San Polo e chom lo Marchexe de Monfral e chom lo Conte Balduin de Flandra e con moltj altrj baroni per reschatar e per tiesthuodor [?]	Anchora questo doxie, dexideroxo el zerchaua la chresimento dela Christianita, de ese astrense in liga chon el Chonte Balduin de Fiandra e chon el Chonte de San Polo e chon el Marchexe de Monfera e chon moltj

p. 131

marchione Montis Ferati.

lo Santo Sepulcro […].

altrj Baronj et Prinzipi per reschuoder e rechatar el Santo Sepulchro e le Tere Sante.

It. VII. 44: 31a	Abbiosi: 20a	Curato: 17b	It. VII. 2576: 25b
E anchora questo Doxe, desideroso circa l'acrescimento s'astrenze in liga con lo Conte Baldoin de Fiandra e lo Conte de San Polo el Marchese de Monfera e cum molti altri Baronj per rescatar e rescuoder el Santo Sepulcro e le Terre Sante, [...].	In questo tempo medemo, el vene à Venetia Conte Balduin de Franza [sic!] el Conte de San Polo, el Marchexe de Monferrà e molti altri Baroni che venne à far liga in questa terra, per reschattar la Terra Santa: [...].	[1203] Rigo Dandolo [...]. In questo tempo medemo el vene a Venetia Conte Balduin de Franza [sic!] el Conte de San Polo el Marchese de Monfera et molti altrj Baronj che vene a far liga in questa Zara [= terra] per rescatar la Terra Santa, [...].	[...] et anchora, desideroso cerca lo acresimento della christianitade, se astrinse in liga con el Conte Balduin de Fiandra et con el Conte de San Pollo et con el Marchese da Monfera et con moltj altrj Barronj, per rescatar et conquistar el Santo Sepulchro et le Terre Sante, [...].

One could add the chronicle It. VII. 2548, only partially studied by me. There are mentioned Balduin d'Fiandra, Conte de San Polo e con el Marcheze d Monfera e con molti altri baroni and their intention to go to Santo Sepulchro[87].

11. Finally, some chronicles enumerate a lot of participants, many of them including together the leaders and the ambassadors. Certainly, there are many differences inside of this specific category. This fact determined me to create two different subcategories:

11a. There are the chronicles that refers to two distinct episodes: 1) the gathering of the crusaders in order to pass to the Holy Land, and 2) the ambassadors' arrival to Venice.

It. VII. 78: 8a, col. 1	It. VII. 2543: 46b-46 bis[88] a	It. VII. 1577: 245-247
In tempo de questo doxe, per divina voluntade, molti Signori Oltramontani fecero consiglio & deliberatione de andare a recuperare le Terre Sancte dal Soldano occupate, li quali furono questi: il Conte Tibaldo de Campagna, el Conte Balduino de Fiandra, il Conte Alvuixe de Bles, il Vescovo de Sosire & il Vescovo de Sisson, il Conte de San Polo, con molti	In questo tempo una granda et alta compagnia de oltramontani se assembrano e presino consiglio per andar oltra el mar, a servir il nostro Signor Dio. Et il primier fu li Coan uia' Conte Tibalde e li Coan Balduin zoe Conte de Fiandra el Conte Alovise de Blas et el Vescovo de Sison et apresso el Conte de Sison et il Conte de San Polo, lo Conte de Batuel, el Marascalcho de	In quel tempo pure, per volontà de Dio, una gran compagnia de' Signori de oltra i monto se deliberò de andar a servir messer Iesù Christo, de regovernar le Terre Sante; el primo fu el Conte Ubaldo de Compagnia, el Balduin Conte de Fiandra, e Alvise Conte de Bes, el Vescovo de Sesire, el

p. 132

altri preclari homini & cavalieri, et quelli di Campagna, il Mareschalcho misser Cuino de Betione, Simone de Monte Forte, misser Jacomo de ............ [lacună în text], il quale era tenuto il miglior cavaliero di quelle parte in quel tempo. [...]. Et, essendo tutj li sopra nominatj uniti de una medesima voluntade, deliberorono de mandare a Veniesia ambassatori per il passagio, gli qualli furono misser Comes de Bethunes, il Maraschalco de Campagna, Miser Zuane Frigies, Miser Arlat de Macharule et alguni altri cavalieri, furono in summa X. Con grande & nobile compagnia.

Campagna, messer Zuan Friges, et messer Arsal Marihuale et messer Chumo de Betiamo e Simon de Monfort e messer lo Como de Vena e messer Mandema Marasan, el qual era tegnudo uno de i melglior cavalieri de quella contrada. Et che molti altri assaissimi Principi et Signori, tanto che i fono in suma Segnori CCCC. L, cavalieri ij m. ij c., senchiri XX m, tutti ben in ponto. [...]. Apresso so pensono la dita compagnia de mandar ambasada a Veniexia per trattar el pasazo: e mandono messer Comes de Bethune et al Maraschalcho de Campagna et messer Zuan de Friges e messer Alardi Macharel e altri chavalieri, tanti che fono X [...].

Conte de Sion, el Conte de San Polo, e assaissimi Cavalieri e homeni appreziadi, el Marescalco de messer Chiuno de Besucano e Simon de Monfort e messer Iacomo de Vena e messer Mandema Marasan, valentissimo Cavaliere; [...]. [...]. I Ambasadori fono messer Chomes de Bechuno el Marascalco de Compagnia, messer Zanfrigier, messer Arlar de Macaruola, et altri Cavalieri fono in somma X ambasadori cum assai fameia. [...].

It. VII. 1586: ???	Zancaruolo: ???	Erizzo: 104a
In tempo di questo Doxe e come el fò de uolontade del nostro Signore messer Giesù Christo una grande et alta compagnia de Signori Oltramontani; li si addunorono et presero consiglio trà di loro di volere andare à servir messer Domene Dio oltra el mare, cioe per signoreggiare le sue Terre Sante. El primo fo lo Conte Baldo da Campagna, lo Conte Balduino cioè Conte de Fiandra el Conte Alvise di Beo el Vescovo di Cesere. Appresso lo Conte di Sison el Conte de San Polo et molti huomini apprecciati et Cavallieri et quelli di Campagna el Marescalcho et messer Cosmo di Bettuechino et Simon di Monfort et messer Giacomo de Vena et messer Madaman Marasini, el qual veniva tenuto lo megliore Cavalliere di quella contrade; [...].	De recuperatione Terram sanctam Nel anno del Signore MCCI, nel mexe daprile, in nela quarta indiction, ma nel anno X del suo dugado, in quel tempo, i Signorj Oltramontanj, adunatj insieme, deliberono de aquistar le Terre Sancte Jerosolimitane, li quali fono questi: el Conte Tibaldo de Campagna e Balduin Conte de Fiandra e Lodovicho Conte de Blesensis el Vescovo de Sesire el Conte de Sison el Conte de Sanpolo el Mareschalcho e misser Chiuno de Betuchano e Simon de Monforte, Jacomo de Vena e Mandema Maresan, valentissimj Cavalierj. [...]. Ambasciatori de Principi mandati a Venexia per li recuperatione de Terra Santa [...]; e questi forono li	La Cruciatta et Union de Christiani, che fu fatta per andar à conquistar Constantinopoli et la Terra Santa In tempo de questo de questo gratiosissimo Doxe ms Rigo Dandolo, per fosse volontade de Dio una grande et alta compagnia de Principi et Signori de Oltraimonto se assunò insembre e fra loro deliberaronno de voler ander à servir messer Jesù Christo oltra el mar e regovrar le Terra Santa. El primo sàro(?): • El Conte Theobaldo de Campagna • El Conte Balduin de Fiandra • El Conte Alvisse de Bes • El Vescovo de Sesira • El Conte de Sion • El Conte de San Polo • El Gran Maraschalio • Messer Chiumo de Betucano • Messer Simon de Monfort • Messer Jacomo de Navaria • Messer Mandema Marasan valentommo • El Signor Conte Zuan Frigies

p. 133

[...]. Et gl'ambasciatori furono questi: messer Cosmo di Bettunico el Marescalcho de Campagna et messer Zuanne Frigies et messer Arlai de Macharulla et alcuni Cavalieri tanti che i furono in summa Dieci et furono gl'Ambasciatori con una nobbile e grande famiglia. E tanto cavalcorono che vennero à Venezia.

ambassadorj che azonse in Venexia: misser Comes de Bechune el Marescalcho de Campagna, Misser Zuan Frigies, Misser Arlae de Marcharuole et altrj Cavalierj; forono in suma X ambassadorj; [...].

Cavallier • Messer Arlar de Massaruole • El Signor Marchexe de Monferrà • El Duca de Savoia • El Signor Conte de Saxonia Et molti altri nobilissimi Signori et Cavallieri Oltramontani. [...]. I ambassadori fonno: messer Comes de Becune el Marascalio de Compagna, messer Zuan Frigies, messer Aslar de Maccaruole et altri cavallieri; fonno in summa X. ambassadori con assai fameia i zonse à Veniexia, [...].

As a note for the chronicle Zancaruolo, there is the presentation in extenso of the treaties between the Venetians and each non-Venetian leader personally[89]. Then, the same chronicle, together with the chronicles It. VII. 2543, It. VII. 1577, It. VII. 1586 and Erizzo, presents the pact with the whole non-Venetian leaders[90]. It. VII. 1577, Zancaruolo and Erizzo go farther, presenting the one expressly for the taking of Constantinople[91], while Zancaruolo insert the agreement for the conquest of the Cita Constantinopolitane, meaning the Byzantine territory[92].

The episode of the ambassador's arrival to Venice makes a connection to category 6. Still, this latter presents the four characters (Conon of Béthune, Geoffrey of Villehardouin, John of Friaise and Alard Maquereau) just as if they were to be the leaders themselves of the crusade. The subcategory 11a. makes the clear specification that they were simple ambassadors. However, the respective characters are also present in the first episode, being circumscribed with their leaders. As a curiosity, their name differs from one episode to another, while John of Friaise and Alard Maquereau appears in both circumstances only in It. VII. 2543 and Erizzo, as follows. Moreover, the chronicles It. VII. 1577, Zancaruolo and Erizzo, when presenting the different pacts between the doge and the non-Venetians, mention again the names of the ambassador(s).

11b. Then, there are the codices that omit to present the second episode, confining to mention some of the ambassadors during the first one, accidentally mixed with the leaders:

p. 134

It. VII. 798: xxi a	It. VII. 2560: 67a	It. VII. 2563: 10b
Come una conpagnia de Signori Oltramontani mando a Veniexia a dimandar socorso per andar a rechuperar le Terre Sante et el Re Balduin Re de Jerusalem, lo qual jera in prixon in man de Saraini. In tempo de questo messer Rigo Dandolo Doxe, come fo volonta de messer Jexu Cristo, se aduno una grande conpagnia de Principi e Signori de Oltramonte e fra loro fo deliberado de voler andar a servir a messer Domenedio oltra el mar et andar a conquistar le Terre Sante. E fo el primo el Conte de Baldi, de conpagnia del Conte Balduin Conte de Fiandra el Conte Alvixe da Bes el Vescovo de Sisara el Conte de Sisons el Conte de San Polo e molti altrj nobelissimj Signori e Cavalieri Oltramontani; [...].	Item in tempo de questo doxe, per volonta de Dio, una grande et alta compagnia de Principi e Signori Oltramontani se asunarono insembre e fra loro fo deliberado de voler andar a servir misser Domenedio oltra mar et andar a conquistar le Terre Sancte. E fo el primo el Conte Tibaldo de Compagnia con el Conte Balduin de Fiandra el Conte Alvise de Bes el Vescovo de Salire el Conte de Sision el Conte de San Polo e molti altri nobelissimi Signori e Cavalieri Oltramontani [...].	In tempo de questo Doxe, molti Principi Tramontanj delibero de andar à conquistar le Terre Sante. Il primo fo el Conte Tibaldo de Compagnia con el Conte Baldujn stra, el Conte de Fiandra, item el Conte Avixo de Bes, item el Vescovo del Sisire, item el Conte de Sisa, item el Conte de San Polo et molti altri nobili Signiori et Cavalieri Tramontanj, [...].

It. VII. 550: 71b

Z. Dolfin: 185 ff.

[...] nel qual tempo ancora una compagnia de Signori Oltramontani se assembrorno insieme per andar a servir Iddio & conquistar le Terre Sante & fu lo primo el Conte Sinibaldo, il Conte Baldovino de Fiandra el Conte Alvise de Bens, con Episcopo de Treste el Conte de Sisson, il Conte de San Pollo, [...].

Come una gran compania de Signori Oltramontani mando a domandar soccorso a Venetiani per andar a recuperar la Terre Sante e per haver il re Balduin re de Jerusalem, el qual era prexoniero in mani dai Saraceni. In tempo de questo Doxe, per volonta de Dio, una grande et alta compagnia si assumerono insieme de Principi et Signori Oltramontani et fra loro fu deliberato de andar a servir messir Domine Dio oltra el mar et andar a conquistar le Terre Sante et fu el primo: El Conte Timbaldo de Campagnia El Conte Alvixe de Bes El Vescovo de Stisire cum El Conte Balduino de Fiandra El Conte de Sisron El Conte de San Polo et molti altri Signori nobilissimi et Chavalieri Oltramontani. [...].

The episode that these two subcategories have in common, that is the decision of the Signori Oltramontani to take the cross, introduces two other new characters, beside the ones provided by the other categories. There are the bishop and the count of Soissons, presented in different strange ways[93].

p. 135

In addition, 11a. presents Simon of Montfort, an authentic character attested by Villehardouin and Clari[94]. He is together with others, invented: James of "Vena"[95] and a certain "Mandema Marasan"[96], very appreciated knight, considered "il miglior cavaliero di quelle parte in quel tempo."[97] This latter character would be again presented on the occasion of the first siege of Constantinople, under different names.

Treated originally, the chronicles Barbaro and Savina could be approached to this category, because of some crusaders' names.

Barbaro: 215b-216b

Savina: 54a-54b

Haveva in questo tempo il Saladin, Re della Soria, occupado quasi tutto il Regno de Hierusalem, et levadolo dall'adoration de messer Giesù Christo nostro Signor l'hauene tornado a perfidia de Macometo, la qual cosa intesa in Europa dai Prencipi Christiani, mosse molti de lor, massime nella Franza, et nella Germania e non dover comportar tanta offesa nella nostra ede et a prepararse alla deffesa della nostra Religion et recuperation di quel Santo Paese, furono li capi et principal auttori di questa impresa Monsignor de San Polo, il Conte Alvise Balbo et Conte Balduin de Fiandra, il Gran Marescalco de Ziampagne, il Conte de Lieghe, il Duca de Savoia, il Conte de Sansonia et molti altri Prencipi et Prelati et Signori et Cavallieri de altississimo affar, questi, inanimadi molto per se stessi et con le proprie persone et con tutte le forzze de suoi stadi a questa santissima impresa, de una cosa sola erano retardadi; et vedevano azzoche questo effetto se condusesse con commodità et prestanza al suo debito fin, haver bisogno d'un popolo potente al mar, il qual, con li suoi navilij, traghetasse le zente da guerra alla Soria et poi de continuo portasse le vittuarie et altre cose che bisognaseno per l'esercito et che con l'armada, oltre la commodità, ghe fesse anche spalle et reputation. Considerando questa cosa, li Prencipi antedetti, con quelle diligentia et con quei avertimenti che era necessario, giudicorono tutte de commun parer, solo li Venetiani esser attissimi a questo sopra tutti li altri, si per esser espertissimi, et potentissimi in le cose maritime, sianche per esser religiosissimi, et ardentissimi per la conservation, et augumento della santa fede, come ne havevano nei tempi passadi fatte grandissime esperientie, spessissime volte. Resolti quei Prencipi de voler per

[...]. Saladin, Soldan de Egitto, havendo za ocupado el Regno de Hierusalem con gran danno de Cristiani [beyond the text: tolto a Guidon de Lusignan Re], per il che intro ne la mente de molti Signori Oltramontani del Ponente, li quali deliberatossi de andar al aquisto de Terra Santa a trar quelli luoghi dalle man de infideli, li qual Signori revelatissi i loro pensieri l'un a l'altro finalmente se acordorno de far questo passazo; li principal Signori de questa liga furno: el Conte Ugo de San Polo el Conte Alvise Sebaldeo el Conte Balduin de Fiandra el gran Marescalco de Zampagnes el Conte de Butuel overo de Betucano el Conte de Sansonia el Conte Zondifrigies el Conte Arsul de Marcuef el Duca de Savogia el Conte Baldo de Campagna el Vescovo de Stanserit el Vescovo de Asire, Maicho de Ruia Kavallier el Conte de Sisan, Cumo Betuolian, Simion de Monte Forte et assai altri Signori & Cavallieri e fatto el ditto alcorda & liga e considerando non poder far cosa alcuna senza l'agiuto del Comun de Venetia circa del passazo

p. 136

compagni in questa impresa li Venetiani, deliberorno de mandarghe ambasciatori per indurli a collegarse con loro et per trattar con quei, et delle condition dell'accordo. Vegnudi li ambasciatori a Venetia nel mese de Marzo nel 1201, [...].

che sufficiente fusse, per il che mandorno immediate imbassadori a questo comun [...].

On their turn, these two chronicles make referrals to the characters originally presented in category 11.[98] (actually, this is one of the reasons why I approached them to it) and additionally some others[99]. Moreover, Savina refers to Simon of Montfort, as the subcategory 11a. does.

Regarding the chronicle Veniera 2580, it could also be included in category 5. for the supposed participation of the Emperor Henry VI[100] and for the inclusion of the Marquis of Montferrat among the first participants to the crusade. Still, for other reasons (such as some crusaders' names), I placed Veniera 2580 in category 11. It also refers to the bishop and the count of Soissons[101].

Veniera 2580: 129a

Comme venerò à Venetia ambassatori de piu principi per far armada contra infideli

Molti Principi Oltramontani deliberono de andar al concquisto delle Terre Santte et mandorono ambassarie à Venetia del 1202; el primo fu misser Enrigo Imperator de Roma el Conte Balduin et il Conte Tibaldo, il Conte de Fiandra, il Conte Alvise da Bes el Vescovo de Sisirton el Conte de Sisa el Conte de San Polo el Conte de Savogia, il Marchese de Monfera et molti altri Signori et Cavalieri Oltramontani; [...].

Following all the above codices, I am to notice some differences also regarding the one and the same character. I refer here to the main non-Venetian participants to this crusade.

For instance, Baldwin of Flanders is sometimes regarded as "Conte Balduin de Franza" by two chronicles in category 5.[102] and other two in category 10.[103] As I already note, category 8. promotes Baldwin to the Imperial title of Constantinople since the very beginning. The chronicles It. VII. 2592 [2.] and Sabellico [2.] and also It. VII. 2548 [10.][104] forget to mention Baldwin's title of count. The chronicle Trevisan [approached to 5.]

p. 137

expresses its doubts on his title, oscillating between "Conte over Duca di Fiandra", while the chronicles It. VII. 2563 [11.] and Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.] considers "Conte Balduin" and "Conte de Fiandra" as being two different characters. Later, during the second siege of Constantinople, It. VII. 2563 would regard Baldwin as "Conte di Francia", as category 5. does. The character's first name is not mentioned by the chronicle Canal [approached to 4.][105], all the other codices specifying it[106].

The Marquis Boniface of Montferrat, the later leader of the crusaders is sometimes presented among the first participants in the codices that omit to mention the transfer of leadership from Thibault of Champagne (or, according to others, from Hugh of St. Pol). In a first instance, there are quite few the chronicles that mention his first name, being limited to categories 2.[107], 3.[108] and 11.[109] and also to the chronicles Trevisan [approached to 5.][110] and Caroldo [7.][111]. It would appear later in almost all the cases, on the occasion of the documents referring to the acquiring of Crete by the Venetians from the marquis. There are two codices that regard him as count, along with the other non-Venetian crusaders: Trevisan [approached to 5.] and It. VII. 2550 [10.][112].

Thibault of Champagne appears with his first name only in categories 2.[113], 7.[114] and 11. (excepting the chronicles Barbaro that does not mention him at all)[115]. Category 1. only regards him as "dominus Comes de Campania[116] / messer lo Conte de Campagna[117]".

Concerning Hugue of St. Pol, the supposed first leader of the crusade (as some codices assert), he is usually mentioned simply, as "Conte de San Polo" or its versions[118].

p. 138

Some of the chronicles introduce a supposed first name, which is in only one case the real one, that is Hugue[119]. Thus, the Count of St. Pol is Henricus[120] with its versions and once Eustachio[121]. On the occasion of the different pacts, the character would appear again[122].

The character of Louis of Blois is somehow under controversy. There are the chronicles in categories 1.[123], 7.[124] and some of 2.[125] and 11.[126] categories that mention him properly, that is as "Count of Blois" (with the corruptions Ples, Bes, Bens, Beo) or even more, as "Count of Blois and Clairemont"[127]. Still, the other codices in category 2., beside this proper denomination[128], would introduce later another character under the name of "Louis the Count / Duke of Savoy", considering this latter separately than Louis of Blois[129]. This separation would be retaken by some chronicles in category 11.[130] The confusion goes farther when one chronicle makes this separation between "Conte Alvise Sebaldeo" and "Duca de Savogia"[131]. I have not been able to detect any Savoyard participant in the lists provided by Villehardouin and Clari, and that fact leads me to the conviction that there must be one and the same character. The point is that some other categories (4. and 5.) simply mentions since the beginning of the events this "Count of Savoy"[132], leaving aside the real Louis of Blois.

p. 139

In connection to Louis of Blois, it is also to be mentioned that category 1. does not present any title of this character, neither of count, nor of duke. Regarding his first name, it is present in the cases of categories 1.[133], 2.[134], 7.[135] and 11.[136] and also of the codex It. VII. 71 [approached to 4.][137].

On their turn, the ambassadors’ names present curious evolutions not only from one case to another but also inside of one and the same codex.

In the list below, I am to present the versions of the ambassadors’ names provided by Villehardouin and Chronicum Gallicum ineditum[138], the chronicles in categories 6., 7. and 11a. and the chronicles Barbaro and Savina that I approached to category 11..

- Conon of Béthune

Villehardouin: Coenes de Betune

Chronicum Gallicum: Quennes de Betune

It. VII. 78: Misser Cuino de Betione > misser Comes de Bethunes

It. VII. 2543: lo Conte de Battuel, messer Chumo de Betiamo (there are two different characters) > messer Comes de Bethune > Comes de Bethune[139]

It. VII. 1577: (seen in combination with Villehardouin) el Marescalco de messer Chiuno de Besucano > messer Chomes de Bechuno > Conte di Beluno [sic!][140]

It. VII. 1586: messer Cosmo di Bettuechino > messer Cosmo di Bettunico > Conti di Bethunes[141]

Zancaruolo: misser Chiuno de Betuchano > misser Comes de Bechune > Canonico dibitinia [sic !][142] > Canonici [sic!] di Betina[143]

Erizzo: messer Chiumo de Betucano > messer Comes de Becune > conte de Betume[144]

It. VII. 2544: lo Conte de Bethuel

It. VII. 2570: lo Contte de Betuel

Caroldo: Connon di Bettunia

Sanudo 4: Zonones de Bituria

Barbaro: not mentioned

Savina: el Conte de Butuel overo de Betucano, Cumo Betuolian (there are two different characters)

- Geoffrey of Villehardouin

Villehardouin: Jofrois de Vileardoin li mareschaus de Campaigne

Chronicum Gallicum: Gieffroy de Villeharduin

It. VII. 78: il Mareschalcho > il Maraschalco de Campagna

It. VII. 2543: el Marascalcho de Campagna > el Maraschalcho de Campagna

It. VII. 1577: (in combination with Conon) el Marescalco de messer Chiuno de Besucano > el Marascalco de Compagnia

It. VII. 1586: el Marescalcho > el Marescalcho de Campagna

Zancaruolo: el Mareschalcho > el Marescalcho de Campagna > Magistro Gaufredo Marescalcho[145] > Gualfredo Marascalcho[146]

p. 140

Erizzo: el Gran Maraschalio > el Marascalio de Compagna

It. VII. 2544: el Marescalcho de Campagna

It. VII. 2570: not mentioned

Caroldo: Goffredo Marescialo

Sanudo 4: Gaufredus Marescalcus

Barbaro: il Gran Marescalco de Ziampagne

Savina: el gran Marescalco de Zampagnes

- John of Friaise

Villehardouin: Johans de Friaise

Chronicum Gallicum: Jehan de Friaise

It. VII. 78: not mentioned > Zuane Frigies

It. VII. 2543: messer Zuan Friges > messer Zuan de Friges

It. VII. 1577: not mentioned > messer Zanfrigier

It. VII. 1586: not mentioned > messer Zuanne Frigies

Zancaruolo: not mentioned > misser Zuan Frigies > Zuan di Fresi[147] > Zuan de Grangens[148]

Erizzo: el Signor Conte Zuan Frigies Cavallier > messer Zuan Frigies

It. VII. 2544: messer Zuan Friges

It. VII. 2570: messer Zuan Friges

Caroldo: Gioanni di Frigens

Sanudo: Johannes de Suesia

Barbaro: not mentioned

Savina: el Conte Zondifrigies

- Alard Maquereau

Villehardouin: Alars Maqueriaus

Chronicum Gallicum: Alart Maquerel

It. VII. 78: not mentioned > miser Arlat de Macharule

It. VII. 2543: messer Arsal Marihuale > messer Alardi Macharel

It. VII. 1577: not mentioned > messer Arlar de Macaruola

It. VII. 1586: not mentioned > messer Arlai de Macharulla

Zancaruolo: not mentioned > misser Arlae de Marcharuole > Alanedimia Querellia[149] > Alardo Maquarello[150]

Erizzo: messer Arlar de Massaruole > messer Aslar de Maccaruole

It. VII. 2544: messer Aybal Marchual

It. VII. 2570: messer Arbal Marchuale

Caroldo: Allardo Maguazello

Sanudo: Araldus Maquatelus

Barbaro: not mentioned

Savina: el Conte Arsul de Marcuef[151]

p. 141

The other two ambassadors, that is Milon the Brébant (Miles li Braibanz) and Walter of Gaudonville (Gautiers de Gaudonville) are left aside by the Venetian authors, the only chronicles mentioning them remaining the two in category 7., together with Zancaruolo:

Villehardouin: Miles li Braibanz

Gautiers de Gaudonville

Chronicum Gallicum: Mile de Braibant

Gautier de Gaudonville

Caroldo: Millon di Privino

Gualtier de Guadonvilla

Sanudo 4: Prilones de Privino

Gualterius de Gandvilla

Zancaruolo: Millon de Privimo[152] > Millon di Pruino[153]

Gualtier de Grandovillo[154] > Gualtiero di Gaudonvilla[155]

In the above delimitation among the different Venetian codices, I did not include the codices that are simply the same chronicles as others[156]. On the other side, the specific episode of the Fourth Crusade could very well have one and the same presentation from one codex to another belonging to the same category. For instance, there are the chronicles It. VII. 2571 and It. VII. 2581 - category 1.; It. VII. 2592 and Sabellico - category 3., E. Dandolo and pseudo-Dolfin - category 4., It. VII. 2544 and It. VII. 2570 - category 6., It. VII. 2541, Barbo and It. VII. 67 - category 8., Tiepolo and Agostini - category 9. that seem to be one and the same. Still, because of the fact that some other episodes along the respective chronicles are completely differently presented, I regard them separately.

The papal initiative of the crusade is usually neglected by the Venetian authors, although the crusade’s holly feature is often mentioned. Actually, there are very few the cases mentioning the Pope at the very beginning of the Fourth Crusade, that is category 4.[157] and in addition the chronicles Navagero [approached to 2.], It. VII. 89 [5.] and It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.][158].

p. 142

On the contrary, the Pope is mentioned on another occasion, that is the young Alexius’ escape from Constantinople and his arrival to Rome. Moreover, the Pope is supposed to be the one that directed the Byzantine prince towards Venice. At least, this is the version suggested by categories 4.[159], 5.[160] and 11.[161] and the chronicles Navagero [approached to 2.], It. VII. 2570 [6.] and Sanudo [7.][162]. Thus, these Venetian chronicles accredit the idea that the anti-Byzantine campaign was to be a papal endeavor. Some chronicles only mention the year of the beginning of Innocent III’s rule after the death of Celestine III and of his death[163]. The referrals to other moments are simple exceptions[164].

Innocent III would appear again only on the occasion of the election of the Venetian patriarch of Constantinople. There are only two chronicles that introduce the Papal initial opposition, that is Navagero [approached to 2.] and It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.][165]. In all the other cases, it seems that the pope was eager to agree with the election and even "alliegramente"[166], as if his confirmation and generally his attitude was an eternal approval to the Venetian deeds.

He is also mentioned on the occasion of the acquisition of the island of Crete from Boniface of Montferrat, when the respective document refers to the Papal authority[167].

For the Venetian tradition, all the other factors of this crusade outside of Venice (the papacy[168], the “Emperor Henry VI” and even the non-Venetian crusaders), initially

p. 143

presented pompously, would gradually pale as importance and the almost entire glory would belong to Venice and to its doge. Their initial presentation had been surely done in order to legitimate the enterprise.

As a prelude of this “Venetian crusade”, the Venetian chronicles refer to the anti-Christian campaign of Saladin. While some of them make a direct connection between Saladin’s conquest of the Holy Land and the gathering of the crusaders in Venice, there are some of them that induce directly the opinion that Soldan Saladino occupied Constantinople instead of Jerusalem[169]. Thus, this supposed event was to justify the crusade or at least the translation of the St. Stephen’s relics from Constantinople to Venice[170].

The episode that indirectly constituted the first cause of the crusaders' embarrassing situation that later would provoke the 'deviations' of this particular crusade, that is the death of Thibault of Champagne[171], is also represented in some Venetian chronicles, that is in the 1., 2., 6., 7. and 11. categories, as it follows:

1. The substitution of Thibault by Boniface is mentioned only later, in the context of the young Alexius' arrival inside of the crusader camp in Zara (1202). It is to be noticed that the matrimonial relationship between young Alexius and Philip of Swabia, as brothers-in-law, is transferred to Boniface of Montferrat, regarded as cognatus / chugnado:

Hist. Ducum: 93	It. VII. 2571: 101a	It. VII. 2581: 89a-89b
[...]. Phylipus autem, cum dicto puero et uxore propria habito consilio, deprecatorias literas et honorabiles duci Venecie tunc Iadre hyemanti destinavit, comitendo nihilominus Alexium marchioni de Mont-ferrato, cognato eiusdem, qui electus fuerat loco comitis de Campania, qui mortuus fuerat.	[...] el destina chomitando Alesio niente men al Marchese de Monferal so chugnado lo qual iera stado eleto in luogo del Conte de Campagna lo qual iera morta arezer lo esercito che doveva andar oltra il mar, lo qual Alesio con lo Marchese preditto honorificamente vene a Veniesia [...].	[...] el destina chometando Alessio niente men al Marchese de Monferal so chugnado lo qual jera stado eletto in luogo del Conte de Campagna, lo qual jera monta a rezer lo esercito che doveva andar oltra il mar lo qual asedio [= Alessio] con lo Marchese preditto honorificamente vene a Veniesia, [...].

p. 144

2. Since the very beginning, it is necessary to underline that there are only two chronicles in this category that makes referrals to this episode, since the chronicle A. Dandolo does not mention it. The particularity of this category resides in the fact that the death of Thibault is not mentioned at all. It is only a subsequent adherence to the crusade of Boniface, Hugue of St. Pol and Louis of Savoy to be presented. The chronicle P. Dolfin makes the difference between Louis of Blois, previously mentioned, and this Louis of Savoy. Since the episode could be detected in almost the same way in the chronicle Navagero, I attach it directly in this category, although it additionally mentions the reason, that is the death of Thibault, and it does not include Louis of Savoy:

Monacis: 134	P. Dolfin: 322a-322b	Navagero: 980-981
[...], supervenerunt postea apud praedictos Bonifacius Marchio Montis Ferrati, Henricus Comes Sancti Pauli, Ludovicus Comes Sabaudiae, [...].	[...], conzonti à questi Bonifacio di Monferato Marchexe, et Henrico Conte de San Polo, e Ludovico Duca de Savoia: [...].	[...]. Dopo pochi giorni morto il Conte Palatino, furono accettati nella lega Bonifacio Marchese del Monferrato, Eustachio Conte di San Polo; e quello del Monferrato fu fatto Capitano dell'esercito terrestre.

6. There already appears one strange peculiarity common to some Venetian chronicles. That is the substitution of Thibault of Champagne as the former leader of the crusade before Boniface of Montferrat with another French participant, that is Hugue of St. Pol. I am to recognize that I am not able to detect the real cause for this substitution. I could simply suppose that the denomination of San Polo was to be more at hand to the Venetian writers, more accustomed to their homonymous sestier di San Pollo. The death of "the Count of St. Pol" is directly put into connection to the crusaders' financial drawbacks:

It. VII. 2544: 42a, col. 2	It. VII. 2570: 21b-22a
[...] et siando zonti qua à Venecia li se escusano che per la morte del signor Conte de San Polo li non havevan ne potevan ottegnire quello che par li soi mesazi hera stado promesso de tanti dinarj, ma che loro se metevano in le sue man.	E siando zonttj quj in Veniexia, li se scuxa che per la mortte del signor Contte de San Polo li non haveva, ne podeva obtegnire quelo che per li soi mesazi i gera sta promeso de tanti danarj, ma che loro se buttava in le sue man.

7. The chronicle Caroldo follows the same manner of interpretation as category 1. just that the matrimonial relationship between Boniface and Alexius is transformed in congionti. The chronicle Sanudo (more exactly, its referrals to "another chronicles") could be approached to category 6.

Caroldo

[...]. Era venuto a questa impresa il Marchese Bonifatio di Monferà del giovine Alessio congionto; [...].

Sanudo 2: 530

E da sapere, che, come in altre Cronache ho letto, vennero a Venezia [...], e si scusarono, che il Conte di San Polo era morto, e però non aveano portato i danari con loro, che promisero di portare.

11. The succession in leadership from "Count of St. Pol" to Boniface is explicitly mentioned. Nevertheless, the Count of St. Pol would appear later in some of these codices

p. 145

on other occasions, such as the agreement with Venice[172]. As a note, chronicle It. VII. 550 only specifies the death of “Count of St. Pol”, ignoring Boniface of Montferrat’s taking of Cross. On the contrary, the chronicle Zancaruolo would reiterate this succession[173]:

It. VII. 78: 8a, col. 1	It. VII. 2543: 46b- 46 bis a	It. VII. 1577: 246	Barbaro: 219a
In quel tempo il Conte de Sam Polo vene a morte et per testamento ordino che le sue arme & la Croce † fussero portate al Marchexe Boniffacio de Monferra con tuto lo havere suo, in adiuto dela spexa da essere facta per dicto Marchexe aliegramente per dicta causa accepto.	[...]. In questo tempo lo Conte de San Polo morite e comando per suo testamento che la sua vesta de arme con la croxe fusse portada al Marchese Bonifatio di Monfera e tutto lo haver che lui havea proposso di spendere oltra al mar al ditto viazo el ditto Marchese per viesse di farlo de bona volglia.	[...]; e Conte de San Polo morì, el qual lasa per testamento che la sua vesta d'arme cum la crose fosse mandada al Marchese Bonifazio de Monfera, e riuilmente [?] i poderi che avea oltre il mar.	[...]. Ma avanti che vegnisse quel tempo, piasse a Dio de levar de vita il Conte de San Polo, un come s'e ditto capo principal della liga, per la morte del qual, ancorche lasasse suo herede, anche in questa impresa il Marchese Bonifacio de Monferà et ghe donasse l'insegna delle cruciata, che esso haveva, come capitano zenere della liga, [...].

It. VII. 798: xxi a	It. VII. 2560: 67a	It. VII. 2563: 10b	It. VII. 550: 71b
[...]; e, come piaque a dio, el mancho el Conte de San Polo, el qual laso per el suo testamento che lascia la sua vesta darme con la croce fose portada al Marchexe Bonifacio de Monfera e cusi tuto lo suo haver che lui havea pavado per portar oltra el mar, le qual cose el dito Marche aceto aliegramente.	[...] e, come piasete a Dio, el mancho el Conte de San Polo, el qual lasso e comando per lo so testamento che la soa vesta darme con la croxe fosse portada al Marchexe Bonifacio de Monfera. E cusi tuto lo so haver che luy haveva apariado per portar oltra mar. E arssi el dito Marchese azeto le dite cosse i molto allegramente.	[...], de i quali mancò de questa vita el Conte de San Polo, el qual lasso per so testamento, che la so vita darme, con la crose fosse portada al Marchexe Bonifatio de Monferra con tutto el suo haver che l'haveva, preparà da portar con luj oltra el mar per limprexa predita, le quale cose porte le fono al ditto Marchexe lo la aceta alliegramente et se offerse de andar in suo luogo, de bon animo et de bona uogia; [...].	[...], il Conte de San Pollo, il qual lascio in Testo, il qual manco de vita che la sua veste d'arme con la croce fusse portata al mar è tutto il resto che con lui portava [...].

It. VII. 1586: 33b	Zancaruolo: clxxxvij a-clxxxvij b	Z. Dolfin: 185 ff.
[...]; et, come el piacque à Dio, in questo tempo el Conte di San Polo el morì et li lascia et commanda per	[...]. In questo imteuin(?), el Conte de San Pollo morite. Lasso per testamento che la	[...]. Et come el piaxete a Dio, el mandio el Conte de San Polo, el qual lascio in

p. 146

sui testamento che la sua veste d'arme con la croce fosse portata al Marchese Bonifacio da Monferrato, et per simile tutto l'havere lui haveva apparrecchiato per portar oltra el mare per le spese fusse di bisogno al detto viaggio, et passaggio. El ditto Marchese Bonifatio attento di farle molto alegramente [...].

sua vesta con le arme con linsegna dela croce e li danarj preparati e ogni altra cossa per andar oltra el mar li fosse mandato al Marchese Bonifatio Monfera.

suo testamento che la sua veste d’arme cum la croxe fosse portada al Marchexe Bonifacio de Monfera et cusi tutto lo suo haver che lui havea parechiato per portar oltra el mar. Et cusi il ditto Marchexe rezevete quelle cose aliegramente.

Erizzo: 104a	Veniera 2580: 129a	Savina: 54b-55a
[...]. E, come el piaxete à Dio, el Conte de San Polo morì, el qual lassà, e con nu^ [?] dà per suo testamento che la suo vesta d'arme con la † fosse mandà al Marchexe Bonifacio de Monferrà e per el simel tutto lo suo haver che lui havessa appariado da portar oltra el mar e poi dado al ditto Marchexe la soraditte cose, lo le accettà molto alliegramente.	[...]; et, comme piache à Dio, manchò il Conte de San Polo, il qual lassò à testamento, che la sua veste d'arme con la croce fusse portata al Marchese Bonifattio de Monfera, et cussi tutto il suo haver, qual haveva apparechiato per portar oltra el mar; et portate le ditte cosse, el ditto Marchese le accettò alegramente, [...].	[...]. In questo mezo venne à morte el Conte de San Polo, uno di principali Signori della liga, el qual lassò per testamento le sue armadure e sora veste col segno della crosa centa al Marchese Bonifacio de Monferato, el qual per lui andar dovesse a questa impresa; [...].

Anyhow, the non-Venetian crusaders are also mentioned in some other contexts, beside the episode of their arrival to Venice (and then the substitution of the leader) and the one respecting the elections in 1204. I am to specify that I do not intend here to analyze the accuracy of the events' description and the events themselves neither. I am only to exclusively present those events that allow the mentioning of a non-Venetian crusader or another.

Among the non-Venetian crusaders, the most often presented character is undoubtedly Boniface of Montferrat, eclipsing to a certain extent even the Emperor Baldwin. It is certainly due to the fact that the marquis was in the middle of some events that directly concerned Venice, such as the ceding of Crete to the Commune of Venice (categories 1., 2., 3., 5., 6., 7., 9., 11. and in addition Abbiosi from category 10. and Trevisan)[174] and the similarities of his and the Doge's heraldic signs (categories 1., 2., 10., 11. and in addition Morosini and Trevisan from 4. and Donà from 5.)[175]. Actually, these two circumstances

p. 147

are common to almost all the Venetian chronicles and they made possible that the relationship between the doge and Boniface be somehow particular. Beside them, there were certainly other reasons: Boniface's leadership - so that he is sometimes regarded separately to the other non-Venetian crusaders (category 11.)[176], his participation to the agreement on March 1204[177] and so on. All these opportunities made that the Marquis of Montferrat be mentioned distinctly on different occasions: the new conventions signed by the Oltramontani with Venice (category 11.)[178], the marquis' preferential relationship with the young Alexius (category 1., Caroldo and It. VII. 2572)[179], his participation to the first[180] and second[181] sieges of the Byzantine capital and his part in the coronation of Alexius IV (category 11.), the capture of Alexius III (category 11.)[182], his campaign in Thracia and, episodically, his decision that the crusaders to remain in Constantinople for one year[183] and his supposed leading of the crusaders' retreat after the disaster from Adrianople[184]. In a particular case, that is the chronicles Tiepolo and Agostini, Boniface is mentioned in the original position of son-in law of the doge[185]. It seems that only this status allows him to be the only non-Venetian crusader referred to by these two chronicles.

p. 148

Beside the episode of his election, coronation and the territorial acquisitions in quality of emperor, Baldwin of Flanders is also mentioned on some occasions, but especially together with the Doge and/or with Boniface: the coronation of Alexius IV (categories 6. and 11.)[186], the decision that the Doge be the head of the army during the second siege (taken also together with Boniface) (category 11.)[187], the second capture of Constantinople. Still, Baldwin is also mentioned in some circumstances alone: the capture of different relics from Constantinople (categories 2., 7. and some codices from 11.)[188], the battle of Adrianople (category 2. and three other codices)[189] and its consequences and, rarely, the capturing of Alexius V Murtzuphlos[190] and the attacks of the Lascarides of Nicaea[191]. In connection with the depiction of Baldwin, it is quite interesting that the codices in category 8., which are completely inexact and fugitive with the events of the Fourth Crusade, still are very correct with an event that is rather marginalized by many Venetian writings, that is the Baldwin's death during the siege of Adrianople[192].

His brother, Henry of Hainault is naturally mentioned more occasionally as crusader. The references are reduced to the campaign together with Boniface in Thracia (category 3. and Navagero)[193] and his coronation after the battle of Adrianople (categories 2., 3., Caroldo and Erizzo)[194]. Obviously, Henry I would be mentioned again later, under the rule of the Doge Pietro Ziani.

Initially considered as the leader of the crusade and then regarded as dead by many chronicles, Hugue of Saint Pol would reappear during the second siege of Constantinople, certainly in the chronicles that did not make the confusion between him and Thiebault of Champagne[195].

On his turn, Louis of Blois appears as character only in connection with the battle of Adrianople (category 2.)[196].

Beside these authentic characters, some Venetian chronicles strangely introduce some fictive ones. Thus, Andrea / Adamo Marazzan, formerly mentioned as "valentissimo

p. 149

huomo", is directly linked with the first siege, being the one who definitely encouraged the Oltramontani[197]. Then, Piero da Brignol was the Frenchman who accidentally killed the Venetian Piero Alberti that had already put the St. Mark's flag on the Constantinopolitan walls[198]. Both of them are present in the same six chronicles belonging to category 11. Finally, a certain Corsin Sumaripa, seen as a Veronese, took part to the partitio theoretically achieving some islands in the arcipelago[199].

The mentioning of the non-Venetian participants could be somehow surprising, since the Venetian galleys' captains are very rarely mentioned. The examples are reduced to one chronicle from category 1. (It. VII. 2581) and three from 11. (Barbaro, Erizzo and Savina)[200]. This scarcity of information could be due to the fact that thus the authors intend to emphasize the doge's part in the expedition and to leave aside the possibility of the other possible Venetian as participant to the glorious event. The other exceptions when different Venetian participants are mentioned are reduced to the mentioning of Rainieri Dandolo, the doge's son[201], Francesco Maistropietro as the new castellan of Zara after its conquest[202],

p. 150

Vitale Dandolo[203], the episode of Pietro Alberti as the first one who get entered in Constantinople[204], the Venetian electors in 1204 (that is, beside Enrico Dandolo and Vitale Dandolo, Otto Querini, Nicolo Navigaioso, Bertucci Contarini and Pantaleone Barbo)[205] and the intervention of Pantaleone Barbo in the favor of Baldwin of Flanders[206], the elected Patriarch of Constantinople (either erroneously named Pantaleone Zustignan[207] or Fantin Dandolo[208], or rightly indicated as Tommaso Morosini[209]).

p. 151

Generally speaking, the non-Venetian participants are rather regarded as a whole, as Oltramontani or Franceschi, the examples above referring to particular characters being simple exceptions. Inside of the large quantity of information in the Fourth Crusasde's depiction, they are only seldom presented.

Analyzing the non-Venetian crusaders' image in the Venetian representation, it is to be underlined the definitely superior position attributed to the doge among all the others. Proportionally, the role of the non-Venetians is diminished. There are many episodes during the 1201-1204 events that are emphasized by the Venetian chroniclers in order to impose the Doge Enrico Dandolo as the central character in the struggles against the enemies.

For instance, the knights’ initial defeat during the second siege against Murtzuphlos is emphasized. This episode was to clearly illustrate that the doge's assistance was to be indispensable. Without it and without following the doge's advices, the Oltramontani were not able to lead the siege[210]. The presence of the doge seems not only salutary, but it only occurs in a more ceremonious ritual. While the Venetians' allies had first attacked the city disorderly, the Venetian intervention supposed the invocation of the Holy Spirit and takes place under the circumstances of the most ordinate rules of war.

Obviously, the propagandistic feature of the later Venetian sources imposed to promote the doge as the uncontested head of the crusade[211]. This tendency of the Venetian leaders in the 16^th century could only happily accepted a work like Villehardouin’s that emphasize the glorious moments of the Fourth Crusade and moreover put the Republic of St Mark in an extremely favorable light. That is why a manuscript of the Champenoise author’s memoirs was brought to Venice in 1541, so that the work became available for the Venetian lecturers[212]. The point is to establish to what an extent did Villehardouin’s work influenced the Venetian chronicles’ tradition.

Beside the general events that are naturally to be presented in all the works referring to the Fourth Crusade, there are some details that are to be found exclusively in Villehardouin and in the Venetian later works. I leave aside the direct influence that Villehardouin exerted upon Paolo Ramusio[213] and Andrea Morosini[214] and even on Francesco Sansovino[215]. I refer here to the Venetian general chronicles.

For instance, the fate of Alexius III after the second siege of Constantinople has almost the same description: the former emperor was captured by Boniface’s army and then

p. 152

sent to Montferrat[216]. On the contrary, other contemporary sources appreciate that Alexius III was granted with possessions by the new rulers in Constantinople[217].

The same is the case for the death of the Emperor Alexius IV Murtzuphlos, raised on a column in Constantinople and thrown down, episode associated with the supposed prophecy written under the respective column[218]. It is right that this episode was also presented by Robert of Clari[219], more disposed to narrate different prophecies and marvels connected to the Byzantine capital[220], and by Gunther of Pairis[221]. While Clari does not mention the capture of Murtzuphlos by Alexius III, but by “Thierri, brother of the count of Loos”[222], and Gunther, although mentions the blinding of Murtzuphlos by his father-in-law, commits clear errors about this latter, it should be concluded that it was Villehardouin who is the most approached to the Venetian tradition regarding this episode.

Another dispersed detail that is common to Villehardouin and the Venetian tradition, and that is not to be detected in any other source[223] is the one that present the two Venetian ships that directly participated to the conquest of the first Constantinopolitan towers in 1204, that are la Pelerine and li Paravis[224].

As a prelude of the second siege of Constantinople, the episode of the Murtzuphlos intention to burn the Venetian fleet is to be in detail found only in Villehardouin[225] and the Venetian chronicles. Clari and Gunther of Pairis do not mention it at all.

It is to be noticed that some chronicles in category 11a. state that the elections were to occur in a chapel of the palace in Constantinople where the Doge lived in[226]. They suggest thus that it was the Venetian Doge the one who direct the elections. Actually, the information is to be found only in the chronicle of Villehardouin: "[...], assemblerent a un rich palais, ou li dux de Venise ere a ostel, un des plus bials del munde."[227] On the contrary, Robert of Clari advances another version, that the elections were to take place "at the palace of Boukoleon, which belonged to the marquis"[228], while Nicetas Choniates invokes that the

p. 153

electors gathered in the Church of the Apostles "la giesia di Apostoli"[229]. This latter version was retaken only by the chronicle Savina[230].

It could be added the denomination that Villehardouin constantly gives to the Emperor Isaac II, that is Sursac or Sorsac[231], which could very well influence the later Venetian Irsac etc.

Moreover, an analysis of the Villehardouin’s text demonstrates that the French author prefers often the denomination of li barons for the non-Venetian crusaders, and li pelerin, more seldom li conte, li seigneur or li croisiez. Among the “ethnic” denominations, he seems to prefer li François, li Franc, and more seldom li Latin. On such a basis, one could compare them with the ones utilized by the Venetian chroniclers[232].

Another denomination that could derivate from Villehardouin is the one of “griffoni”, this time attributed to the Byzantines. The French chronicler utilizes “grifon / griffon” in three different circumstances[233]. Respecting the Venetian chronicles, the denomination was retaken many times, and accompanied by different legends regarding the throne in Constantinople[234].

The possible Villehardouin’s influence, absent in the Venetian chronicles that had been surely written before 1541, could help in the dating of the chronicles which are difficult to be established the period when they were composed, placing them after this year.

Anyhow, despite the above similarities, the Villehardouin’s influence remains only as a possibility. The respective common presentation of different details could be only incidentally, the events mentioned in the Venetian chronicles being nothing more than the preservation of a tradition. It seems more appropriate that the events themselves represented the same root for both Villehardouin and the Venetian tradition. At the same time, since the Venetian chronicles offer such a diversity of interpretations, the possible Villehardouin’s influence on them is no more than tangential.

It seems more appropriate that the Venetian authors followed a particular path, which originality consists first and foremost in the emphasizing of the Venetian Doge’s part in the events.

p. 154

List of abbreviations for the Venetian chronicles utilized in this study:

Published chronicles:

Hist. Ducum	« Historia Ducum Veneticorum » (ed. by H. Simonsfeld), in Monumenta Germaniae Historiae, Scriptores, vol. 14, Hannover : Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, 1883 : 72-97a
Canal	Les estoires de Venise. Cronaca Veneziana in lingua francese dalle origini alle 1275 (ed. by Alberto Limentani), Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 1972b
A. Dandolo	“Andreae Danduli Duci Venetorum. Chrnoica per extensium descripta aa. 46-1280 d. C.” (ed. by Ester Pastorello), in Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, vol. 12, new edition, Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli, 1923: 5-327c
Monacis	Laurentii de Monacis Veneti Cretae Cancellari Chronica de rebus venetis Ab U. C. ad Annum MCCCLIV. sive ad conjurationem ducis Faledro (ed. by Flaminius Cornelius), Venice: Typographis Remondiniana, 1758d

p. 155

Morosini	The Morosini Codex (ed. by Michele Pietro Ghezzo, John Melville-Jones and Andrea Rizzi), 2 vols., Padua: Archivio del Litorale Adriatico, 1999-2000e
Sabellico	“M. Antonii Sabellici, rerum Venetarum ab urbe condita, ad Marcum Barbadicum, Sereniss. Venetiarum Principem & Senatum, Decadis Primae”, in Degl’Istorici delle Cose Veneziane, I quali hanno scritto per Pubblico Decreto, Venice: Lovissa, 1718 [first edition 1489]f
Sanudo	“Marini Sanuti Leonardi filii Patricii Veneti De Origine Urbis Venetae et vita omnium Ducum feliciter incipit”, in Rerum Italicarum Sriptores (ed. by Ludovicus Antonius Muratorius), vol. 22, Milan: Typographaia Societatis Palatinae in Regia Curia, 1733: Vitae Ducum Venetorum Italicae Scriptae ab originis Urbis, sive ab anno CCCCXXI, usque ad annum MCCCXCIII: 399-1252g
Navagero	“Storia della Repubblica Veneziana scritta de Andrea Navagero patrizio Veneto” (ed. by Ludovicus Antonius Muratorius), in Rerum Italicarum Scriptores, vol. 23, Milan: Typographia Societatis Palatinae in Regia Curia, 1733: 923-1216h
Sansovino	Venetia Città nobilissima et singolare (ed. by Giustiniano Martinioni), vol. 2, Venice: Filippi, 1968 [1663]

Chronicles in manuscript*:

It. VII. 2592	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1247, manuscript It. VII. 2592 [= 12484]i
Marco	Marci Chronica universalis…, manuscript It. XI. 124 [= 6802]j

p. 156

It. VII. 78	Cronaca Veneziana dall’anno 1190 all’anno 1332, manuscript It. VII. 78 [= 9135] (Carile, June 1965; Carile, October 1966; Loenertz, January 1967)k
It. VII. 2543	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1356, manuscript It. VII. 2543 [= 12435]l
E. Dandolo	Enrico Dandolo. Cronaca Veneta dall’origine della Città fino al 1373, manuscript It. VII. 102 [= 8142]m
It. VII. 2541	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1310, manuscript It. VII. 2541 [= 12433]n
It. VII. 2544	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1382, manuscript It. VII. 2544 [= 12436]o
Caroldo	Gianiacopo Caroldo. Cronaca Veneziana, sino all’anno 1382, manuscript It. VII. 128-b [= 7443] (Thiriet, December 1952; Carile, June 1965)p
It. VII. 1577	Cronaca della Città di Venezia dalla sua fondazione fino all’anno 1400, manuscript It. VII. 1577 [= 7973] (Thiriet, June 1951; Loenertz, May 1965)q

p. 157

It. VII. 2548	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1405, manuscript It. VII. 2548 [= 12440]r
It. VII. 89	Cronaca Veneta dal principio della Città fino al 1410, manuscript It. VII. 89 [= 8391] (Thiriet, June 1951; Loenertz, May 1965; Carile, June 1965; Carile, March 1966; Loenertz, December 1966)s
It. VII. 2550	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1410, manuscript It. VII. 2550 [= 12442]t
Barbaro	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1275, manuscript It. VII. 2554 [= 12446]u
pseudo-Dolfin	Cronaca di Venezia, detta di Pietro Dolfino, dall’origine della Città sino all’anno 1418, manuscript It. VII. 559 [= 7888] (Loenertz, May 1955; Loenertz, June 1960; Loenertz, May 1964; Carile, June 1965; Carile, March 1966; Loenertz, April 1966; Carile, February 1967)v
It. VII. 2556	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1422, manuscript It. VII. 2556 [= 12448]w
P. Dolfin	Dolfin, Pietro. Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1422, manuscript It. VII. 2557 [= 12449]x
It. VII. 2559	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1427, manuscript It. VII. 2559 [= 12451]y

p. 158

It. VII. 2560	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1432, manuscript It. VII. 2560 [= 12452]z
It. VII. 798	Cronaca Veneta dall’origine della città sino all’anno 1478, manuscript It. VII. 798 [= 7486] (Thiriet, June 1951; Loenertz, May 1965; Carile, June 1965; October 1966; June 1970)aa
It. VII. 44	Cronaca Veneziana dal principio della Città fino al 1433, manuscript It. VII. 44 [= 7865] (Thiriet, May 1951)bb
It. VII. 2563	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1441, manuscript It. VII. 2563 [= 12455]cc
It. VII. 550	Cronaca dall’origine di Venezia sino all’anno 1442, manuscript It. VII. 550 [= 8496] (Thiriet, May 1951; Loenertz, May 1965; Carile, June 1965; Carile, October 1966; Loenertz, October 1966; Carile, June 1970)dd
Abbiosi	Abbiosi Camilo detto il Seniore da Ravenna. Cronaca di Venezia dall’origine della Città fino all’anno 1443, manuscript It. VII. 2052 [= 8981] (Thiriet, May 1951; Carile, December 1966)ee
It. VII. 1586	Cronaca Veneta dal principio della città fino al 1450, manuscript It. VII. 1586 [= 9611] (Thiriet, June 1951; Loenertz, May 1965)ff
Trevisan	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1444, manuscript It. VII. 2567 [= 12459]gg
Zancaruolo	Cronaca Veneta supposta di Gasparo Zancaruolo, dall’origine della Città fino al 1446, manuscript It. VII. 1274 [= 9274]hh

p. 159

It. VII. 2570	Zancaruol, Gasparo. Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1446, manuscript It. VII. 2570 [= 12462] (Carile, April 1977)ii
Curato	Antonio di Matteo di Curato. Cronaca Veneta, manuscript It. VII. 162 [= 8037] – pana la 1457jj
It. VII. 796	Cronaca Veneta da S. Marco Evang. fino al 1457, manuscript It. VII. 796 [= 7613] (Thiriet, March 1951; Loenertz, June 1965; Carile, July 1965)kk
It. VII. 2571	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1457, manuscript It. VII. 2571 [= 12464]ll
It. VII. 2581	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1570, manuscript It. VII. 2581 [= 12473]mm
Z. Dolfin	Cronaca di Venezia dall’origine della Città sino all’anno 1458, manuscript It. VII. 794 [= 8503]nn

p. 160

It. VII. 2572	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1471, manuscript It. VII. 2572 [= 12464]oo
It. VII. 793	Cronaca di Venezia dall’origine della città al 1478, manuscript It. VII. 793 [= 8477] (Thiriet, March 1951; Loenertz, May 1965; Carile, June 1965; Loenertz, April 1966)pp
Donà	Antonio Donà. Cronaca Veneta dall’anno 687 al 1479, manuscript It. VII. 10 [= 8607] (Carile, December 1966; Loenertz, January 1967)qq
Erizzo	Cronaca Veneta attribuita a Marcantonio Erizzo, fino all’anno 1495, manuscript It. VII. 56 [= 8636] (Carile, June 1965)rr
It. VII. 2555	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1414, manuscript It. VII. 2555 [= 12447]ss
It. VII. 2576	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1501, manuscript It. VII. 2576 [= 12468]tt
Tiepolo	Giovanni Tiepolo Patriarca di Venezia. Cronaca Veneta ad esso attribuita dall’anno 421 al 1524, manuscript It. VII. 129 [= 8323]uu
Barbo	Cronaca Veneta detta Barba dal principio della Città fino al 1545, manuscript It. VII. 66 [= 7766]vv
It. VII. 67	Cronaca Veneta dal principio della Città fino all’anno 1549, mannuscript It. VII. 67 [= 9132] (Carile, December 1966)ww

p. 161

Veniera 2580	Cronaca di Venezia fino al 1556, manuscript It. VII. 2580 [= 12472]xx
Agostini	Agostino Agostini. Storia veneziana di Agostino Agostini dal principio della fondazione di Venezia (421) fino all’anno 1570, Biblioteca della Fondazione Querini Stampalia, manuscript IV. 16 [= 770]yy
Veniera 791	Cronaca Veniera, manuscript It. VII. 791 [= 7589] (Thiriet, March 1951)zz
It. VII. 71	Cronaca Veneta dal principio della Città fino al 1600, manuscript It. VII. 71 [= 7866]aaa
It. VII. 1800	Estratti da una Cronaca Anonima dal principio della Città fino all’anno 1616, manuscript It. VII. 1800 [= 7682]bbb
Savina	(Girolamo Savina). Cronaca Veneta dal principio della Città sino al 1616, manuscript It. VII. 134 [= 8035]ccc
It. VII. 1833	Storia Veneta dalla fondazione della Republica sino all’anno 1750, manuscript It. VII. 1833 [= 8376]ddd

Appendix. Denominations attributed to the non-Venetian crusaders by the Venetian chroniclers

For this material, permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use.

Whether you intend to utilize it in scientific purposes, indicate the source: either this web address or the Annuario. Istituto Romeno di cultura e ricerca umanistica 4 (2002), edited by Şerban Marin, Rudolf Dinu and Ion Bulei, Venice, 2002

No permission is granted for commercial use.

© Şerban Marin, August 2002, Bucharest, Romania

serban_marin@rdslink.ro

Back to Geocities

Back to Yahoo

Back to Homepage Annuario 2002

---

* Donald E. Queller, The Latin Conquest of Constantinople, New York, London, Sydney, Toronto: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1971: 110.

[1] Ludovico Gatto explicitly names the title referring to this particular crusade as « La crociata dei Veneziani », see Ludovico Gatto, Le crociate, Rome: Tascabili Economici Newton, 1994: 76-79 (76).

[2] See M. S. de Mas Latrie, Histoire de l'ile de Chypre sous le règne des princes de la maison de Lusignan, I, Paris: Imprimerie Impériale, 1861 : 164 : « Henri Dandolo, admiré de l"armée entière, le conseil et le héros de cette marveilleuse conquête. » ; Lodovico Streit, "Venezia e la quarta crociata" (translation by R. Fulin, of Venedig und die Wendung des vierten Kreuzzuges gegen Konstantinopel, Anklam: Krüger, 1877), Archivio Veneto 8 (1878), vol. 16, part 1: 46-94 and 239-271 (254 and 261 : where he regards this crusade as a particular conflict between the doge and the pope;  265 : « Che nella direzione della quarta crociata Enrico Dandolo sia stato, anche in opposizione con Innocenzo, « auctor rerum », credo di averlo dimostrato abbastanza » ; also about Dandolo : « Chi vorrà oggi censurare l"uomo, il quale ha deciso per molti secoli la sorte di tutto intero l"Oriente? »; W. Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant au moyen-âge (French edition by Furcy Raynaud, I, Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1983 (reprinting of Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1885-1886) : 266 (« [...] le doge Dandolo [...], le véritable chef de l"expédition. ») ; Charles Diehl, Un république patricienne. Venise, Paris: Ernest Flammarion, 1915 : 50 (« [...], Dandolo fut l"âme de tout. ») (Without accusing him directly, the author regards Dandolo as the director of the entire action, and even as « héros national qui a fondé l"empire vénitien en Orient » : 53) ; A. A. Vasiliev, History of the Byzantine Empire 324-1453, n. pl.: The University of Wisconsin Press, [1932] : 452 (« But the central figure of the crusade was the doge of Venice, Enrico Dandolo, [...]. ») ; Louis Halphen, L'essor de l'Europe (XI^e-XIII^e siècles), Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1941 [1932] : 284; N. Iorga, France de Constantinople et de Morée, Bucharest: [n. ed.], 1935 : 11 (« Lorsque les Vénitiens ont accepté de conduire les croisés, [...] »; Freddy Thiriet, La Romanie vénitienne au moyen age. Le développement de l'exploitation du domaine colonial vénitien (XII^e-XV^e siècles), Paris: E. de Broccard, 1959 : 75 : « Or Dandolo paraît bien avoir mis l"ascendant qu"il exerçait sur tous au crédit exclusif de sa patrie. » ; Andrea Da Mosto, I dogi di Venezia nella vita publica e privata, Milan: Aldo Martello, [1960] : 73 : « Ma il grande posto che occupa nella storia Enrico Dandolo lo deve al fatto di avere capitanato la quarta crociata [...]. La spedizione, agli ordini del Dandolo, eletto unanimamente capo supremo, [...] » ; Denis A. Zakythinos, "La conquête de Constantinople en 1204, Venise et le partage de l'Empire byzantin", in Venezia dalla Prima crociata alla Conquista di Costantinopoli del 1204, Florence: G. C. Sansoni, 1965: 139-155 (150 : Dandolo regarded as « auctor rerum ») ; Donald M. Nicol, "The Fourth Crusade and the Greek and Latin Empires, 1204-61", in The Cambridge Medieval History, vol. IV: The Byzantine Empire, part 1: Byzantium and its Neighbours (ed. by J. M. Hussey), Cambridge: University Press, 1966: 275-330 (278 : « [...] the Doge of Venice [...] as the only realist in a tale of confused aims and misdirected ideals. » ; A. J. Andrea and Ilona Motsiff, "Pope Innocent III and the Diversion of the Fourth Crusade Army to Zara", Byzantinoslavica 33 (1972), no. 1: 6-25 (24); Donald E. Queller, The Fourth Crusade. The Conquest of Constantinople. 1201-1204, [Leicester]: Leicester University Press, 1978 : 53 (« Time and again they were to turn to him for leadership, and in the heat of battle no man would show greater courage than his [Dandolo’s]. ») ; Giorgio Cracco, Un "altro mondo". Venezia nel medioevo. Dal secolo XI al secolo XIV, Torino: UTET, 1986 : 60 (« [...] lo stesso duca Enrico Dandolo fosse a capo della spedizione, [...] ») ; Nicol, Byzantium and Venice. A study in diplomatic and cultural relations, [Cambridge]: Cambridge University Press, 1988 : 128 (« From the moment when Geoffrey of Villehardouin put his signature to the treaty the crusade was dominated by Venice »), 127-128 (that the doge knew in advance that the crusaders were not able to fulfil their obligations), 134 (that the doge knew also that the young Alexius’ promisses are impossible to be fulfilled) etc.

[3] O City of Byzantium, Annals of Niketas Choniates [hereafter, Choniates] (translated by Harry J. Magoulias), Detroit: Wayne State University, 1984 : 295.

[4] The Capture of Constantinople. The Hystoria Constantinopolitana of Gunther of Pairis [hereafter, Gunther] (ed. by Alfred J. Andrea), Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 1997: 97: "In the case of matters that were unclear, the others always took every care to seek his [Dandolo's] advice, and they usually followed his lead in public affairs." Also very concise in the Doge’s depiction, the anonymous author of Chronista Novgorodensis specifies that “Qui dux grande bellum urbi molitus est; omnes enim ei obtemperabant, quum suae essent naves quae urbem ceperant.”, see "Chronista Novgorodensis" [hereafter, Novgorod], in Chroniques Greco-Romanes inedites ou peu connues (ed. by Charles Hopf), Berlin: Weidmann, 1873: 93-98 (98).

[5] Samuele Romanin, Storia documentata di Venezia, 10 vols., vol. 2, 2^nd ed., Venice : Giusto Fuga, 1912 (1853) : 180 (Dandolo is considered as « il primo promotore dell’impresa »; John Knight Fotheringham, "Genoa and the Fourth Crusade", The English Historical Review 25 (1910): 26-57 (35); Diehl, Un république patricienne, cit., 1915 : 52 ; Leopoldo Usseglio, I marchesi di Monferrato in Italia ed in Oriente durante i secoli XII e XIII (ed. by Carlo Patrucco, vol. II, Turin: Miglietta, 1926 : 243 (about Dandolo’s somma influenza); Roberto Cessi, « Venezia e la quarta crociata », Archivio Veneto, V series, 48 (1951) : 1-52 (48, about the Venetians’ posizione preminente during the elections on 1204) ; Idem, "L'eredità di Enrico Dandolo", Archivio Veneto, serie V, 67 (1960): 1-25 (10 : arbitro) ; Steven Runciman, A History of the Crusades, vol. III: The Kingdom of Acre and the Later Crusades, Cambridge: University Press, 1966 : 124; Cognasso, Storia delle crociate, cit. : 1967 : 742; Cessi, Storia della Repubblica di Venezia, Florence: Giunti Martello, 1981 : 192.

[6] Choniates : 295.

[7] See Vasiliev, History of the Byzantine Empire, cit. : 452, 453 ; George Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, revised edition, New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1969 [1952] : 414 ; Francesco Cognasso, Storia delle crociate, [Milan]: dall'Oglio, 1967 : 742; Michael Angold, The Byzantine Empire 1025-1204. A Political History, London, New York: Longman, 1984 : 288; Mario Gallina, Potere e società a Bisanzio. Dalla fondazione di Costantinopoli al 1204, Turin: Giulio Einaudi, 1995 : 320 etc. See above, note 2.

[8] Urkunden zur älteren Handels- und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig mit besonderer Beziehung auf Byzanz und die Levante (ed. by G. L. Fr. Tafel and G. M. Thomas) [hereafter, Tafel-Thomas], vol. 1 : 814-1205, Amsterdam: Verlag Adolf M. Hakkert, 1964 : doc. CV : Innocentius III exercitui Crucesignatis. Consilium, quod Papa ipsis mittit sine bulla [dated 1203] : 417-419 (418).

[9] Queller (edited by), The Latin Conquest of Constantinople, New York, London, Sydney, Toronto: John Wiley and Sons, 1971: xiii.

[10] Even the Venetians did not exploit it to the end, since they achieved less than it had been stipulated in the partitio agreement. This fact is less underlined by the scholars. For partitio Romaniae and its practical territorial results, see especially William Miller, The Latins in the Levant. A History of Frankish Greece (1204-1566), London : John Murray, 1908 ; Zakythinos, « La conquête de Constantinople », cit. ; Antonio Carile, "Partitio Terrarum Imperii Romanie", Studi Veneziani 7 (1965): 125-305 ; Idem, « La Partitio Terrarum Imperii Romanie del 1204 nella tradizione storica dei Veneziani », Rivista di Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici, new series, 2-3 [12-13] (1965-1966) : 167-179 ; Nicolas Oikonomides, « La décomposition de l"Empire byzantin à la veille de 1204 et les origines de l"Empire de Nicée : à propos de la Partitio Romaniae », in XV^e Congrès International d’Etudes Byzantines, Rapports et co-rapports, Athènes, 1976 : 3-28 reprinted in Idem, Byzantium from the Ninth Century to the Fourth Crusade. Studies, Texts, Monuments, Hampshire-Brookfield, Vermont : Variorum, 1992 : XX etc.

[11] For this, see Queller and Susan J. Stratton, « A Century of Controversy on the Fourth Crusade », Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History 6 (1969) : 235-277 reprinted in Queller, Medieval Diplomacy and the Fourth Crusade, London : Variorum Reprints, 1980 :X ; Queller, The Latin Conquest of Constantinople, cit.

[12] Achille Luchaire, Innocent III. La Question d'Orient, second edition, Paris: Hachette et C^ie, 1911 : 97. The pseudo-solution offered by Luchaire have many times been rejected by Queller, see "A Century of Controversy", cit.: 235-277 (256); The Latin Conquest of Constantinople, cit.: 66, 109; The Fourth Crusade, cit.: ix. Nevertheless, the problem of different responsabilities in connection to this crusade was also considered that « a chance d"être un faux problème » by Paul Lemerle, « Byzance et la Croisade », in Comitato Internazionale di Scienza Storiche. X. Congresso Internazionale di Scienze Storiche Roma 4-11 Settembre 1955, Relazioni, vol. 3, Florence, 1955 : 611 and by Zakythinos, « La conquête de Constantinople », cit. : 140.

[13] Strictly referring to the events of the Fourth Crusade, the rejection of the Venetian tradition could be detected in : Iorga, France de Constantinople, cit. : 28 (expressing his doubts regarding the veracity of the chronicle A. Dandolo) ; Cessi, « Venezia e la quarta crociata », cit., 1952 : 48 (neglecting the « testimonianze tardive ») ; Idem, "L'eredità di Enrico Dandolo", cit., 1960 : 9, note 2 (talking about Ramusio, « che ha contaminato tradizioni ormai corrotte dal tempo, per convalidare una versione, che non trova credito in nessuna fonte contemporanea ; he also criticizes the chronicle Barbaro) ; Kenneth M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant (1204-1571), vol. 1: The Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries, Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1976 : 9-10, note 27 (« In comparison with the documentary sources the Venetian chronicles are of slight value for the history of the Fourth Crusade except to show the self-righteous mentality of the Venetian ruling class ») ; Cessi, Storia della Repubblica di Venezia, cit. : 193 (referring to Martino da Canale, considered as a « tarda invenzione »).

[14] Thiriet, "Les chroniques vénitiennes de la Marcienne et leur importance pour l'histoire de la Romanie gréco-vénitienne", excerpt from Mélanges d'Archéologie et d'Histoire, publiés par l'École Française de Rome, 1954: 241-292 ; Idem, La Romanie vénitienne, cit.

[15] J. K. Fotheringham, Marco Sanudo, Oxford, 1915: 41.

[16] See Idem, "Genoa and the Fourth Crusade", cit.: 44, 45, 46, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 55, etc. The referrences are to the chronicles Hist. Ducum, Canal, A. Dandolo, Barbaro, Navagero, Sanudo, the chronicle of Stefano Magno and even to some anonymous chronicles. Among the codices that I have studied by now, the name of J. K. Fotheringham appears on the following schedoni: It. VII. 58, It. VII. 905 (a version of the chronicle Caroldo), It. VII. 1577, It. VII. 56 (the chronicle Erizzo), It. VII. 78, It. VII. 79, It. VII. 89, It. VII. 102 (the chronicle Curato), studied in January, August and September 1907. Such an attitude towards the Venetian chronicles had been promoted by Romanin, Storia documentata, cit., who had made referrals to many chronicles in Italian and Latin from Marciana and Museo Civico Correr, as if considering them as primary sources (he often cites from the chronicles A. Dandolo, Caroldo, Barbaro and Trevisan, but also from Canal, Monacis, Morosini, Navagero, Sanudo, Zancaruolo, Z. Dolfin, Savina, Veniera, Stefano Magno, Paolo Morosini and many anonymous chronicles.

[17] Robert Lee Wolff, "A New Document from the Period of the Latin Empire of Constantinople: The Oath of the Venetian Podestà", Annuaire de l'Institut de Philologie et d'Histoire Orientales et Slaves 12 [= Mélanges Grégoire, IV, Bruxelles, 1953], reprinted in Idem, Studies in the Latin Empire of Constantinople, Londra, 1976, X : 539-573 (546).

[18] Ibidem, : 543, note 5.

[19] Common to almost all the scholars, the distinction has been specifically mentioned in some occasions, see Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant, cit., : 269 : « Les conquérants, d"ailleurs, étaient divisés en deux parties bien tranchées, chacune poursuivant un intérêt particuliers : tels il avaient été pendant la campagne, tels ils restèrent au moment du partage ; d"un côté les Vénitiens, de l"autre les croisés (peregrini) » ; Charles M. Brand, Byzantium confronts the West 1180-1204, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1968 : 234 :  «  The expedition tended to fall into halves : the Venetians and the « French » ». A more nuanced accidental version, in Iorga, France de Constantinople, cit., : 4 (« [La croisade] est arrivée à la conquête de Constantinople par les Occidentaux proprement dits, et par ces autres Occidentaux, d"un caractère bien différent, ayant une autre conception de leur mission et un autre système d"exploitation de la conquête, qui étaient les Vénitiens. ») ; Andrea, in Gunther: 154, note 83: "[...], the two major group of crusaders, the Venetians and the non-Venetians, [...]".

[20] See [Geoffroi de] Villehardouin, La conquête de Constantinople [hereafter, Villehardouin] (ed. by Edmond Faral), 2 vols., Paris: Les belles lettres, 1938-1939; Robert of Clari, The Conquest of Constantinople [hereafter, Clari] (translated by Edgar Holmes McNeal), New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1969. See also Gunther ; « Corpus Chronicorum Flandriae », in Tafel-Thomas : I, 293-304 (with the separation between Veneti and Gallici / Franci) ; « Chronicum Gallicum ineditus » [hereafter, Chronicum Gallicum], in Tafel-Thomas : I, 328-358 [according to Gabriel Hanotaux, « Les Vénitiens, ont"ils trahi la Chrétienté en 1202 ? », Revue historique 2 (1877) : 74-102 (76), the chronicle’s author should be Baudouin d’Avesnes] (with the separation between les Venissiens and les Franchois ; the anonymous author is visibly inspired by Villehardouin, whom he quotes : 356); "Devastatio Constantinopolitana" [hereafter, Devastatio], in Chroniques Greco-Romanes, cit.: 86-92. Especially this latter makes always the separation between "peregrini" and "Veneti". The work was produced in the crusaders' milieu since it refers to a certain instant to "parte nostra" (92). See also the later Chronicle of Morea, in Chronique de la Conquête de Constantinople et de l'établissement des Français en Morée (ed. by J. A. Buchon), Paris: Verdière, 1825 and another edition, The Chronicle of Morea, To cronikon tou MorewV. A History in political Verse, relating the Establishment of Feudalism in Greece by the Franks in the Thirteenth Century, edited by John Schmitt, London: Methuen & Co., 1904.

[21] Innocentii III ... Epistolae, in Patrologia Latina, vols. 214-217 (ed. by J.-P. Migne), Paris, 1855; Gesta Innocentii PP. III. Patrologia Latina, vol. 214 (ed. by J.-P. Migne), Paris, 1855.

[22] It is true that Choniates makes sometimes referrals to "the Venetians". Indeed, it is a general tendency for the Byzantine writers to regard sometimes the Venetians separately inside of "the Western nations", see Catherine Asdracha, "L'image de l'homme occidental à Byzance: le témoignage de Kinnamos et de Choniates", Byzantinoslavica 44 (1983): 31-40 (33: "[...] les Vénitiens sont presque les seuls parmi les Occidentaux à figurer sous leur vrai nom ethnique [...]"). Nevertheless, it seems that Choniates prefers the general term of "the Latins". He follows his pathern more usually and, moreover, also when he refers to the fleet, narrating about "the Latin naval forces" positioned in front of Constantinople during the first siege, see Choniates : 298. He speakes also about "the Latins" when he refers to the conquest of Zara in 1202, see Choniates : 296 and many other contexts of the crusade that undoubtedly the Venetians also participated to. His referrals to "the Venetians" seems to be utilized only in the purpose to emphasize the character of the Doge Enrico Dandolo, who is Choniates' favorite "evil" character, the one who directed the non-Venetian crusaders (seen as simple "confederates", see Choniates : 295) and who manipulated the elections in 1204, see Choniates : 328. The Choniates' pattern is followed and even accentuated by Novgorod: 98 that also presents the Byzantine view, just that "the Latins" are substituted by "Franci". In this case, there is only one time when the Venetians are distinctly regarded, when the Doge is presented along with other main “Frankish” participants.

[23] Iorga, France de Constantinople, cit., : 4 makes an attempt in this sense : « Et les Vénitiens s"y obligeaient, non pas autant à participer à la croisade, [...], mais uniquement à être, [...], « les voituriers », les fournisseurs de vaissaux et les profiteurs éventuels de la croisade. ». For Iorga’s position regarding the Fourth Crusade and the Venetian condemnation, see Şerban Marin, « Nicolae Iorga e la cronachistica veneziana », in Quaderni della Casa Romena di Venezia 1 (2001) : Quaderni Nicolae Iorga. Atti del Convegno italo-romeno N. Iorga, organizzato all’Istituto Romeno di Cultura di Venezia. 9-10 novembre 2000 (ed. by Ion Bulei and Şerban Marin), Bucharest : Enciclopedică, 2001 : 48-65 (52-57).

[24] Comte Riant, "Innocent III, Philippe de Souabe et Boniface de Montferrat. Examen des causes qui modifièrent, au détriment de l'empire grec, le plan primitif de la quatrième croisade", Revue des Questions Historiques 27 (1875) , 9: 321-374 (336), 10 : 5-75. The Venetians seem to be depicted as simple instruments also by Paul Alphandéry, La Chrétienté et l'Idée de Croisade, II: Recommencements nécessaires (XII^e-XIII^e siècles) (ed. by Alphonse Dupront), Paris: Albin Michel, 1959.

[25] Villehardouin: I, 68/69. See also Chronicum Gallicum : 336-337.

[26] Clari: 40. It is not the case of Gunther of Pairis, whose anti-Venetian attitude is manifest, see Gunther: 77-78, 80 (definitely condamning the Venetians in connection to the Zara episode), 90-91 (for the Venetians' avarice) and so on.

[27] Luchaire, Innocent III, cit. : 78.

[28] Runciman, A History of the Crusades, cit. : 115 ; Nicol, "The Fourth Crusade and the Greek and Latin Empires », cit. : 279 ; Halphen, L'essor de l'Europe, cit., : 281 (specifying that « D"abord les Vénitiens [...] avaient, lors de la marche sur Zara, changé d"attitude et manifesté soudain une vocation irrésistible pour la guerre sainte »).

[29] Romanin, Storia documentata, cit. : 154-155 (simply quoting Villehardouin, without any additional commentary) ; Streit, "Venezia e la quarta crociata", cit., : 57 (then, when the author commences the proper narration of the events : 253 ff, the episode is omitted. Prior to refer strictly to the Fourth Crusade, the author had followed the Norden’s theory, presenting the Fourth Crusade in a larger context in time, see Walter Norden, Der vierte Kreuzzug im Rahmen der Beziehungen des Abendlandes zu Byzanz, Berlin: E. Beck, 1898, and later Usseglio, I marchesi di Monferrato, cit.; Edgar H. McNeal and Robert Lee Wolff, "The Fourth Crusade", in A History of the Crusades (ed. by Kenneth M. Setton), vol. II: The Later Crusades 1189-1311 (ed. by Robert Lee Wolff and Henry W. Hazard), Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1962: 153-185 (168); Brand, Byzantium confronts the West, cit., etc.) ; Camillo Manfroni, Storia della marina italiana dalle invasioni barbariche al trattato di Ninfeo (anni c. 400-1261), Livorno: R. Accademia Navale, 1899 : 312 (still, the episode is placed somewhere during the arrival of the ambassadors to Venice ; this is not the only error that characterizes Manfroni’s text, see 309 : Philip of Swabia as young Alexius’ uncle instead of brother-in-law ; 310, 314, 316 : Conrad instead of Boniface of Montferrat ; 338 : Crete promised to Boniface by giovane imperatore Isacco instead of young Alexius etc.); Usseglio, I marchesi di Monferrato, cit., : 197 ; Louis Bréhier, L'Eglise et l'Orient au moyen age. Les Croisades, sixth edition, Paris: Lecoffre, 1928 : 155 ; Jean Longnon, L'empire latin de Constantinople et la principauté de Morée, Paris: Payot, 1949 : 31; McNeal and Wolff, « The Fourth Crusade », cit.; Setton, The Papacy and the Levant, cit.: 8 ; J. Folda, "The Fourth Crusade, 1201-1203. Some Reconsiderations", Byzantinoslavica 26 (1965), 2: 277-290 (288) ; Joseph Gill, "Franks, Venetians, and Pope Innocent III 1201-1203", Studi Veneziani 12 (1970): 85-105 (89) ; Frederic C. Lane, Storia di Venezia [original title : Venice. A Maritime Republic], Turin : Einaudi, 1991 [1973] : 45 ; John Godfrey, 1204: The Unholy Crusade, Oxford: [Oxford University Press], 1980 : 77 (adding that « It would be naïve to dismiss these proceedings as insincere. »); Angold, The Byzantine Empire, cit. : 292 (in a moment « when it seemed that the crusade might break up, [...] » ; Nicol, Byzantium and Venice, cit., 1988 : 131-132 (adding that : 132 « [...] and the expedition had gained a new leader, a man of great wisdom, courage and experience. »).

[30] Francesco Cerone, "Il papa ed i veneziani nella quarta crociata", Archivio Veneto, new series, 18 (1888), vol. 36, 1: 57-70, 287-297.

[31] For the crusader vow, see Michel Villey, La croisade. Essai sur la formation d'une theorie juridique. These pour le doctorat en droit, Caen: Imprimerie Caennaise, 1942: esp. 119-127; James A. Brundage, "A Note on the Attestation of Crusaders' Vows", The Catholic Historical Review 52 (1966): 234-239, reprinted in Idem, The Crusades, Holy War and Canon Law, Aldershot, Brookfield, Vermont: Variorum, 1991: VIII; Idem, "The Votive Obligations of Crusaders. The Development of a Canonistic Doctrine", Traditio 24 (1968): 77-118, reprinted in loc. cit.: VI.

[32] Queller and Gerald W. Day, "Some Arguments in Defense of the Venetians on the Fourth Crusade", The American Historical Review 83 (June 1976), 3: 717-737 (720), reprinted in Idem, Medieval Diplomacy, cit. : XIII : « By this act the Italian merchants transformed themselves from purely secular dealers in goods and services to milites Christi, enjoying the religious perquisites and accepting the obligations of crusaders. » and Queller, The Fourth Crusade, cit. : 53 . The same author, when presenting different passages from Villehardouin and Clari in his historiographical analysis of the Fourth Crusade (see Queller, The Latin Conquest of Constantinople, cit.: 6-7, respectively 14-15), interrupts the doge’s speech exactly in the moment when the taking of the Cross was to follow.

[33] Cessi, « Venezia e la quarta crociata », cit. : 24-26.

[34] Heyd, Histoire du commerce du Levant, cit. : 265 (« Organisée par des chevalier français et flamands et renforçée dans la suite par le concours des Vénitiens, [...] ») ; 266 (« [...] ; de simple alliée qu"il [le Doge] était auparavant, il se trouvait, par le fait de sa créance, le véritable chef de l"expédition ») ; Iorga, France de Constantinople, cit., : 11 (« [...] les Vénitiens ont combattu, non seulement comme marins, mais comme soldats. »

[35] See the text of Devastatio : 86 that regards separately Burgundia, Campania, Frantia and Flandria as places where the crusade was preached. To a certain extent, one could add « Corpus Chronicorum Flandriae », in Tafel-Thomas : I, 293-304 (296, 299) that separates Franci and Flamingi.

[36] Streit, Venezia e la quarta crociata, cit. : 260 ; Luchaire, Innocent III, cit. : 99 ; A. A. Vasiliev, History of the Byzantine Empire, cit, : 452, 454 (even emphasizing that Zara was to be a crusader city !) ; Iorga, France de Constantinople, cit. : 4-5 ; Ostrogorsky, History of the Byzantine State, cit. : 415 ; William M. Daly, "Christian Fraternity, the Crusaders, and the Security of Constantinople, 1097-1204: The Precarious Survival of an Ideal", Mediaeval Studies 22 (1960): 43-91 (82) ; Godfrey, 1204. The Unholy Crusade, cit. : 75 ; Gill, « Franks, Venetians, and Pope Innocent III », cit. : 89 ; Queller, The Fourth Crusade, cit. : 53-54 ; Nicol, Byzantium and Venice, cit. : 131.

[37] See, for instance Iorga, France de Constantinople, cit. : 5 (« le roi de Hongrie était un roi apostolique, qui avait la mission perpétuelle de croisade. »). Actually, among the sources, there is only one that insists to a certain extent on the Hungarian King’s anger, see « Croisade de Constantinople », in Tafel-Thomas : I, 322-328 (325-326). Otherwise, it seems that the king was not to have any reaction.

[38] Even the « champion » of the Venetian absolving, that is Donald Queller, in a particular article, Queller, "The Fourth Crusade: The Neglected Majority" (with Thomas K. Compton and Donald A. Campbell), Speculum 49 (1974): 441-465, reprinted in Queller, Medieval Diplomacy, cit., XI: 448 mentions that « the lands of a Christian king, Emeric of Hungary, who had himself taken the cross, [...] » and forgets to mention the same act taken by the doge and the Venetians.

[39] James Ross Sweeney, "Hungary in the Crusades. 1169-1218", The International History Review 3 (4) (October 1981): 467-481 (476).

[40] Tafel-Thomas, doc. CXXVIII : Henrici Danduli Ducis Venetorum ad Papam epistola Excusat se de excisa Jadera, et de expugnata Constantinopoli rationem reddit; exinde supplicat, ut petitiones, quas ei facit, per nuntios benigne exaudiat [dated : 1205 (?)] : I, 521-523 (522).

[41] Paolo Rannusio, Della Guerra di Costantinopoli per la restitutione de gl'imperatori Comneni fatta da' signori Venetiani et Francesi, l'anno MCCIV. Libri sei, Venice: Domenico Nicolini, 1604; Pauli Rhamnusii Veneti, De bello Constantinopolitano et Imperatoribus Comnenis per Venetos et Gallos restitutis a MCCIV, Libri sex, Venice: Dom. Nicolini, 1609; De bello constantinopolitano et imperatoribus Comnenis per Gallos, et Venetos restitutis historia Pauli Ramnusii, Venice: Marc. Ant. Brogiolum, 1634. For Ramusio, see Marin, "A Humanist Vision regarding the Fourth Crusade and the State of the Assenides. The Chronicle of Paul Ramusio (Paulus Rhamnusius)", Annuario. Istituto Romeno di Cultura e Ricerca Umanistica 2 (2000): 51-120 [= http://www.oocities.org/serban_marin/ramusioindex.html].

[42] Andrea Moresini [sic !], L'Imprese, et espeditioni di Terra Santa, et l'Acquisto fatto dell'Imperio di Constantinopoli dalla Serenissima Republica di Venetia, Venice: Antonio Pinelli, 1627; Storia della Conquista di Costantinopoli efatta da' Venetiani, e da' Francesi, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, manuscript It. XI. 152 [= 6253], in miscellanea. For brief referrals to these two chronicles, see Marin, « A Humanist Vision », cit. : 79-80, respectively 80.

[43] Especially in Navagero [approached to category 2.]; category 3.; It. VII. 71 [approached to 4.]; Caroldo [7.]; It. VII. 793 [9.]; It. VII. 2572 [approached to 9.]; Sansovino [approached to 9.]; It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.]; Marco [10.]; Barbaro [approached to 11.]; episodically, the denomination appears also in It. VII. 2581 [1.]; P. Dolfin [2.]; It. VII. 2570 [6.]; It. VII. 2559 [10.]; It. VII. 2543 [11.]; It. VII. 798 [11.]; It. VII. 2560 [11.]; It. VII. 2563 [11.]; Zancaruolo [11.]; Z. Dolfin [11.] ; Erizzo [11.]; Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.].

[44] The two denominations are in majority in It. VII. 2592 [2.]; categories 4. (including Trevisan) 5., 6., 7., 10. (excepting Marco) and 11. (excepting Barbaro); It. VII. 1800 and appears episodically or together with other denominations in It. VII. 2571 [1.]; It. VII. 2581 [1.]; It. VII. 2572 [approached to 9.], Barbaro [approached to 11.].

[45] In majority in category 1. and also present in A. Dandolo [2.]; P. Dolfin [2.]; category 6., Sanudo 3 ; Zancaruolo [11.] ; Z. Dolfin [11.].

[46] When it is used as noun, see P. Dolfin [2.], although it appears more often as adjective for other denominations, see It. VII. 2571 [2.]; It. VII. 2581 [2.]; It. VII. 2563 [11.]; Z. Dolfin [11.] ; Erizzo [11.].

[47] Monacis [2.]; It. VII. 78 [11.]; It. VII. 2543 [11.]; It. VII. 1577 [11.]; It. VII. 798 [11.]; It. VII. 2560 [11.]; It. VII. 2563 [11.]; It. VII. 550 [11.]; It. VII. 1586 [11.]; Erizzo [11.]; Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.].

[48] Hist. Ducum [1.].

[49] Navagero [approached to 2.]; It. VII. 2592 [3.]; Sanudo 1; Barbaro [approached to 11.]; Erizzo [11.].

[50] Sanudo 4.

[51] It. VII. 2572 [approached to 9.]; Barbaro [approached to 11.].

[52] Many times utilized by Barbaro [approached to 11.].

[53] It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.].

[54] Curato [10.].

[55] Barbaro [approached to 11.].

[56] Barbaro [approached to 11.].

[57] The denomination is in majority in It. VII. 2571 [1.]; It. VII. 2581 [1.]; P. Dolfin [2.]; It. VII. 2592 [3.]; categories 4. (including Trevisan), 5., 6., 7., 8., Sansovino [approached to 9.], It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.]; category 10 and also appears episodically in some chronicles in category 11.: It. VII. 2543, Barbaro, Zancaruolo, Erizzo.

[58] A. Dandolo [2.]; Monacis [2.] (although both of them seem to prefer Franci, especially Monacis); Sabellico [3.].

[59] In majority, the ones in 11., It. VII. 2572 [approached to 9.] and It. VII. 1800 and in other cases in competition with Francesi, see Trevisan [approached to 4.]; category 6. ; Abbiosi [10.]; episodically, in Monacis [2.] {Gallicis, & aliis Ultramontis); Sabellico [3.] (Galli & caeteri Transalpini); Sanudo [7.].

[60] See It. VII. 2570 [6.]; Abbiosi [10.]; It. VII. 1577 [11.]; It. VII. 2563 [11.]; It. VII. 550 [11.]; Zancaruolo [11.].

[61] A. Dandolo [2]; P. Dolfin [2.]; It. VII. 2592 [3.]; Trevisan [approached to 4.]; Caroldo [7.]; It. VII. 798 [11.]; It. VII. 2560 [11.]; It. VII. 2563 [11.]; Z. Dolfin [11.] ; Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.]; Savina [approached to 11.].

[62] It. VII. 2571 [1.]; It. VII. 2581 [1.]; category 2. (including Navagero); Sabellico [3.]; categories 6. and 7.; It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.]; It. VII. 2543 [11.]; It. VII. 1577 [11.]; It. VII. 798 [11.]; It. VII. 2563 [11.]; It. VII. 1586 [11.]; Zancaruolo [11.]; Erizzo [11.]; Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.].

[63] See especially the cases of Franceschi et Latinj in It. VII. 2571 [1.]; It. VII. 2581 [1.]; Caroldo [7.] or of Galli & Latini in Sabellico [3.].

[64] See category 6.; Sanudo 1 and Sanudo 2; Abbiosi [10.]; It. VII. 2543 [11.]; It. VII. 1577 [11.]; It. VII. 798 [11.]; It. VII. 2560 [11.]; It. VII. 2563 [11.]; It. VII. 1586 [11.]; Zancaruolo [11.]; Z. Dolfin [11.] ; Erizzo [11.]; Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.].

[65] Hist. Ducum, It. VII. 71, It. VII. 793, and Marco [10.] do it exclusively.

[66] Antonio Carile, La cronachistica veneziana (secoli XIII-XVI) di fronte alla spartizione della Romania nel 1204, Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 1969. Despite different criticles (see for instance Silvana Collodo, "Note sulla cronachistica veneziana. A proposito di un recente volume", Archivio Veneto, V series, 91 (1970): 13-30), Carile’s labor remains an extremely serious undertaking. For other attempts to classify the Venetian chronicles, see Aug. Prost, "Les chroniques vénitiennes", Revue des Questions historiques 31 (1882): 512-555 ; Idem, "Les chroniques vénitiennes. Second mémoire", Revue des question historiques, 34 (1883): 199-224 ; R.-J. Loenertz, apud Carile, La cronachistica veneziana : 210-219.

[67] Beside Marciana, Carile consulted different codices from Museo Civico Correr in Venice, Archivio di Stato in Venice, Biblioteca Universitaria in Padua, Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale "Vittorio Emanuele" in Rome, Biblioteca Oliveriana in Pesaro, Bibliotheque Nationale in Paris, the Bibliothèque in Metz, Oesterreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna, Sächsische Landesbibliothek in Dresden, Baverische Staatsbibliothek in Munich, the National Library Szechenyi in Budapest, Narodna Univerzitetna Knjizica in Ljubljana, British Museum in London, the University Library of Syracuse - New York, Newberry Library in Chicago, Harvard University Library], see Carile, La cronachistica, cit.

[68] It. VII. 2555: 22b.

[69] Another order of these four leaders is presented by Devastatio : 86, talking about comes Campanie, comes S. Pauli, comes de Blois and comes Flandriae, together with a large number of clerks.

[70] Villehardouin : I, 16/17.

[71] Sanudo 1 : 528-530, written in Italian.

[72] Sanudo 2 : 530-531, representing completions to Sanudo 1, on the basis of "altre Cronache".

[73] Sanudo 3 : 531; written in Latin.

[74] Sanudo 4 : 531-532; in Latin.

[75] Sanudo : 532-533, in Latin, according to Liber Albus.

[76] Sanudo : 533, in Italian.

[77] Choniates: 295.

[78] See Edgar N. Johnson, "The Crusades of Frederick Barbarossa and Henry VI", in A History of the Crusades (ed. by Kenneth M. Setton), cit..: 87-122 ; Brand, Byzantium confronts the West, cit. : 189-194.

[79] See also the chronicle It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.] : 23b that, speaking about the Oriental projects of the Emperor Enrico IV [sic !], names them as Quarta Crociata.

[80] Villehardouin: I, 38/39-40/41, speaking about Oedon de Borgoigne and his refusal. The same episode, in Chronicum Gallicum : 331-332. Ottone Duca di Borgogna is also present in the chronicle Sanudo [7.] : 525 in connection to the Third Crusade.

[81] See Villehardouin : I, 16/17. See also Chronicum Gallicum : 330.

[82] Clari : 36.

[83] A. Dandolo [2.]: 279 (specifying about Sibile Erictee); P. Dolfin [2.]: 327b.

[84] Monacis [2.]: 138; It. VII. 2592 [3.]: 30b-31a; Sabellico [3.]: 183-184; Marco [10.]: passim [76-80]; Veniera 2580 [11.]: 131a-132a. About the prophecies in Byzantium, see expecially Diehl, "De quelques croyances byzantines sur la fin de Constantinople", Byzantinische Zeitschrift 3 (1929-1930): 192-196; Vasiliev, "Medieval Ideas of the End of the World", Byzantion 16 (1942-1943), 2: 462-502; Paul J. Alexander, "Byzantium and the Migration of Literary Worksand Motifs. The Legend of the Last Roman Emperor", Medievalia et Humanistica, new series 2 (1971): 47-68; G. Podskalsky, Byzantinische Reichseschatologie, Munich, 1972; Alexander, The Byzantine Apocalyptic Tradition, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London: University of California Press, 1985; Agostino Pertusi, Fine di Bisanzio e fine del mondo. Significato e ruolo storico delle profezie sulla caduta di Costantinopoli in Oriente e in Occidente (ed. by Enrico Morini), Rome: Sede dell'Istituto, 1988 etc. For the legends' adaptation to Venice, see Carile, La cronachistica veneziana, cit.: 178 ff.; Pertusi, "Le profezie sulla presa di Costantinopoli (1204) nel cronista veneziano Marco (c. 1292) e le loro fonti bizantine (Pseudo-Costantino Magno, Pseudo-Daniele, Pseudo-Leone il Saggio)", Studi Veneziani, n. s. 3 (1979): 13-46; Marin, "Imaginea imparatului Manuel I Comnen in cronistica venetiana [The Image of the Emperor Manuel I Comnenus in the Venetian Chronicles]", Revista istorică, new series 11 (2000), 1-2: 31-57 (41-50); Idem, "Venice and translatio imperii. The Relevance of the 1171 Event in the Venetian Chronicles' Tradition", Annuario. Istituto Romeno di cultura e ricerca umanistica 3 (2001): 45-103 (73-86).

[85] For the first crusade at least, the detailed narration offered by Caroldo [7.] and his own interpretations are impressive : 80-104. Still, there were some other chronicles that mention the events of the first crusade and of the Crusader states in the Levant (see A. Dandolo [2.] : 220 ; 222 ; 223 ; 224-225 ; 228 ; 231 ; 233 etc. ; Monacis [2.] : 83 ff., 118 ; P. Dolfin [2.] : 244a ; 246b ; 247b ; 248b ; 251a ; 258a ; 270b-271a ; 272a ; 284a ; 308a-309a etc. [this category insterts some other different events among the details about the crusades and the crusading states] ; It. VII. 2592 [3.] : 16b-18b ; 18b-19b ; Sabellico [3.] : 99-106 etc. [category 3. includes also the speech of Urban II at the Council of Clermont] ; It. VII. 2541 [8.] : 117b-121a ; Barbo [8.] : 26b ff. ; It. VII. 67 [8.] : 148a-151a ; It. VII. 2543 [11.] : 25b-27a or at least the name of the participants, see Sanudo [7.] : 479 ; 481 ; It. VII. 798 [11.] : iiii a ; Erizzo [11.] : 16 bis ; Savina [approached to 11.] : 33b-34a. On the contrary, some other chronicles only insist on the Venetian participation in it [for the Venetians and the crusader states, see especially Steven Runciman, "L'intervento di Venezia dalla prima alla terza crociata", in Storia della Civiltà Veneziana (a cura di Vittore Branca), I: Dalle origini al secolo di Marco Polo, Firenze: Sansoni Editore, 1979: 231-240 ; Queller and Irene B. Katele, "Venice and the Conquest of the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem", Studi veneziani, n. s. 12 (1986): 15-43]. For the second crusade, see A. Dandolo  [2.] : 242-243 ; Monacis [2.] : 137; P. Dolfin [2.] : 273b-274a ; 276a ; Caroldo [7.] : 118-119. For the third one, see A. Dandolo [2.] : 270-271 ; Monacis [2.] : 133 (presented before the second crusade because of the particular style of Monacis that does not follow the chronological criterion, but relies upon the topics) ; P. Dolfin [2.] : 313a-313b ; 314a-314b ; It. VII. 2592 [3.] : 27b ; Sabellico [3.] : 169 [category 3. refers exclusively to Richard I’s campaign] ; Caroldo [7.] : 143-134 [sic !] ; Sanudo [7.] : 525 ; It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.] : 22b ; Erizzo [approached to 11.] : 102a (exclusively about the English King).

[86] Although the order of the leaders is reversed.

[87] It. VII. 2548: 15b, col. 1.

[88] The page between 46 and 47 is not numbered by the librarians at Marciana.

[89] The pacts with Balduino Conte de Fiandra, Zancaruolo : clxxxvij b-clxxxviij a; Teobaldo Conte Trecense et Paladin: clxxxviij a and Lodovicho Conte Blasenense: clxxxviiij a.

[90] Zancaruolo: clxxxviij a-clxxxviij b: Balduan Conte di Fiandrea et Teobaldo Conte Trecense et Lodovicho Conte Blesense, cf. clxxxviij a; It. VII. 2543 : 46 bis a ; It. VII. 1577 : 247-248 ; It. VII. 1586 : 33b ff. ; Erizzo: 104a-104b.

[91] Zancaruolo: clxxxxj b-clxxxxij b: Bonifacio Marchexe de Monte Ferrato et Balduin Conte de Fiandra et Lodovicho Conte Blesenense, cf. clxxxxj b; It. VII. 1577 : 262-268 ; Erizzo: 107b-108a: Bonifacio Marcheze de Monferra, Baldoin Conte de Fiandra, Amon de Bles e de Chiaramonte et H. conte de S. Polo, although in these latter two cases it is about the agreement on 1204, the pact is placed immediately after the arrival of the young Alexius to Zara. This text is also present in It. VII. 2581 [1.] : 91a-92b (with Marchese de Monferal, Conte de Fiandra et di Hanconn, Conte Debles e de Claramonte and lj de Sen Pollo).

[92] Zancaruolo : clxxxxiiij a (with Bonifatio Marchexe de Monferato, Balduin Conte di Fiandra and Lodovico Conte Blesenense ; in the text, there are mentioned B. Marchese di Monferato, Conte de Fiandra, Ludovicho Conte Blesenses Chiaramonte and Henrico Conte di S. Paulo).

[93] "Vescovo de Sosire and Vescovo de Sisson" (It. VII. 78; so that there are two clerks, in this case); "Vescovo de Sison and Conte de Sison" (It. VII. 2543); "Vescovo de Sesire and Conte de Sion" (It. VII. 1577); "Vescovo de Sisara and Conte de Sisons" (It. VII. 798); "Vescovo de Salire and Conte de Sision" (It. VII. 2560); "Vescovo de Sisire and Conte de Sisa" (It. VII. 2563); "Episcopo de Treste and Conte de Sisson" (It. VII. 550); "Vescovo di Cesere and Conte de Sison" (It. VII. 1586); "Vescovo de Sesire and Conte de Sison" (Zancaruolo); "Vescovo de Stisire and Conte de Siston" (Z. Dolfin); "Vescovo de Sesira and Conte de Sion" (Erizzo).

[94] Villehardouin : I, 6/7 ; Clari : 31. The character is also present in Chronicum Gallicum : 329 (Symon de Montfort); Corpus Chronicorum Flandriae : 295 (Simon comes Montis-Fortis).

[95] "Messer Iacomo de Vena" (It. VII. 1577), "messer Giacomo de Vena" (It. VII. 1586), "Jacomo de Vena" (Zancaruolo) that becomes "Jacomo de Navaria" (Erizzo) or, by copier errors "messer lo Como de Vena" (It. VII. 2543). Codex It. VII. 78 only presents "misser Jacomo de" being followed by a blank space.

[96] "Messer Mandema Marasan" (It. VII. 2543, It. VII. 1577 and Erizzo), "messer Madaman Marasini" (It. VII. 1586), "Mandema Maresan" (Zancaruolo). This is not present in It. VII. 78 because of the blank space, see the precedent note.

[97] This appreciation is diminished by It. VII. 1577 ("valentissimo cavaliere"), Erizzo ("valentommo") and especially Zancaruolo, which utilize the plural form ("valentissimj cavalierj"), transferring this quality to all the other participants.

[98] Savina refers to Vescovo de Stanserit, Vescovo de Asire (these two regarded separately) and Conte de Sisan. Like Erizzo does, both Barbaro and Savina mention a certain Conte de Sansonia that later would be also present during the elections in 1204, see Navagero [approached to 2.] : 984 (Conte di Sassonia) ; Sanudo 1 : 529 (Conte di San Polo in Saxonia, as a strange combination between the two characters) ; Barbaro [approached to 11.] : 237a (Conte de Sassonia) ; Erizzo [11.] : 150 (Conte de Sassonia) ; Savina [approached to 11.] : 58a (Conte de Sansonia). These Sassonia, Sansonia or Saxonia could only be once again Soissons.

[99] A certain Conte de Lieghe in Barbaro and a so called Maicho de Ruia Kavallier in Savina. This latter could be somehow approached to a character that Villehardouin : I, 142/143 would only later mention : Nicholaus Rous, as being originated in Lombardy and sent as messenger by the Emperor Alexius III to the crusaders. This identification is only a supposition.

[100] See above, for the denominations given to the Emperor Henry VI: "Erigo sesto Imperador de Roma" (It. VII. 89), "Imperator Enrigo" (Donà), "messer Enrigo Imperator de Roma" (Veniera 791), "Rigo Imperador" (Trevisan). Veniera 2580: "misser Enrigo Imperator de Roma" follows in this case Veniera 791.

[101] Veniera 2580: Vescovo de Sisirton and Conte de Sisa.

[102] Donà; Veniera 791.

[103] Abbiosi; Curato.

[104] It. VII. 2592: Baldovino di Fiandra; Sabellico: Baldoinus Flandriae; It. VII. 2543: Balduin d'Fiandra.

[105] Canal: li cuens de Flandre .

[106] Category 1.: Balduinus, Balduin; category 2.: Balduinus, Balduino, Balduin, Baldoini; category 3.: Baldovino, Baldoinus, Balduino, Balduinus; category 4.: Baldovin, Baldoin, Balduino; category 5.: Baldoin, Balduin, Balduino; category 7.: Baldovin, Balduinus; category 8.: Balduin; category 10.: Balduinus, Balduin, Baldoin; category 11.: Balduino, Balduin, Baldovino, Balduan, B. [sic !].

[107] Monacis: Bonifacius; P. Dolfin: Bonifacio; Navagero: Bonifacio.

[108] It. VII. 2592: Bonifacio; Sabellico: Bonifacius; Sanudo: Bonifacio.

[109] All the chronicles in the category, excepting It. VII. 550. There appears as Boniffacio, Bonifatio, Bonifazio, Bonifacio, Bonifattio, B. [sic !].

[110] Trevisan: Bonifazio.

[111] Caroldo: Bonifacio.

[112] Trevisan: Bonifazio Conte de Monfera ; It. VII. 2550: Conte Marchese de Monferà. In this latter case, it seems thus that Marchese is to be the first name of the character.

[113] A. Dandolo: Theobaldus comes Trecenensis; Monacis: Thecliadus [sic!] Comes Trecensis; P. Dolfin: Tibaldo Conte de Treceno; It. VII. 796: Tibaldo Conte Tre Cenensis; Navagero: Teobaldo Conte Palatino. Later, Navagero would simply mention him as Conte Palatino.

[114] Caroldo: Teobaldo Conte di Trech e Palatino; Sanudo 4: Theobaldus Trecensis Comes Palatinus.

[115] Some of the chronicles simply mention the first name: It. VII. 2543: Coan uia' Conte Tibalde; It. VII. 550: Conte Sinibaldo; Veniera 2580: Conte Tibaldo. Others mention also his county: It. VII. 78: Conte Tibaldo de Campagna; It. VII. 1577: Conte Ubaldo de Compagnia; It. VII. 2560: Conte Tibaldi de Compagnia; It. VII. 2563: Conte Tibaldo de Compagnia; It. VII. 1586: Conte Baldo da Campagna; Zancaruolo: Conte Tibaldo de Campagna, then Teobaldo Conte Trecense or Theobaldo Tricense Paladin; Z. Dolfin: Conte Timbaldo de Campagnia; Erizzo: Conte Theobaldo da Campagna; Savina: Conte Baldo de Campagna. It is interesting the alternance Tibaldo / Ubaldo / Baldo. A particular case is represented by the chronicle It. VII. 798, which transforms semantically the province of Campagna in the common noun of compagnia, resulting thus "Conte de Baldi, de compagnia del Conte Balduin [...] [emphasis mine]" .

[116] Hist. Ducum.

[117] It. VII. 2571; It. VII. 2581.

[118] See categories 1. (Hist. Ducum, It. VII. 2571, It. VII. 2581), 4. (Canal, E. Dandolo, pseudo-Dolfin), 5. (It. VII. 89, Donà, Veniera 791), 6. (It. VII. 2544, It. VII. 2570), 7. (Sanudo 2), 10. (Marco, It. VII. 2548, It. VII. 2550, It. VII. 2556, It. VII. 2559, It. VII. 44, Abbiosi, Curato, It. VII. 2576) and 11. (It. VII. 78, It. VII. 2543, It. VII. 1577, Barbaro - in a first instance, this chronicle names him as Monsignor de San Polo instead of Count, It. VII. 798, It. VII. 2560, It. VII. 2563, It. VII. 550, It. VII. 1586, Zancaruolo, Z. Dolfin, Erizzo, Veniera 2580).

[119] Mentioned only in Savina [approached to 11.]: Ugo.

[120] Categories 2. (Monacis: Henricus and P. Dolfin: Henrico) and 3. (It. VII. 2592: Enrico, Sabellico: Henricus, Sanudo 1: Arrigo), and chronicles It. VII. 71 [approached to 4.]: Arrigo and Trevisan [approached to 5.]: Rigo. It is to be specified that the codex It. VII. 2592 forgets to mention him as a Count: Enrico di Pauli.

[121] Navagero [approached to 2.]: Eustachio.

[122] Zancaruolo : H. di Sancto Paulo ; Erizzo: H. Comte di S. Polo.

[123] Hist. Ducum: dominus Alvisius de Bles; It. VII. 2571: messer Alvise de Ples; It. VII. 2581: messer Alvise de Bles.

[124] Caroldo: Lodovico Conte di Bles e di Chiarmont; Sanudo 4: Dominus Ludovicus Comes Blesensis & Clarimontis.

[125] A. Dandolo: Lodovicus comes Blesensis; Monacis : Ludovicus Comes Blesenses ; It. VII. 796: Lodovico Conte Blesensis; Navagero: Lodovico Conte di Bles.

[126] It. VII. 78: Conte Alvixe de Bles; It. VII. 2543: Conte Alovise de Bles; It. VII. 1577: Alvise Conte de Bes; It. VII. 798: Conte Alvixe da Bes; It. VII. 2560: Conte Alvise de Bes; It. VII. 2543: Conte Avixo de Bes; It. VII. 550: Conte Alvise de Bens; It. VII. 1586: Conte Alvise di Beo; Zancaruolo: Lodovicho Conte de Blesensis; Z. Dolfin: Conte Alvixe de Bes.

[127] Zancaruolo: Lodovicho Conte Blesense, Ludovicho Blesense et Chiaramonte, Lodovicho Conte Blesenense; Amon Conte de Blesa et Chiaramonte ; Erizzo: Conte Alvisse de Bes, then Amon de Bles e de Chiaramonte]

[128] Monacis: Ludovicus Comes Blesensis; P. Dolfin: Lodovico Conte di Vienna, Elbensis.

[129] Monacis: Ludovicus Comes Sabaudiae; P. Dolfin: Ludovico Duca di Savoia.

[130] Louis of Blois presented as: Conte Alvise Balbo (Barbaro), Conte Alvisse de Bes (Erizzo), Conte Alvise da Bes (Veniera 2580). "The Count of Savoy" as: Duca de Savoia (Barbaro), Duca de Savoia (Erizzo), Conte de Savogia (Veniera 2580).

[131] Savina.

[132] Canal: li cuens de Savoie; E. Dandolo: Conte de Savoia; pseudo-Dolfin: Conte de Savoya; It. VII. 71: Lodovico Conte di Savoia; It. VII. 89: Conte de Savoia; Donà: Conte de Savogia; Veniera 791: Conte de Savogia.

[133] Alvisius, Alvise.

[134] Lodovicus, Ludovicus, Lodovico, Ludovico.

[135] Lodovico, Ludovicus.

[136] Alvixe, Alovise, Alvise, Avixo, Lodovicho, Alvisse.

[137] Lodovico.

[138] Villehardouin : I, 16/17 ; Chronicum Gallicum : 330.

[139] It. VII. 2543 : 46 bis a (in the text of the initial pact}.

[140] It. VII. 1577: 247 (in the text of the initial pact between Venetians and non-Venetians).

[141] It. VII. 1586 : 33b (in the text of the initial pact}.

[142] Zancaruolo : clxxxvij b (in the text of the individual pact with Baldwin of Flanders).

[143] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij b (in the pact with all the non-Venetian leaders).

[144] Erizzo : 104a (in the initial pact).

[145] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij b (pact with Thibault).

[146] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij b (pact with all).

[147] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij a (pact with Louis).

[148] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij b (act with all).

[149] Zancaruolo : clxxxvij b (pact with Baldwin).

[150] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij b (pact with all).

[151] In connection to Geoffrey of Villehardouin and Alard Maquereau, who, according to the Venetian tradition, would also participate to the election of the Latin emperor in Constantinople, and the names given to them by different Venetian chroniclers in this latter context, see Navagero [approached to 2.] : 984 (gran Conte Mariscalco, Mariscalco di Campagna – seen as separated characters ; Conte Nerul) ; Sanudo [7.] : 531 (Maresciallo di Campagna ; Conte Arsuel) ; Barbaro [approached to 11.]: 237a (Marescalco de Ziampagna ; Alard Maquereau is not present) ; Erizzo [11.]: 110b (Gran Maraschalio de Campagna ; Conte de Macaruole), Savina [approached to 11.] : 58a (Marascalco de Zamponies ; Conte de Arsul de Mercuel).

[152] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij a (pact with Thibault).

[153] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij b (pact with all).

[154] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij a (pact with Louis).

[155] Zancaruolo : clxxxviij b (pact with all).

[156] See especially the great number of codices of the chronicles written by Daniele Barbaro : It. VII. 40, It. VII. 41, It. VII. 42, It. VII. 76, It. VII. 96, It. VII. 126 (although attributed to Giovanni Bon), It. VII. 357, It. VII. 540, It. VII. 780-781, It. VII. 789, It. VII. 790, It. VII. 973 (although attributed to Vettor Molin), It. VII. 1606 (although attributed to Pietro Navagero), It. VII. 1692 (although attributed to Giovanni Bon), It. VII. 2479, It. VII. 2551-2552, It. VII. 2554, It. VII. 2652, It. VII. 2659; Giangiacopo Caroldo - It. VII. 127, It. VII. 128a, 128b, It. VII. 320, It. VII. 905-906, It. VII. 970, It. VII. 971, It. VII. 972, It. VII. 1974, It. VII. 1975-1976 and Girolamo Savina - It. VII. 134, It. VII. 135, It. VII. 539,, It. VII. 1561, It. VII. 1995. These chronicles could also be detected in some other libraries. Just to mention the ones personally detected, I am to mention here Querini Stampalia: Barbaro (IV. 117), Caroldo (IV. 112 and IV. 113); Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana: Caroldo (Vat. lat. 6085, Vat. lat. 6088] etc.

[157] E. Dandolo : 39a ; pseudo-Dolfin : 43b.

[158] Navagero : 980 ; It. VII. 89 : 23a, col. 2 ; It. VII. 1833 : 23b. In addition, It. VII. 1833 : 24a mentions that the Pope absolved the Francesi and not the Venetians for the attack against Zara.

[159] Canal : 48/49-50/51 ; E. Dandolo : 39b ; pseudo-Dolfin : 44a.

[160] Donà : 30a ; Veniera 791 : 68a. The chronicles It. VII. 89 : 23b, col. 1 and Trevisan : 39a, col. 1 do not expressly specify that the pope sent the young Alexius to Venice, but just that this latter arrived reccomended by Papal and imperial / Philip King of France’s letters.

[161] It. VII. 798 : xxi b ; It. VII. 2560 : 68a, 68b ; It. VII. 2563 : 11a ; It. VII. 550 : 72a ; It. VII. 2543 : 46b (placed before the ambassadors’ arrival to Venice) ; It. VII. 1577 : 257, 257-258 ; It. VII. 1586 : 35b ; Zancaruolo : clxxxx b ; Z. Dolfin ; Erizzo : 105b, 106a, 107a ; Veniera 2580 : 129b. It is to be noticed that the chronicles Barbaro and Savina do not make any allusion to any papal involvement.

[162] Navagero : 981 ; It. VII. 2570 : 22a ; Sanudo 2: 530. The codex It. VII. 2543 : 46b differs this time from It. VII. 2570, only mentioning that the Pope declared that he is not able to assist Alexius, who afterwards went to the court of Philip of Swabia.

[163] A. Dandolo [2.] : 274 and 287 and category 8. : It. VII. 2541 : 153b ; Barbo : 43b and 47a ; It. VII. 67 : 174b and 179a.

[164] P. Dolfin [2.] : 321a (about the papal involvement in the imperial controversy between Philipp of Swabia and Otto of Brunswick) ; Caroldo [7.] : 140 (in connection to the agreement between Enrico Dandolo and the crusaders’ leaders) ; It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.] : 24a (about the papal excommunication, his absolvence offered to the non-Venetians, bot not to the Venetians etc.) ; It. VII. 1577 [11.] : 267 (in the pact for the conquest of Constantinople). Sanudo : 534 also mentions the Pope Innocent III in connection to the minorite orders.

[165] Navagero : 985 ; It. VII. 1833 : 25b.

[166] For this « alliegramente », see especially category 4. (E. Dandolo : 42a ; pseudo-Dolfin : 46b ; Morosini : 10 (Curiously for this latter case, the phrase referring to the Papal confirmation is not translated by the editors : 11) and It. VII. 89 [5.]: 24b, col. 2.

[167] It. VII. 2581 [1.] : 94a ; Navagero [approached to 2.] : 985 ; Trevisan [approached to 5.] : 40a, col. 2 ; Sanudo : 533 ; Caroldo [7.] : 151 ; It. VII. 2543 [11.] : 53a ; It. VII. 1577 [11.] : 291 ; It. VII. 1586 [11.] : 41a ; Zancaruolo [11.] : clxxxxvj a ; Z. Dolfin [11.] ; Erizzo [11.] : 111b ; It. VII. 798 [11.] : xxiij b ; It. VII. 2560 [11.] : 70a ; It. VII. 550 [11.] : 73a ; Barbaro [approached to 11.]: 249a ; Savina [approached to 11.] : 59b. Although it presents the text of the treaty between the Venetians and Boniface, Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.] : 133b forgets to mention the Pope’s name.

[168] For the papal attitude, see especially Helmut Roscher, Papst Innocenz III. und die Kreuzzüge, Götingen, 1969 ; Marin, Pope Innocent III and the Fourth Crusade, MA Thesis, Central European University, Budapest, 1998.

[169] See It. VII. 2544 [6.] : 41b, col. 2 : « Constantinopoli et molte Terre Sancte » ; It. VII. 2550 [10.] : 76a : « Constantinopoli con altre terre de Grecia » ; It. VII. 78 [11.] : 7a, col. 2 : « la citade de Constantinopoli et altre citade dela Grecia » ; It. VII. 1586 [11.] : 32b : « la cittade de Constantinopoli et altre terre della Grecia » ; Erizzo [11.] : 102a : « el Sepulcro e Constantinopoli [...] e con altra terra de Grecia » ; Savina [approached to 11.] : 53a : « la citta de Costantinopoli et alcune terre che gierano sotto el dominio del Imperator ». Thus, the crusade in Venice is prepared specifically in order to reconquer Constantinople (see It. VII. 2544 : 42a, col. 1 ; It. VII. 2570 : 21b). The chronicle It. VII. 2576 [10.] : 256a seems more subtle, specifying that Soldan Saladin occupied « alcune terre sotto el dominio del Imperador », while the chronicle Abbiosi [10.] : 19b presents a more neutral attitude : « alghune terre de Christiani ». Anyhow, some of the above chronicles mention Saladin again, this time as the conqueror of Gerusalem : It. VII. 78 : 7b, col. 1 ; Savina : 54a.

[170] It. VII. 78 : 7a, col. 2 ; Savina : 53a.

[171] The transmission of the leadership from Thibault to Boniface is differently represented by Villehardouin: I, 38/39-40/41 (who introduces the unsuccessful attempts of the crusaders to determine Odo of Burgundy and then Thibault the Count of Bar-le-Duc to retake the commandment ; see also Chronicum Gallicum : 331-332. For Clari: 34, the transfer is direct from Thibault to Boniface.

[172] See It. VII. 1577: 262: il Conte de S. Polo appears again in text pf the pact for the campaign against Constantinople; Zancaruolo: in the same pact, although he is not present in the title, a H. [sic!] di Sancto Paulo would appear in the content : clxxxxj b; Erizzo: 107b : H. Comte de S. Polo is mentioned even in the title of the pact.

[173] Zancaruolo : clxxxviiij b: « […] e sopra veneno Bonifatio Marchese de Monfera in locho del p [?] morto Conte ».

[174] It. VII. 2571: 104b; It. VII. 2581: 92b-95b; A. Dandolo: 280; Monacis : 142 ; P. Dolfin: 329a-329b; Navagero: 984-985; It. VII. 2592: 30a-30b; Sabellico: 182; Trevisan [approached to 4.]: 40a, col. 2; Donà: 31b; Veniera 791: 69a ; It. VII. 2544: 43a, col. 2-43b, col. 1; It. VII. 2570: 23a; Caroldo: 150-151; Sanudo 2: 531 ; Sanudo 3 : 533 (where is presented the document of the achievement of Crete); It. VII. 793: 70a; Tiepolo: 79a; Agostini: 27a; It. VII. 2572: 14b-15a; Abbiosi: 20b; It. VII. 78: 11b, col. 2; It. VII. 2543: 53a-53b; It. VII. 1577: 289-294; Barbaro: 248b-250a; It. VII. 798: xxiij b; It. VII. 2560: 70a; It. VII. 2563: 12b; It. VII. 550: 73a; It. VII. 1586: 40a-41b; Zancaruolo: clxxxxv b-clxxxxvj a; Z. Dolfin ; Erizzo: 111b-112a; Veniera 2580: 133b-134b; Savina: 59b-60a.

[175] It. VII. 2571: 104a; It. VII. 2581: 93b; P. Dolfin: 328a-328b ; E. Dandolo : 42b ; pseudo-Dolfin : 47a ; Morosini: 12 ; Trevisan: 40a, col. 1; It. VII. 89 : 25a, col. 1 ; Donà: 31b ; Veniera 791 : 69a ; It. VII. 2550: 78b; It. VII. 2556: 53; It. VII. 2559: 22, col. 1; It. VII. 44: 32b; Abbiosi: 20b; Curato: 18a; It. VII. 2576: 26b; It. VII. 78: 12a, col. 1; It. VII. 2543: 53b; It. VII. 1577: 289; Barbaro: 247b-248a; It. VII. 798: xxiij b; It. VII. 2560: 70a-70b; It. VII. 2563: 12b; It. VII. 550: 73b; It. VII. 1586: 41b; Zancaruolo: clxxxxvj a; Z. Dolfin ; Erizzo: 111a; Veniera 2580: 133b; Savina: 60a.

[176] It. VII. 1577: 249, 262, 269; It. VII. 798: xxi a; It. VII. 2560: 67b; It. VII. 2563: 10b; It. VII. 1586: 34a and 36a; Z. Dolfin ; Erizzo: 108a; Veniera 2580: 129a.

[177] It. VII. 2581 [1.]: 92b; It. VII. 1577 [11.]: 268; It. VII. 1586 [11.]: 39b; Zancaruolo [11.]: clxxxxv a-clxxxxv b (together with Baldwin and Louis of Blois, in this latter case]. The acquisition of Thessalonic made by Boniface of Montferrat is also present in categories 3. (It. VII. 2592: 30a ; Sabellico : 182, providing the denomination of the entire province of Thessaly, 4. (Canal: 60; E. Dandolo: 42b; pseudo-Dolfin: 46b; Morosini: 12; Trevisan: 39b, col. 2, this latter adding Gallipoli); 5. (It. VII. 89: 25a, col. 1; Donà: 31b; Veniera 791: 69a. Excepting It. VII. 89, the other codices mention also Crete and Gallipoli); the chronicle Sanudo 1 [7.]: 530; categories 8. (It. VII. 2541: 148a; Barbo: 44a; It. VII. 67: 174b, all these three refering to Thessaly and specifying that Boniface was named by the Emperor Baldwin) and 11. (It. VII. 78: 11b, col. 1; It. VII. 2543: 53a; It. VII. 1577: 288; It. VII. 798: xxiij b; It. VII. 2560: 70a; It. VII. 2563: 12b; It. VII. 550: 73a; It. VII. 1586: 40a; Erizzo: 111a; Veniera 2580: 133a - mentioning also Crete and Gallipoli; Savina: 58b. Also, Erizzo: 111b and Savina: 58b) speak about an improbable capturing of Antioch by Boniface. I could only suppose that it was Adrianople to be taken into consideration in these two cases.

[178] It. VII. 1577: 262; It. VII. 798: xxi a; It. VII. 2560: 67b; It. VII. 2563: 10b; It. VII. 1586: 34a; Z. Dolfin ; Erizzo: 104b; Veniera 2580: 129a.

[179] Hist. Ducum: 93; It. VII. 2571: 101a; It. VII. 2581: 89a-89b; Caroldo [7.]: 142, 144; It. VII. 2572 [approached to 9.]: 14a. The acquisition of Crete by Boniface from the future Alexius IV is presented in It. VII. 2592 [3.] : 30a ; Sabellico [3.]: 182, Caroldo [7.]: 142-143.

[180] Sanudo 2 [7.]: 530; It. VII. 1577 [11.]: 269; It. VII. 1586 [11.] 36a and 36b; Zancaruolo [11.]: clxxxxij b ; Z. Dolfin (together with Baldwin).

[181] A. Dandolo [2.]: 279; P. Dolfin [2.]: 326b (together with Hugue of St Pol). See also Sabellico [3.]: 180 (where is only Baldwin mentioned as penetrating inside of Constantinople) and some chronicles in category 11.: It. VII. 2543: 51b; It. VII. 1577: 282; It. VII. 798: xxii b; It. VII. 2560: 69a; It. VII. 2563: 12a; Zancaruolo: clxxxxiiij a; Z. Dolfin ; Erizzo: 110a; Veniera 2580: 130b.

[182] It. VII. 78: 11a, col. 2; It. VII. 2543: 52a (without specifying the marquis as character, this codex mentions that it was "la zente de Monfera" that captured the former Byzantine emperor.); It. VII. 1577: 283; It. VII. 798: xxiij a; It. VII. 2560: 69a; It. VII. 2563: 12a; It. VII. 550: 73a (including also Baldwin in this operation); It. VII. 1586: 38b; Zancaruolo: clxxxxiiij a; Z. Dolfin ; Erizzo: 110a; Veniera 2580: 130b.

[183] Zancaruolo [11.]: clxxxxiiij b.

[184] Navagero [approached to 2.]: 985 (together with Henry of Hainault).

[185] Tiepolo : 79a ; Agostini : 27a. The originality goes even farther, considering that the very wedding between Boniface and the doge’s daughter was to be the one that conduct to the island of Crete, as dowry. The other chronicle that I included in category 9., that is It. VII. 793 : 70a specifies that the doge bought the island from Boniface, who had previously received it as dowry from the daughter of the Emperor of Constantinople.

[186] It. VII. 2544: 42b, col. 1; It. VII. 2570: 22b; It. VII. 2560: 68b; It. VII. 2563: 11b; It. VII. 550: 72b; Z. Dolfin ; Erizzo: 108b; Veniera 2580: 130a.

[187] It. VII. 2543: 50b; It. VII. 1577: 279; It. VII. 2563: 12a; It. VII. 1586: 37b (it is interesting that Baldwin is called as Conte di Francia in this circumstance); Zancaruolo: clxxxxiij b (the chronicle mentions exclusively Baldwin, without Boniface); Erizzo: 109b; Veniera 2580: 130a.

[188] A. Dandolo: 279-280; P. Dolfin: 328b-329a; Caroldo: 150; Sanudo: 533; Barbaro: 235b; Erizzo: 111b; Savina: 58a.

[189] A. Dandolo: 280-281; Monacis : 141 ; P. Dolfin: 329b-330a; Navagero: 985; Caroldo [7.]: 151; Sansovino [approached to 9.]: 561; It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.]: 26a.

[190] Hist. Ducum [1.]: 94.

[191] Barbaro [approached to 11.]: 244b and 250a.

[192] It. VII. 2541 : 146b ; Barbo : 43a ; It. VII. 67 : 173b.

[193] Navagero [approached to 2.]: 984 (although the author mentions about a campaign in Francia, it is quite normal that he had Thracia in mind); It. VII. 2592: 30a; Sabellico: 182.

[194] A. Dandolo: 281; P. Dolfin: 330b (named Henrico suo fratello d’Angiò, thus Hainault becoming Anjou !); Navagero: 985; It. VII. 2592: 30b; Sabellico: 183; Caroldo [7.]: 151; Erizzo [11.]: 112b; It. VII. 1833: 26a.

[195] P. Dolfin: 326b ; It. VII. 2571 : 279 (together with Boniface of Montferrat in both cases).

[196] A. Dandolo: 280-281; Monacis : 141 ; P. Dolfin: 329b-330a; Navagero: 985 (as Conte de Bresion, and only then as Conte Lodovico).

[197] It. VII. 78: 10a, col. 2 (Andema Marazano); It. VII. 2543: 48a (Mandemarazzan and Mardeman Marazan); It. VII. 1577: 269 (Andrea Maranza); It. VII. 1586: 36a (Adamo Marezan) and 36b (Madam Naranzia); Zancaruolo: clxxxxij b (Andrea Maranzan); Erizzo: 108b (Andrea Marazzan).

[198] It. VII. 78: 11a, col. 1 and 11a, col. 2 (Piero da Briolo); It. VII. 2543: 51b (Piero de Biol and Piero de Brazuel); It. VII. 1577: 281-282 (Piero de Brugol); It. VII. 1586: 38a (Pietro da Briguol and Pietro Grignol); Zancaruolo: clxxxxiiij a (Piero da Briuolo); Erizzo: 110a (Piero da Brugik and Piero Bruia) ; Barbaro : 234b-235a (Zuanne Basegio). The character is to be identified with the crusader Peter of Bracieux, although the Villehardouin's description does not make any mention about him during the narration of the second siege of Constantinople. Concerning the capture of the first Constantinopolitan tower, Villehardouin: II, 44/45 mentions that: "Et maintenant uns Veniciens et uns chevaliers de France qui avoit nom André Durboise entrerent en la tor, [...]". See also Chronicum Gallicum : 354. About this André Durboise, see Villehardouin: II, 45, note 3 (Faral's note). On the contrary, Clari: 95 is more detailed regarding the episode of the Constantinopolitan towers' capture, refering to a certain Venetian that climbed first a tower and then was killed. Then, Clari: 96 does indeed refer to a certain Peter of Bracuel, although in the context of a second tower's capture. Another testimony is a letter written by Hugo of St. Pol, see Tafel-Thomas : Hugonis, Comitis Sancti Pauli, epistola de expugnata per Latinos urbe Constantinopoli [dated : 1203] : I, 304-311 (307) that mentions this Petrus de Brajeceul. Concerning Pietro Alberti, he is mentioned exclusively by Anonymus Suessonensis, in Exuviae sacrae Constantinopolitanae (ed. by Paul Riant), Paris, 1877: 7.Then, as A. Carile, Per una storia dell'impero latino di Costantinopoli (1204-1261), 2^nd ed., Bologna: Pàtron, 1978 : 160 considers, the mention of Piero Alberto is exclusively provided by the families C and D of Venetian chronicles. The Venetian inovation consists only in the nomination of Pietro Alberti as one of the patroni delle nave (according to Barbaro: 226a and Savina: 56a).

[199] Trevisan [approached to 5.]: 39b, col. 2-40a, col. 1 (Corsin Sumaripa); Donà [5.] : 31b (Cursin Sumarippa) ; Veniera 791 [5.]: 60a (Corunn Sumaripa); Veniera 2580 [11.]: 133a (Corssir Sumaripa).

[200] It. VII. 2581: 86b-87a; Barbaro: 225a-226b; Erizzo: 106a; Savina: 56a. In the modern historiography, there is only Romanin, Storia documentata, cit. : 156-157 that provides such a list, specifying that « altri Cronisti li nominano con qualche diversità : 157, note 1).

[201] Hist. Ducum [1.] : 93 ; It. VII. 2571 [1.] : 98a ; It. VII. 2581 [1.] : 86a ; A. Dandolo [2.] : 276 ; Monacis [2.] : 134 ; P. Dolfin [2.] : 322b ; Navagero [approached to 2.] : 981 ; Canal [4.] : 46/47 ; Trevisan [approached to 5.] : 39a, col. 1 ; Caroldo [7.] : 140 ; Sanudo 1 : 528 ; Sanudo 3 : 531 ; It. VII. 2556 [10.] : 52 ; It. VII. 2559 [10.] : 21, col. 4 ; Abbiosi [10.] : 20a ; It. VII. 2576 [10.] : 26a ; Zancaruolo [11.] : clxxxx a ; Erizzo [11.] : 106b ; Barbaro [approached to 11.] : 224b ; Savina [approached to 11.] : 56a ; It. VII. 1800 : 57. It. VI. 2550 [10.] : 77a does not specify his name, just that Enrico Dandolo leaves « suo fio » in his place. Among these codices, there are some that considers Rainiero Dandolo as vicedose, see A. Dandolo, P. Dolfin, Sanudo 1, Barbaro. The doge’s son is also mentioned as the one who led another campaign in Dalmatia (while his father was in Constantinople), see Hist. Ducum : 93 ; It. VII. 2571 : 99a ; Monacis : 105 (it is mentioned only as filius Ducis) ; It. VII. 2592 [3.] : 29a (as Proveditore) ; Sabellico [3.] : 175 (as Vicario nomine Reipublicae) ; Sanudo 1 : 529, It. VII. 2572 [approached to 9.] : 14b ; Zancaruolo : clxxxxj a (only mentioned as il figliolo del doxe) ; Erizzo : 107a ; Barbaro : 228b-229a. His internal government in Venice is only mentioned in Sanudo : 534, while Barbaro : 246b specifies that he is the one who received different relics sent from Constantinople by his father. He is also the one who sent Tommaso Morosini (regarded as Patriarch of Grado) to pacify the Ragusan revolt, according to It. VII. 2571 : 105a (although there is a lacuna in the text, it its clear that the text refers to Rainiero Dandolo, since it is specified « che tegniva luogo del padre » ); Barbaro : 246b and the one who leads the Venetians in order to assist the reconquest of Jerusalem by the Christians [ !], see Tiepolo [9.] : 79a ; Agostini [9.] : 26b.

[202] Hist. Ducum [1.] : 93 (speaks about Domenico Michiel instead of Francesco Maistropietro) ; It. VII. 2571 [1.] : 99a ; E. Dandolo [4.] : 40a (although Francesco Maistropietro leads the Dalmatian campaign, the new castellan of Zara would be Domenico Morosini) ; pseudo-Dolfin [4.] : 44b (the same observation as in the chronicle E. Dandolo ; in addition, the first name of Maistropietro is omitted) ; Morosini [4.] : 6/7 ; It. VII. 89 [5.] : 23b, col. 2 ; Donà [5.] : 30b ; Veniera 791 [5.] : 68b ; It. VII. 2550 [10.] : 76b (named Marco instead of Francesco) ; It. VII. 44 [10.] : 31b ; Abbiosi [10.] : 20a ; Curato [10.] : 17b (it is only his campaign in Dalmatia mentioned, without his nomination as castellan) ; It. VII. 2576 [10.] : 26a ; It. VII. 2543 [11.] : 47b ; Zancaruolo [11.] : clxxxxj a ; Barbaro [approached to 11.] : 229a ; Savina [approached to 11.]: 56b ; Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.] : 130a ; It. VII. 1800 : 59 (it is also mentioned that he was soracomito of the Venetian fleet).

[203] During the first siege of Constantinople, mentioned only in the chronicle Savina [approached to 11.]: 57a.

[204] It. VII. 78 [11.] : 11a, col. 1 ; It. VII. 2543 [11.] : 51b ; It. VII. 2560 [11.] : 69a ; It. VII. 2563 [11.] : 12a ; It. VII. 1577 [11.] : 281 ; It. VII. 1586 [11.] : 38a ; Zancaruolo [11.] : clxxxxiiij a ; Z. Dolfin [11.] ; Erizzo [11.] : 110a ; It. VII. 798 [11.] : xxiij a ; It. VII. 550 [11.] : 72b ; Barbaro [approached to 11.] : 234a ; Savina [approached to 11.] : 57b (with the specification that he was also « patron de una delle nave armade » ; Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.] : 130b. Canal [4.] : 60 only mentions un Venisien in connection to this episode.

[205] Navagero [approached to 2.]: 984; It. VII. 71 [approached to 5.]: 129a; Sanudo [7.]: 531; Barbaro [approached to 11.]: 237a; Erizzo [11.]: 110b (that substitutes Vitale Dandolo with Domenico Barbaro); Savina [approached to 11.]: 58a. I do not know on what a basis Romanin, Storia documentata, cit. : 179 introduces « Giovanni Basegio o, secondo altri, Giovanni Michiel » instead of Vitale Dandolo, since the author does not indicate any source for this episode.

[206] Beside the chronicles presenting all the electors, the intervention of P. Barbo is also mentioned in Trevisan [approached to 5.]: 39b, col. 1 (that substitutes P. Barbo with Ottaviano Querini); category 6.; Caroldo [7.]: 148-149 ; category 11. (including Veniera 2580). For P. Barbo’s speech, see Marin, "Comunitatea veneţiană - între civitas si imperium. Un proiect de transfer al capitalei de la Veneţia la Constantinopol, în conformitate cu cronica lui Daniele Barbaro [The Venetian Community - between civitas and imperium. A Project of the Capital's Transfer from Venice to Constantinople, according to the Chronicle of Daniele Barbaro]", Studii şi materiale de istorie medie 20 (2002): 127-154 (see Appendix) [in print].

[207] It. VII. 2571 [1.]: 103b; It. VII. 2581 [1.]: 93a ; Barbaro [approached to 11.] : 248a.

[208] Tiepolo [9.]: 79a; Agostini [9.]: 26b.

[209] Categories 2. (including Navagero), 3.; Trevisan [approached to 5.]; It. VII. 71 [approached to 5.]; category 7.; It. VII. 2572 [approached to 9.]: 14b; Sansovino [approached to 9.]: 561; It. VII. 1833 [approached to 9.]: 25b; Erizzo [11.]: 111b; Savina [approached to 11.]: 59a.

[210] The episode had been presented by Villehardouin : II, 40/41 : « Et li Venicien, qui plus savoient de la mer, [...] ». On the contrary, Clari : 93 suggests that the Venetians also participated to the initial defeat during the second siege of Constantinople. On its turn, Devastatio : 92 speaks about the initial defeat and mentions the same reason, that is the wind direction ; nonetheless, the source omits to specify the decissive doge’s intervention.

[211] For the modern historiography about the doge’s leading position among the other crusaders, see above, note 2.

[212] For this manuscript, see Marin, « A Humanist Vision », cit. : 68-69.

[213] Ramusio’s initial project was to simple translate Villehardouin from medieval French to Latin, see Marin, « A Humanist Vision » : 68-72. Consequently, Ramusio’s quotations to the French chronicler are extremely often.

[214] Andrea Moresini, cit. : ? ? ? quoting Villehardouin ! ! ! , but also Choniates : ? ? ?

[215] Sansovino : 561 also mentions Villehardouin.

[216] Villehardouin : II, 116/117-118/119. Some Venetian authors (more exactly, what I identified as being category 11a.) would later add that the Genoese were also interested in capturing the former Byzantine emperor, because of his proverbial wealth, see It. VII. 2543: 52a; It. VII. 1577: 283-284; It. VII. 1586: 38b; Zancaruolo: clxxxxiiij a; Erizzo: 110a. This Genoese involvement in the episode is a Venetian innovation.

[217] Gunther : 115. Gunther’s editor, A. Andrea considers this assertion as a nonsense : 175, note 273.

[218] Villehardouin : II, 114/115-116/117.

[219] Clari : 124.

[220] Clari : 110-111 and so on.

[221] Gunther : 115-116.

[222] Clari : 123.

[223] Excepting the letter of Baldwin to Innocent III, see Tafel-Thomas, doc. CXXII : Literae Balduini Imperatoris ad Papam. Significat ei, quo modo Constantinopolitanum Imperium occupatum sit a Latinis [dated 1204] : I, 501-511 (506). On his turn, Clari : 95 only mentions « the ship of the bishop of Soissons ».

[224] Villehardouin : II, 44/45.

[225] Villehardouin : II, 16/17-18/19.

[226] It. VII. 1577: 285: "in una capella picola del palazzo dove stava messer lo Dose"; It. VII. 1586: 38b: "in una picciola capella che v'era in uno piccolo palaggio che stava lo Doxe de Veniexia"; Zancaruolo: clxxxxiiij b: "in una capella dove stevano el Doxe"; Erizzo: 110b: "in una capella pizzola in el palazzo dove stava messer lo Doxe, [...]".

[227] Villehardouin: I, 64/65. Ed. Faral: I, 65, note 6 settles this palace: "Ce palais, selon la tradition vénitienne, se trouvait sur l'Augustaion, juste au sud de Sainte-Sophie."

[228] Clari: 113.

[229] Choniates: 327.

[230] Savina: 58a.

[231] Villehardouin : I, 70/71, 112/113, 126/127, 144/145, 146/147, 184/185, 186/187, 188/189 ; II, 10/11, 68/69, 114/115, 118/119. The denomination of Sorsac appears only once : I, 184/185.

[232] See Appendix.

[233] Villehardouin : I, 188/189 ; II, 46/47 ; II, 198/199.

[234] For this denomination in the Venetian chronicles, see Marin, « Venice and translatio imperii », cit. : 84 ff. (see also the texts : 75-84, and the tables : 93-103). I referred here to the following chronicles : It. VII. 2592 [3.] : 25a-25b ; Sabellico [3.] : 155-156 ; Donà [5.] : 29a ; Veniera 791 [5.] : 68a ; It. VII. 2543 [11.] : 33b-34b ; It. VII. 1577 [11.] : 177-182 ; It. VII. 798 [11.] : xvj b-xvij a ; It. VII. 2560 [11.] : 59b-60a ; It. VII. 2563 [11.] : 8a ; It. VII. 550 [11.] : 67a-67b ; It. VII. 1586 [11.] : 24a-24b ; Zancaruolo [11.] : clxx a-clxx b ; Erizzo [11.] : 38b-39b ; Veniera 2580 [approached to 11.] : 121a-121b. In the appendix, I presented some other circumstances that this denomination is used, adding the chronicles It. VII. 2581 [1.] ; P. Dolfin [2.] ; Navagero [approached to 2.] ; E. Dandolo [4.] ; pseudo-Dolfin [4.] ; Morosini [4.] ; It. VII. 89 [5.] ; Trevisan [approached to 5.] ; It. VII. 793 [9.] ; Abbiosi [10.] ; It. VII. 78 [11.]. For this name generally utilized in the West, see A. A. Livingston, « ‘Griffon Greek’ and ‘Griffaigne Greek’ », Modern Language Notes 22 (1907) : especially 47-51 ; Urban T. Holmes Jr., « Old French ‘Grifaigne’ and ‘Griffon’ », Studies in Philology 43 (1946) : 586-594 ; Marc Carrier, « Perfidious and effeminate Greeks: The Representation of Byzantine Ceremonial in the Western Chronicles of the Crusades (1096-1204) », Annuario. Istituto Romeno di Cultura e Ricerca Umanistica 4 (2002) : 39-62 (42, notes 12-14).

a A new edition, bilingual (Latin-Italian), in Testi storici veneziani (XI-XIII secolo). Historia Ducum Venetorum. Annales Venetici breves. Domenico Tino, Relatione de electione Dominici Silvi Venetorum ducis (ed. by Luigi Andrea Berto), Padua : Università di Padova, 2000 [1999] : 1-83. The episode that concerns the beginnings of the Fourth Crusade misses from this chronicle. However, the German editor accomplished the gap by quoting from the chronicle « Iustiniana » (see Supplementum ex Chronico quod vocant Iustiniani : 89) : 90-94, and considering that these two are to be approached. According to Carile, La cronachistica : 38-43 and Idem, "Note di cronachistica veneziana: Piero Giustinian e Nicolò Trevisan", Studi Veneziani 9 (1967): 103-125, this « Iustiniana » was written by Pietro Giustiniano. The Italian edition of Historia Ducum confines itself to present a brief description of the events : 68-69. That is why, in my quotations, I relied upon the solution suggested by H. Simonsfeld. For referrals, see Giorgio Cracco, "Il pensiero storico di fronte ai problemi del comune veneziano", in La storiografia veneziana fino al secolo XVI. Aspetti e problemi (ed. by Agostino Pertusi), Florence : Leo S. Olschki, 1970 : 45-74 (46-50); Lidia Capo, in Girolamo Arnaldi and Lidia Capo, "I cronisti di Venezia e della Marca Trevigiana dalle origini alla fine del secolo XIII", in Storia della cultura veneta. Dalle origini al Trecento, Vicenza : Neri Pozza, 1976: 387-423 (407-411).

b First time, the chronicle of Martino da Canal was edited in Archivio storico italiano 8 (1845) : 231-707. For referrals, see Gina FASOLI, « La Cronique des Veniciens di Martino da Canale », Studi medievali, 3rd series, 2 (1961) ; CRACCO, « Il pensiero storico … » : 50-66 ; Alberto LIMENTANI, « Martin da Canal e Les estoires de Venise », in Storia della cultura veneta, cit. : 590-601 ; PERTUSI, « Maistre Martino da Canal interprete cortese delle Crociate e dell’ambiente Veneziano del secolo XIII », in Storia della Civiltà Veneziana, cit. : 279-295 ; LIMENTANI, "Martino da Canal e l'Oriente Mediterraneo", in Venezia e il Levante fino al secolo XV (a cura di Agostino PERTUSI), volume II: Arte-Letteratura-Linguistica, Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 1974: 229-252.

c It ends with the year 1280. A partial continuation, in Raphayni de Caresinis Cancelarii Venetiarum, Chronica, aa. 1343-1388 (a cura di Ester Pastorello), in RIS, vol. 12, part 2, Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli, 1923. For referrals to A. Dandolo, see H. Simonsfeld, Andrea Dandolo und sein Geschichtswerk, Munich, 1876, translated then by Benedetto Morossi, "Andrea Dandolo e le sue opere storiche", Archivio Veneto 14 (1877): 49-149; G. Arnaldi, "Andrea Dandolo doge-cronista", in La storiografia veneziana, cit.: 127-268; Thiriet, "Byzance et les Byzantins vus par le Vénitien Andrea Dandolo", Revue des études sud-est européennes 10 (1972); Arnaldi in G. Arnaldi e Lidia Capo, "I cronisti di Venezia e della Marca Trevigiana", in Storia della cultura veneta, vol. II: Il Trecento, Vicenza: Neri Pozza, 1976: 287-296; Lino Lazzarini, "«Dux ille Danduleus». Andrea Dandolo e la cultura veneziana a metà del Trecento", in Petrarca, Venezia e il Veneto (ed. by Giorgio Padoan), Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 1976: 123-156.

d For Lorenzo de Monacis, see Giovanni Degli AGOSTINI, Notizie istorico-critiche intorno la Vita e le Opere degli Scrittori Veneziani, Venice : Simone Occhi, 1754 : II, 363-371 ; PERTUSI, « Le fonti greche del De gestis moribus et nobilitate civitatis Venetiarum di Lorenzo do Monacis Cancelliere di Creta (1388-1428) », Italia medioevale e umanistica 8 (1965) ; Mario POPPI, « Ricerche sulla vita e cultura del notaio e cronista veneziano Lorenzo de Monacis, cancelliere generale (ca. 1351-1428) », Studi Veneziani 9 (1967) : 153-186 ; PERTUSI, « Gli inizi della storiografia umanistica nel Quattrocento », in La storiografia veneziana, cit. : 269-332 (277-289) ; Franco GAETA, « Storiografia, coscienza nazionale e politica culturale nella Venezia del Rinascimento », in Storia della cultura veneta dal primo quattrocento al Concilio di Trento, vol. III, part 1, Vicenza : Neri Pozza, 1980 : 1-91 (16-25).

e There are only two volumes published by now , comprising the period to the death of the Doge Andrea Dandolo (1354), respectively to the Doge Antonio Venier (to 1400). The third volume is in print. For Antonio Morosini, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques », cit. : 272-279.

f For Sabellico, see Ruggero BERSI "Le fonti della prima decade delle Historiae Rerum Venetarum di Marcantonio Sabellico", Nuovo Archivio Veneto, n. s., 10, 19 (1910) : 422-460 and ibidem, n. s., 10, 20 (1910): 115-162.

g It ends in 1493. In Muratori's reprinting, it is only the first part published, ending with the Doge Sebastiano Ziani's rule inclussively (1178). For referrals to Marino Sanudo the Young, see Carile, La cronachistica, cit.: 156-158; Gaetano Cozzi, "Marin Sanudo il Giovane: dalla cronaca alla storia", in La storiografia veneziana, cit.: 333-358; Gaeta, "Storiografia, coscienza nazionale e politica culturale, cit. : subchapter 13.

h It ends with the year 1498. Among the manuscripts of this chronicle at Marciana, see It. VII. 57, It. VII. 58, It. VII. 2676 [= 12878]. It is to be noticed that the 20^th century edition of the Muratorian corpus did not reprint Andrea Navagero's chronicle. For referrals, see Carile, La cronachistica, cit.: 164-165.

* Between the brackets, I inserted the period when Freddy Thiriet, R.-J. Loenertz and Antonio Carile studied the respective codices, according to the schedoni at Marciana. Certainly, I was not able to detect whether the respective authors have consulted the versions on microfilms.

i Pages 3a-36a. Since the last phrase of the manuscript refers to the three years of Marino Morosini’s rule, the chronicle ends to 1250 instead of 1247, as it is specified in the catalogue. It is also mentioned afterwards that it is Fine del libro Primo. Therefore, the next supposed book(s) is/are lost. The manuscript also comprises different theological materials (36b-38a), and a diario for the period between 1684 and 1687 stressing the naval struggles against the Ottoman Turks (38b-86a).

j Inside of the manuscript, the chronicle has a proper page counting. On the schedone, it is presented as Zibaldone di cose storiche in gran parte riguardanti Venezia. Indeed, it is a mixture of historical data, sometimes not chronologically arranged. According to the catalogue, a certain Marco gathered in the year 1292 different ancient notes from different historical writings written in French and it ends in 1303. The manuscript contains different other prophetical texts (beginning with page 68b to 86a). For referrals to Marco's chronicle, see Elisa Paladin, "Osservazioni sulla inedita cronaca veneziana di Marco (sec. XIII ex. - XIV in.)", Atti dell'Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti 128 (1969-1970); Cracco, "Il pensiero storico di fronte ai problemi del comune veneziano", in La Storiografia veneziana, cit.: 45-74 (66-71); Carile, "Le origini di Venezia nelle più antiche cronache veneziane", in In Memoria di Sofia Antoniadis, Venice : Biblioteca dell’Istituto Ellenico di Studi Bizantini e Postbizantini di Venezia, 1974 : 151-152; Arnaldi in Arnaldi and Capo, "I cronisti di Venezia e della Marca Trevigiana dalle origini alla fine del secolo XIII", cit.: 397 ff.; Pertusi, "Le profezie sulla presa di Costantinopoli (1204) nel cronista veneziano Marco (c. 1292) e le loro fonti bizantine (Pseudo-Costantino Magno, Pseudo-Daniele, Pseudo-Leone il Saggio)", Studi Veneziani, n.s. 3 (1979): 161-211.

k It is the information in the catalogue that the chronicles deals with the period between 1190 and around 1332. Actually, it begins with the election of Sebastiani Ziani as doge (that is erroneously considered as beginning with 1190) and ends during the Doge Francesco Dandolo (elected in 1328). Meanwhile, I was not able to detect during the chronicle the year 1332 that is regarded by the catalogue as the end of the chronicle. For this codex, see CARILE, La cronachistica : 91.

l The chronicle ends abruptly (page 101b), in the middle of the phrase. The rest of it seems to be lost. Anyway, it is the year 1356 that is the last referred to, and not 1360 as it is suggested by the catalogue and by the information offered by the librarians at the Phillipps Library. The year 1360 appears indeed at the end of the chronicle, but one cannot regard it more than a later and erroneous adding. On the other side, one could also believe that the supposed period between 1356 and 1360 was to be presented on the pages that are lost.

m  It is available only as microfilm, see Pos. Marc. 127. On the front page, it is specified that we are confronted with a Cronica Veneta sino l’anno 1371. Then, the title itself mentions that it is Cronaca Veneta di Enrico Dandolo di Giovanni sino al MCCCLXXX. These two contradictory information are to be neglected, since the last episodes depicted in this chronicle refers to the conflict with Padua and Vaivoda, the captain of the Hungarian army that invaded Friuli on 1373 (page 100a), so that the information in the catalogue is the correct one, also the respective year is not mentioned explicitly. For this chronicle, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 249-250. About the chronicler Enrico Dandolo, see Silvana Collodo, "Temi e caratteri della cronachistica veneziana in volgare del Tre-Quattrocento (Enrico Dandolo)", Studi veneziani 9 (1967): 127-151; Carile, "Aspetti della cronachistica veneziana nei secoli XIII e XIV", in La storiografia veneziana, cit.: 75-126 (98-115); Idem, La cronachistica, cit.: 45-53 ; 261-271 ; 292-300.

n The proper chronicle begins at page 93b of the manuscript. By then, there are inserted different documents (during the Baiamonte Tiepolo’s conspiration) and a list of the Venetian noble families (19a-93a). Then, the title of the chronicle in the text is Principio et Origine della creation delli Dosi. On the last page of the manuscript (that is, 175b), there is the election of the 64^th doge (that is Michiel Morosini, in 1382), but the codex ends abruptly, in the middle of the phrase, suggesting thus that the last pages of it are lost. Anyway, the information in the catalogue that it ends in the year 1310 is definitely wrong.

o The manuscript also contains the noblemen’s heraldic signs (4a, col. 1-25a, col. 1), different statistics of the noble families and lists of bishops and relics (26a, col. 1-27b, col. 2). The last page (that is, 80a, col. 1) deals with the death of the Doge Andrea Contarini (on 1382) and ends in the middle of the phrase.

p The author’s name is mentioned only at the beginning of the second book of the chronicle (page 131, which begins the narration with the election of Sebastiani Ziani) : Dell’Istoria di Gio : Giacomo Caroldo. Libro Secondo. It is structured on ten books, the last one narrating in the final the death of the Doge Andrea Contarini (1382). For referrals to Caroldo, see Thiriet, loc. cit.: 266-272; Carile, La cronachistica, cit.: 158-159. Although he lived in the 16^th century, the Council of the Ten's Secretary finished his narration with the year 1382. For the chronicle Caroldo, Thiriet utilized the manuscript It. VII. 128a [= 8639], see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 266.

q As the catalogue specifies, the chronicle comes to an end on the occasion of the election of the Doge Michele Steno on 1400 (page 390). For this codex, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 259 that notices that « l’information est très inégale et l’ensemble est médiocre. »

r As the catalogue suggests, the last year mentioned by this codex is 1405 (on page 68a, col. 2 ; its last page is 68b, col. 1).

s As the catalogue indicates, the last year of narration is 1410 (at page 73a, col. 1). For this codex, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 257 ; CARILE, La cronachistica : 57.

t According to the title in the proper text (page 1a), the codex is entitled simply, as Cronica di Venezia. It also comprises two lists of the noble families (2a-22b ; 131a-160a), a kind of summary (24a-25b), a list of the Venetians that colonized the island of Crete (161a-162a), while the proper chronicle covers the pages 26a-130b and ends on 1410, as rightly the catalogue indicates.

u Usually, the chronicle Barbaro ends its narration on 1413-1414 (1423, according to It. VII. 2657). Anyhow, the codex that I relied upon finished in 1275, on the occasion of the Doge Jacomo Contarini’s election (page 376a). It is entitled Cronica di Venetia. Parte Prima (page 1a), suggesting an initial intention to be divided in books. Still, there are no other titles of books in the text. For referrals to D. Barbaro (dead in 1570), see Thiriet, « Les chroniques »: 246-249; Carile, La cronachistica, cit.: 159-163.

v On the front page, it is mentioned Cronaca detta di Pietro Delfino. Vedi f. 214. Still, the respective codex has no more than 143 pages, so that one could only suppose that there are some other pages now lost. In addition, there is not any connection with the chronicle of Pietro Dolfin. Actually, there is also a nota bene on the same front page : « E affatto diverso dalla cronaca di Pietro Dolfin. » Indeed, I do not know on what a basis could someone consider it as belonging to Pietro Dolfin, that is why I regard it as pseudo-Dolfin. It makes referals to autentica cronica in foglio di Gio : Giacomo Caroldo Secretario del Consiglio di X (7a, 8a-9b). It also presents some notes about the main Venetian institutions (1a-6b), lists with different Venetian citizens in connection with the Chioggian war (7b-8a). The proper chronicle has a particular page counting. It ends with the year 1418 (during the Council in Constance) (page 143b). For this codex, see CARILE, La cronachistica : 60.

w It has the particularity that does not present any year in the entire text. However, it ends with the period of the Doge Tommaso Mocenigo (1414-1423) (page 203 for his election), at page 215.

x It is only a first volume, covering the period before the referals to the Council in Lyon (page 398b ; the last page is 399a). The second volume of the chronicle, that is It. VII. 2558 [= 12450] has a new page counting and retakes the narration from the election of the Doge Jacomo Contarini (1275, page 2a) to the year 1422 (page 837a ; the last page, 838b). The title is La cronica della Nobele Citade de Veniesia acopiada dal trasunto de quella de messer Andrea Dandolo fò Dose de Veniexia, scontrada con molte altre Croniche, et libri annuali della Cancellaria Ducal de Venexia di Pietro Dolfin quondam Giorgio di San Cancian (according to Volume I, pages 2a and 111a). The codex It. VII. 2557 also specifies (page 3a of the manuscript) that the chronicle contains four volumes (the last one is supposed to present the period « ab Anno Iubilei 1500. retro usque ad haec tempora »), still we have only two at our disposal. The same codex presents the doges’ sepulchres (pages 4a-6a), a list of the doges (7a-9a, the last one being Leonardo Loredano, elected on 1501), a catalogue of the popes (pages 10a-16a ; the last one is the Pope Julius, elected on 1504), an index (21a-61a), a list of the families (62a-64a ; 65a-109a). The proper chronicle begins at page 111a. For referrals to Pietro Dolfin, see Marco Foscarini, Della letteratura veneziana, Padua, 1752 (reprinted Venice, 1854): 159-160 ; CARILE, La cronachistica : 153-156.

y As the catalogue specifies, it ends with the year 1427 (at page 100, col. 3).

z As the catalogue indicates, the last year of the codex is 1432 (at page 189b).

aa In contradiction with the catalogue, this codex ends at 1425 (at page lxviiij a). The information in the catalogue is erroneously influenced by the fact that the chronicle is followed by a History of the Popes, not counted, that indeed ends at 1478. There is an error in the page counting of the chronicle, which continues the page lviij b with lxviiij a, error that also influenced Thiriet, who specifies that the respective chronicle is to have 69 pages. For this codex, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 258-259 that considers it as « sans aucun intérêt » ; CARILE, La cronachistica : 109-110.

bb The chronicle ends at page 267a and is followed by the list of the noble families and their signs (pages 267b-314a). For this codex, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 256.

cc The proper chronicle ends indeed in 1441 (at page 53b ; the page counting is mine), but it is interrupted in the middle of the phrase. The codex also presents a table with the participants to an anti-Turkish campaign (perhaps led by John Hunyad). The same page (54a) retakes the narration referring to the year 1444. Thus, it could also be concluded that is it about the same chronicle, which narration of the period 1441-1444 is lost, so that the chronicle itself ends in 1444.

dd As the catalogue mentions, the chronicle ends in 1442 (at page 172a). Still, it is interrupted in the middle of the phrase. For this codex, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 258 that considers that « mérite peu de confiance, en dèpit d’une chronologie correcte. ; CARILE, La cronachistica : 118.

ee The front page specifies : « Cronica di Venezia scritta da Camillo Abbiosi Ravenate ». On page 1a, the information is retaken : « di Camillo Abbiosi, il vechhio ». As it is indicated in the catalogue, it ends in 1443 (at page 148a ; the last page, 149b). For this chronicle, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 251.

ff The codex also includes a brief presentation (only A-B letters) of the noble families (pages 1a-8a). The chronicle has a particular page counting. Its last year is 1444 (et page 229b), different than the one suggested by the catalogue. For this codex, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 259.

gg I utilized this codex, which provenience is from the Phillipps Library, instead of It. VII. 519 [= 8438], preferred by Thiriet etc. Indeed, this latter covers the period by 1585, including thus the period that Thiriet was interested in. I regarded the codex It. VII. 2567 as being the chronicle Trevisan, also it is only a partial copy that ends in 1442 (at page 230b, col. 1 ; the last of page of the chronicle, 231b, col. 1), and not 1444 as the catalogue indicates. The codex also includes a list of the Venetian noble families (233a-234a), their signs (237a-276b). For Nicolò Trevisan, see Thiriet, « Les chroniques »: 262-266; Carile, "Note di cronachistica veneziana: Piero Giustinian e Nicolò Trevisan", Studi Veneziani 9 (1967): 103-125 (119-125); Idem, La cronachistica, cit.: 138-140; Thiriet, "L'importance de la chronique de Niccolò Trevisan", in Miscellanea marciana di studi Bessarionei, Padua: Antenore, 1971; V. Lazzarini, "Marino Falier, la congiura", Nuovo Archivio Veneto 13 (1897): 8-18: Le fonti (from the title, it could be inferred that Lazzarini's analysis about N. Trevisan's chronicle deals exclussively with the episode of the Doge M. Falier's conspiracy - 1355).

hh The codex is followed by a second volume, in It. VII. 1275 [= 9275] that continues the page counting. The first volume ends with the year 1338 (at page cclxxxj a), while the second continues the narration to 1446 (at page ccccclxxxxvj b). Codex It. VII. 1274 also contains a list of the main historical events (1a-5b, with a proper count paging), a list of the noble families (ii b-iiij a), their signs (lvij b-lviij a) and also provides a kind of title : Capitulo primo de la Chronica de la nobel Cita de Venexia » (page lxj a). For referrals to Zancaruolo and to the paternity problem, see Thiriet, « Les chroniques »: 279-285; Carile, La cronachistica: 84-88; Lia Sbriziolo, "La Cronaca Zancaruola: dall'esilio dalla Biblioteca Marciana al suo ritorno", Atti dell'Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti 128 (1969-1970) : 617-629; Thiriet, "Encore sur le pseudo (?) Zancaruolo", in In Memoria di Sofia Antoniadis, cit. : 58-64; Giulio Zorzanello, "La Cronaca Veneziana trascritta da Gasparo Zancaruolo (codice Marciana It. VII. 2570, già Phillipps 5215)", Archivio Veneto, 5^th series, 114 (1980).

ii The codex has nothing to do with It. VII. 1274, that is with the chronicle Zancaruolo, as the catalogue erroneously asserts. Actually, according with the final statement of this codex (page 179a), Gasparo Zancharuol is only the copier, who wrote in 1519. It indeed ends in 1446 (at page 179a). It also includes a summary (tabula) (pages i b-xiiii b, separately counted, preceding the chronicle), some preachings (inserted after the chronicle by another hand ; not counted). For this manuscript, see the considerations of G. Zorzanello, loc. cit.

jj On the schedone is mentioned that the chronicle is « fino all"anno 1452 ». Nevertheless, the last year presented is 1457 (at page 175b ; the last page, 176b).

kk The last referrals of this codex are to the election of Pasquale Malipiero (pages 169b-170b). I had not the possibility to consult it entirely. For this codex, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 254-256.

ll The title in text is « Venetia miracolosa Citta dal Grande Iddio preservata [...] » (on the front page). It ends in 1457 (the election of Pasquale Malipiero ; page 464a), as the catalogue presents. The manuscript also contains copies on different documents referring to the Venetian internal policy (pages 465a-489a).

mm It presents a title (page 1a) : « Chronica di Venetia con molte cosse degne d" memoria quii ciuso fin lanno del MDLXX chi Dio il doni a C[ondita] V[rbe]. It also presents documents including letters of different Ottoman Sultans (344b-345a ; 390b-391b ; 426a-426b) and, subsequently to the proper chronicle, tables with different outcomes (359a-366a), meetings of the Consiglio Major (367b-389b, 395 ff.), different lists and documents especially emphasizing the war in Cyprus (422b-440a). The last one is a list with the Venetian sopracomiti in Cyprus is dated in 1570. It is this information that induced the conclusion that the chronicle itself ends in this year, as the catalogue and the title at page 1a consider. Still, the proper chronicle ends in 1457 (the election of Pasquale Malipiero, at page 351a).

nn I consulted the microfilm Pos. Marc. 143, the only one available at Marciana for the chronicle Z. Dolfin. The first pages refers to narration of the political events in Italy and has the signature of Pietro Dolfin : « essendo io Piero Dolfin in casa sua a Rodi » and the date of 1433. Then, the manuscript contains a list of the noble families (38a-66b), of the doges (69a ff.), then a summary (85a-104b). At page 112a, it is mentioned « Capitolo primo de lo exordio de la cronicha de la nobel cita de Venetia […] » as title. Unfortunately, the microfilm comes to and end during the Doge Zuanne Badoer, in 892. For the referrals to the Fourth Crusade, I relied upon the notes delivered by Anne-Laure Keiser from Paris, whom I am to express my gratitude. These notes only specify the pages 185-190 as a whole for the entire episode. Zorzi Dolfin's chronicle was partially edited, by G. M. Thomas, in Sitzungsberichte der K. bayerischen Akademie d. Wissenschaft, Munich, 1864: II, 67-80 (referrals to the Fourth Crusade), and ibidem, 1866: II, 1-41 (referrals to the fall of Constantinople in 1453). About Z. Dolfin, see Thiriet, « Les chroniques »: 286-290; Maria Zannoni, "Le fonti della cronaca veneziana di Giorgio Dolfin", Atti del Reale Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti 101, 2 (1941-1942) : 515-546.

oo As the catalogue asserts, the chronicle ends in 1471 (at page 153b ; the last page, 155a, specifying : « Il Fine »). It is also mentioned in a title (page 2a) : « Cronica Veneziana fino il 1471 ». Since it makes a critical referrence to Sabellico (page 149a), it means that this original chronicle was written afterwards.

pp As the catalogue mentions, it ends in 1478 (page 194a ; the last page, 196a). The front page specifies : « 1590. Laus Deo », indicating thus the year when it was written. It is also mentioned that it is a « Copia cavada da una Cronica vechia ». There are many notes on the margin of the text that seem to belong to Thiriet, who compares it Z. Dolf[in], Venier[a], Zanacar[uolo]. The manuscript also includes lists with the relics brought to Venice (27a-32a), the patriarchs of Aquilea (35b), the noble families - presented yearly (37b-39b ; the last year : 1499). For this chronicle, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 253-254 ; CARILE, La cronachistica : 35.

qq As the catalogue indicates, it ends in 1479. According to the shcedone, it should be one of the Veniera chronicles. Still, there are many elements that convinced me to regard it separately.

rr The pages are not properly bound and their counting is many times erroneous. There appears a title (page 7a) : « El principio de Veniexia ». Its last year is indeed 1495 (at page 611a), as the catalogue indicates.

ss It indeed comes to an end with the year 1414, meaning the election of Leonardo Loredan (at page 60a ; the last page 61a). Different supplementary information about different doges (pages 65a-70b, col. 2) also ends with Leonardo Loredan (at 1501). The manuscript also contains a list of the noble families (71a-112b, col. 1).

tt As it is noted in the catalogue, it comes to 1501, meaning the election of Leonardo Loredan (page 93a). On the manuscript cover, it is written « Laurentij Patavos » meaning probably one of its former owners.

uu On the front page, it is written « Cronaca Veneta attribuita al Patriarca Gio : Tiepolo Ab V[rbe] C[ondita] sino MDXXXVIII. » Despite this information and the text evidence (that indeed ends in 1538 - page 241b), the catalogue considers it finishes in 1524. The manuscript contains also a list of the noble families (2a-62b) and some family signs (at page 243a, the last page of the entire manuscript), while the proper chronicle is between pages 63a and 242b.

vv The manuscript comprises actually two different chronicles : the first one (1a-73b) nominates itself as « Cronica antiquissima, transcritta da diverse et antique [...] » (page 1a), and the second (pages 74a-390a) ends indeed in 1545, under the Doge Pietro Lando (page 390a), as the catalogue mentions. The manuscript also contains a kind of index for the first chronicle, placed before this one (pages ii a-lxxix b, with a particular page counting), a list of the Turkish conquests in Europe (392a), different other lists and documents (391a-408b).

ww As the catalogue considers, it ends in 1549, during the Doge Francesco Donato (page 215a). The manuscript also contains different documents (4b-8a), the noble families (12a-122b), lists of outcomes, churches etc. without any order (216a-258a), and an excerpt from the chronicle A. Dandolo (a particular page counting : 1a-118a). The proper chronicle is between pages 123a-215a and has a title : « Principio et origine della Creation delli Dosi » (page 123a).

xx As the catalogue indicates, it ends in 1556, with the election of Lorenzo di Priuli (at page 325b). It is only the catalogue that regards it as a Veniera. However, there are many differences than Veniera 791.

yy As the catalogue specifies, it ends in 1570, along with the election of the Doge Alvise Mocenigo (at page 308a). On the cover of the manuscript, it is written : « Istoria Veneziana di Agostino Agostini ».

zz Despite of the indication in the catalogue, the chronicle ends in 1580, under the Doge Nicolo da Ponte (at page 201a). It is entitled « Cronica dell"inclita città de Venetia » (page 1a). The manuscript also includes the noble families’ signs (1a-48b). For this chronicle, see THIRIET, « Les chroniques » : 251-252 ; CARILE, La cronachistica : 70.

aaa It is not properly a chronicle, but a collection of documents, having as title « Libro della fondatione et ampliatione della Città di Venetia [...] » (page 1a). It contains lists of the noble families (11a-100a ; 108b-121a), nobiliar signs (141a-188a), conjurations, perils and natural calamities (121a ff.), etc.

bbb On the front page, it is specified : « Elettioni, deliberationi, decreti, institutioni, accordi, privilegij, creation de magistrati, ordini, correttioni, patti delli Consiglij et altri Estratti da una Cronaca anonima manuscritta ab Urbe Condita, sino all’anno 1616 ». As the title suggests, it is rather a miscellanea. Its last year is 1606 (for a document between pages 264 and 267), and not 1616 as the catalogue suggests. In addition, it provides an index of the above documents (268-287).

ccc On the front page, there is the title of « Cronaca Veneta di Girolamo Savina sino al MDCXV » and the text also ends in 1615, on the occasion of the election of Marcantonio Memo (pages 377b-378a), despite that the catalogue considers it as finishing in 1616. The chronicle has a particular page counting, being thus separated of the preceding index (28 pages).

ddd The title in catalogue is retaken in the chronicle’s text : « Storia Veneta dalla fondazione della Repubblica » (page 1a). It indeed ends in 1750 (page 377b).