Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T18:09:28.703Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Venetian Mediterranean Empire after the Council of Trent

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2016

A. D. Wright
A. D. Wright*
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
Get access

Extract

In the period from the conclusion of the Tridentine Council in 1563 to the Turkish conquest of Crete in 1669 the Venetian Republic feared for its sovereignty over its Mediterranean possessions. These stretched from Istria, along the Dalmatian littoral, to the islands of Corfu and Zante. Cyprus was lost to the Turks from 1570, despite the Christian maritime victory at Lepanto subsequently. Venetian relations with the papacy were also strained after the Council of Trent, not only in the exceptional and dramatic circumstances of the Interdict of 1606-7. Defence of both Crete and the other remaining Mediterranean possessions was thus complicated by Venetian anxiety over Ottoman power on the one hand and concern at papal policy on the other. From the end of the Tridentine Council to the Interdict, and indeed beyond, Venice insisted on its role as a devoutly Catholic state, claiming from the papacy the concession of decime, paid by the clergy of the Republic, to sustain its defence of Christendom against militant Islam. But the Republic also resisted Roman suggestions that Catholic belief and practice were insecure or in need of reform within its territories. In the Mediterranean possessions, however, the presence of a Greek Christian population represented a particular problem.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Church History Subsidia , Volume 9: The Church and Sovereignty c.590-1918 , 1991 , pp. 467 - 477
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical History Society 1987 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Wright, A. D., ‘The Venetian View of Church and State: Catholic Erastianism?’ Studi Secenteschi, 19 (1978), pp. 75—108, at p. 83Google Scholar. Archivio Segreto Vaticano: Segreteria di Stato: Venezia: vol. XXXVIII, fols 116r ff. [hereafter A.S.V. Venezia XXXVIII; 116r ff.]; XLII (F); 143r ff.; XLII(H); XLII (I); 325v ff; 15 Sep. 1607-25 Nov. 1623 iVenice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, MSS Italiani, classe VII, no. 1553, [2], [13]; no. 1556, fol. 60r—v;P. Sarpi, Discorso dell’ Origine, forma, leggi, ed uso dell’ Ufficio dell’ Inquisitione [Geneva] (1639), pp. 12, 94ff.; B. Cecchetti, La Republica [sic] di Venezia e la Corte di Roma nei rapporti della religione, 2 vols (Venice, 1874), I, pp. 34f., 62, 79, 88ff., [455]ff., 464ff., 469, 489ff.; 2, pp. 351f.; A. Stella, Chiesa e Stato nelle relazioni dei nunzi pontifici a Venezia:Ricerche sul giurisdizionalismo veneziano dal XVI al XVIII secolo (Vatican City, 1964), pp. 290, 305ff., 310,313ff.; W.J.Bouwsma, Venice and the Defense of Republican Liberty: Renaissance Values in the Age of the Counter Reformation (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1968), pp. 488, 513; Fedalto, G., Ricerche storiche sulla posizione giuridica ed ecclesiastica dei Greci a Venezia nei secoli XV e XVI (Florence, 1967)Google Scholar; cf.Donnelly, J. P., ‘Antonio Possevino’s Plan for World Evangelization’, Catholic Historical Review, 74 (1988), pp. 179–98, at pp. 181–3, 188, 196.Google Scholar

2 A.S.V. Venezia XXXVIII; fols 40r ff.; 28 July 1607; cf. Sarpi, Discorso, p. 3; Venice, Archivio di Stato [hereafter A.S. Ven.], Capi del Consiglio dei Dieci: Lettere di Rettori: Padova: busta 87; 8zf.; 15, 18 Sep. 1612; cf. 152; 7 June 1615; Collegio: Relazioni di Rettori: Vicenza: busta 51: Relation of Nicolò Dolfino, 5 Oct. 1625; Venice, Fondazione Cini, Microfilms: Archivio Segreto Vaticano: Segreteria di Stato: Nunziatura in Venezia: filza 265; 254.21 Aug. 1574; 264, 11 Sep. 1576; cf.Pastor, L. von, The History of the Popes from the Close of the Middle Ages, 29 (London, 1938), pp. 177–81.Google Scholar

3 Hay, D., The Church in Italy in the Fifteenth Century (Cambridge, 1977), pp; 75–6, 84–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Logan, O. M. T., ‘The Ideal of the Bishop and the Venetian Patriciate: c. 1430-c. 1630’, JEH, 29 (1978), pp. 415–50Google Scholar; Cantimori, D., Prospettive di storia ereticale italiana del Cinquecento (Bari, 1960), p. 103Google Scholar; Collett, B., Italian Benedictine Scholars and the Reformation. The Congregation of Santa Giustina of Padua (Oxford, 1985)Google Scholar. Among at least partial Byzantine precedents for Venetian practice was the choice of laymen for the patriarchal see of Venice, favoured by the Republic even after Trent.

4 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: busta 85: Relation of Nadal Donado, 1610; b. 83: Relation of Simone Capello, 1607; Francesco Boldù, 1622; Andrea da Mosto, 1627; b. 81: Daniel Barbarigo, 1567; b. 78: Giacomo Foscarini, 1575; b. 79: Zuanne Mocenigo, 1589; 1593; Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, p. 191.

5 A.S. Ven., Duca di Candia: Ducali e lettere ricevute: b. 6, fols 66r ff, 186v ff.; 16 May 1582-18 Nov. 1600; Collegio: Relazioni: b. 79: Lunardo Querini, 1590; Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana: MSS Italiani, classe VII, no. 1556, fols 112r ff.; cf. Pastor, History, 29, p. 220.

6 A.S. Ven., Collegio:Relazioni:b.8i:Nicolo Donado, 1584; b.63, fols 179V ff: Anzolo Barocci, 1585; b. 84.: Santo Moro, 1590; b. 83: Domenico Orio [?], 1617; cf.Kantorowicz, E. H., Laudes Regine: a Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Mediaeval Ruler Worship (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1958)Google Scholar. The laudes in the Venetian Mediterranean Empire commonly carried a right to claim the pardon of a criminal, raising a problem of law and order; cf. Pastor, History, 29, pp. 182-4.

7 A.S.V. Venezia XXXII; 664V ff., 673r ff., 21 Feb., 7 Mar. 1604; XXXVIII; 95r-v, 1 Sep. 1607; XLII (F); 187ff., 13 May 1617; XLII (H) passim, 1621; A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 79: Benedetto Moro, 1602; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 15v ff, 1582; Santo Ufficio: b. 153, 4 Mar. 1576, cf. 19 Dec. 1623; Biblioteca Marciana: MSS no. 1553; no. 1556, fol. 35V; Cecchetti, La Republica, I, 62; II, 351f.; Stella, Chiesa e Sialo, pp. 305ff., cf. pp. 23ff., 182; Bouwsma, Venice and the Defense, p. 524, n. 205;cf. A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 71: Luca Falier, 1587; b. 72: Lorenzo Surian, 1616; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fol. 151v, 28 Sep. 1587, 20 Mar. 1588; Nunziature di Venezia, 9, ed. A. Stella (Rome, 1972), no. 47, 16 July 1569; Relazioni degli Stati Europei lette al Senato dagli Ambasciatori Veneti, ed. N. Barozzi and G. Berchet, Serie III, Italia: Relazioni di Roma, 1 (Venice, 1877), p. 38: Marco Venier, 1601;P. F. Grendler, The Roman Inquisition and the Venetian Press, 1540-1605 (Princeton, 1977), pp. 212-13. Both Rome and Venice appealed to the decrees of the Council of Florence in relations with Greeks: Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, p. 192; cf. Pastor, History, 29, p. 230.

8 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78: 15 Jan. 1574; b. 79: Benedetto Moro, 1602; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 84r ff, 123r—v, 1582—4; Biblioteca Marciana: MSS no. 1553; no. 1556, fol. 35v; cf. Pastor, History, 29, p. 220.

9 A.S.V. Venezia XXXII; 853r-v, 29 Jan. 1605;XLII (F); 143r ff., 187r ff, 29 Apr., 13 May 1617; XLII (H) passim, 1621; A.S. Ven., Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 191V ff., 29 Jan. 1597; Relazioni degli Stati, pp. 35, 395f.; Cecchetti, , La Republica, 1, pp. 62, 466ff.Google Scholar; 2, pp. 351f.; Stella, Chiesa e Stato, pp. 305ff.; Bouwsma, Venice and the Defense, p. 524, n. 205; Grendler, , Roman Inquisition, pp. 220–1Google Scholar; Brown, H. F., The Venetian Printing-Press (London, 1891), pp. 135f.Google Scholar; Savio, P., ‘Il Nunzio a Venezia dopo l’Interdetto’, AV, ser. 5, 56–7 (1955), pp. 55ff.Google Scholar, pp. 99f.; Trevor-Roper, H. R., ‘The Church of England and the Greek Church in the rime of Charles I’, SCH, 15 (1978), pp. 213–40, at p. 223.Google Scholar

10 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78: Giacomo Foscarini, 1575; b. 62, fols 116v ff.: Alvise Lando, 1580; b. 79: Zuanne Mocenigo, 1589; 1593; b. 83: Marco Barbaro, 1609; b. 81: Agostin Michiel, 1612; b. 85: Andrea Bragadin, 1621; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 70V f., 30 May 1587; cf. Pastor, History, 29, pp. 227-8.

11 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 81: Daniel Barbarigo, 1567; b. 78: Giacomo Foscarini, 1575; b. 79: Zuanne Mocenigo, 1589; 1593.

12 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78: Giacomo Foscarini, 1575; b. 87: Bartho. Paruta, 1597; b. 83: Marco Barbaro, 1609; b. 85: Lorenzo Contanni, 1616.

13 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78: 1575; b. 63: 1584; b. 79: 1589, 1591, 1593, 1602, 1608; b. 85: 1600, 1601, 1602, 1603, 1606, 1621, 1637; b. 83: 1617, 1627; b. 66: 1622; b. 81: 1639; Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, p. 191.

14 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 63, fols 148v ff., 151vff.; 1584: Grendler, Roman Inquisition, pp. 238-40; Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, p. 191.

15 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 79:1602; St Francis is represented at Kritsa in Crete.

16 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 81: 1590; Donnelly,’Possevino’, p. 184.

17 A.S.V. Venezia VII; 17ff.; XXXII; 445r ff.-853r-v; XXXIII; 181v ff.-248v ff.; XXXV; 115v ff.-334r-v; XXXVIII; 77r ff.-363r ff.; XLII (D) passim; XLII (E) passim; XLII (F) passim; XLII (G) passim; 1569-1618; Archivo General de Simancas, Spain: Estado: Negociación de Roma: Legajo 986: [1608]; AS. Ven., Capi del Consiglio dei Dieci: Lettere di Rettori: Brescia: b. 26, fol. 74, 25 Nov. 1601; Collegio: Relazioni: b. 84: 1567, 1588, 1590; b. 66: 1572, 1622, 1639; b. 78: 1575;b. 62, fols 49V ff.-203v ff., 1577-1582; b.63, fols 7v ff.-179vff., 1583-5; b. 71: 1587, 1602, 1617,1620, 1625, 1626; b. 79: 1589,1590, 1593, 1602, 1603, 1608, 1612, 1619; b. 86: 1589, 1595; b. 81: 1590; b. 87: 1592, 1601; b. 72: 1593, 1594, 1596, 1598 (Contarmi), 1598 (Giustiniani), 1598 (Minio), 1601, 1602, 1616, 1632, 1635; b. 85:1600,1601, 1602, 1603, 1608, 1610, 1611, 1613, 1625 (?), 1637 (?); b. 83: 1607, 1609, 1620, 1622, 1627; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 5, fols 199v ff.; b. 6, fols 15vff.—1556-1600; Nunziature di Venezia, IX, nos 46, 116, 119; XI, ed A. Buffardi (Rome, 1972), no. 395; 1569-76; Relazioni degli Stati, p. 35; [F. Cornaro], Creta Sacra, 2 vols (Venice, 1755), 2, pp. 125, 132ff., 145, 156ff.; G. Cappelletti, Storia della Chiesa di Venezia, 6, i-ii (Veniċe, 1850, 1855); [i], 377; ii, 147; Cecchetti, La Republica, 1, pp. 422, 439; 2, pp. 351f., 401ff.; Stella, Chiesa e Stato, pp. 23ff., 77, 121, 125, 127f., 148f., 151, 177, 182, 332; Bouwsma, Venice and the Defense, p. 385; Grendler, Roman Inquisition, pp. 9, 212—13; Logan, ‘Ideal of the Bishop’, p. 447, n. 104; Savio, ‘Il Nunzio’, p. 91, n. 1; Trevor-Roper, ‘Church of England’, pp. 221ff; G. Benzoni, Venezia nell’ età della controriforma (Milan, 1973), p. 64; G. Spini, ‘La congiura degli spagnoli contro Venezia del 1618’, ASI, 107 (1949), pp. 17ff.: pp.23, 26; Patterson, W.B., ‘The Peregrinations of Marco Antonio de Dominis 1616-24’, SCH, 15 (1978), pp. 241–57Google Scholar; cf. Pastor, History, 29, p. 220; cf. pp. 226,231: many bishops were in fact non-resident

18 A.S.V. Venezia XXXII; 664V ff., 673r ff., 8s3r-v, 21 Feb. 1604-29 Jan. 1605; AS. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78: 1575; b. 62, fols 188r ff, 1581; b. 63, fols 64V ff., 1583; b. 84:1590; b.72: 1594, 1616; b. 83:1607, 1620, 1627; b. 71:1617; b. 66:1639; b. 81:1639; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 55vf., 31 Mar. 1599.

19 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 63, fols 125r ff, 1584; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fol. 192V, 20 May 1597; Creta Sacra, 2, p. 137.

20 A.S.V. Venezia XXXII, 660v ff, 663r ff., 670V ff, 714V f.; XLII (F); XLII (H) passim; 1604-21; AS. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 81: 1567: b.78: 1575; Biblioteca Marciana: MSS 1553; 1556, fol. 35V; Relazioni degli Slati, pp. 35, 212, 395f.: 1601-35; Cecchetti, La Republica, 1, p. 62; 2, pp. 351f.; Stella, Chiesa e Stato, pp. 305ff; Bouwsma, Venice and the Defense, p. 75; Savio, ‘Il Nunzio’, p. 91, n. 1.

21 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 81: 1612.

22 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 81:1567; b. 78; 1575.

23 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 81:1567: b.79:1602; b. 83:1617.

24 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 81:1639; cf. Pastor, History, 29, p. 219.

25 Creta Sacra, II, 94ff.; cf. Pastor, History, 29, p. 220.

26 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78:1575:6. 81:1590, 1625, 1639; cf. b. 66:1639; Biblioteca Marciana: MS 1553; Nunziature di Venezia, IX, 47, 16 July 1569; Cecchetti, La Republica, 2, pp. 401ff.

27 A.S. Ven., Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fol. 91V, 25 Aug. 1587.

28 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 79:1602, 1603; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 5, fols 109V ff.; b. 6, fols 7r-v, 137r, 186v ff, 191V: 1562-1600; cf. Collegio: Relazioni: b. 62, fols 137r ff, 1581; b. 63, fols 64V ff., 1583; b. 84:1599; Cecchetti, La Republican, I 156 n. 1.

29 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78: 1575; b. 79: 1589, 1593; cf. b. 83: 1609, 1627; b. 86: 1611.

30 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78: 1575; b.62, fols 51v., 180r ff, 1577, 1582; b. 81:1584; b. 84: 1588; b. 79: 1602; b. 85: 1602, 1606, 1625; b. 66:1622; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 84rff., 123r-v, 1582-4; Roth, C., History of the Jews in Venice (New York, 1975), pp. 299f, 313, 315ff., 324f.Google Scholar; Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, p. 194.

31 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 78: 1574-5; b. 79: 1589, 1593, 1602; b. 84: 1598; b.83: 1609, 1622, 1627; b. 85: 1621; b. 81: 1639; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 70V f., 1587; Stella, Chiesa e Slato, pp. 305ff.

32 A.S. Ven., Collegio:Relazioni: b. 78: 1574-5, 1589; b.62, fols 116vff., 1580; b.83: 1609, 1624, 1627: b. 81:1612, 1639; b. 85: 1621; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 70v f., 1587.

33 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 81: 1567; b.78: 1575; b. 86: 1589; b. 79: 1589, 1590, 1593, 1602, 1619; b. 83: 1607.

34 Creta Sacra, II, 137; Stella, Chiesa e Stato, pp. 305ff.; cf. Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, p. 184; cf. Pastor, History, 29, p. 220.

35 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 79: 1603; b. 83: 1607; Duca di Candia: Ducali: b. 6, fols 77r, 129r, 1582-3; Relazioni degli Stali, pp. 183, 395f.: 1621-35; Cecchetii, La Republica, I, 468 n.2; Stella, Chiesa e Slato, pp. 305ff. Relations between Jesuit colleges and existing universities were also often problematic, not only at Padua in the Republic: Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, pp. 184—5, 190-1, 196; cf. also below, n. 41; cf. Pastor, History, 29, pp. 231—2.

36 Relazioni degli Stali, p. 390: 1632-5; Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, pp. 181-92; cf. Piras, G., La Congregazione e il Collegio di Propaganda Fide (Rome, 1976)Google Scholar; cf. Venezia e l’Oriente, ed. L. Lanciotti (Florence, 1987); Pastor, cf., History, 29, pp. 218–19.Google Scholar

37 A.S. Ven., Collegio:Relazioni: b. 71:1607, 1609, 1620, 1625; b. 72: 1616, 1632, 1635; cf.b. 81: 1584.

38 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 84: 1567, 1588, 1590, 1594, 1598, 1599; b. 62, fols 180r ff., 203v ff.: 1580, 1582; b. 63, fols 179vff., 1585; b. 85: 1600, 1601, 1602, 1603, 1608, 1611,1613; b. 66:1622.

39 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 63, fols 179V ff., 1585; b. 86: 1589.

40 A. S. Ven., Collegio:Relazioni: b.63, fols 76a rff.: 1583; Donnelly, ‘Possevino’, p. 184.

41 A.S. Ven., Collegio:Relazioni:b.72: 1621; b.66:1639; Donnelly,’Possevino’, pp. 184, 197.

42 A.S. Ven., Collegio: Relazioni: b. 79:1593.