1

Danny Wall

The Impact of Relics on Venetian Culture after the Fourth Crusade

Fernand Braudel once wrote that “Venice was the greatest commercial success of the Middle

Ages – a city without industry, except for naval-military construction, which came to bestride the

Mediterranean world and to control an empire through mere trading enterprise.”1 In 1204, the

crusader armies of Europe sacked the city of Constantinople under the leadership of the partially

blind, elderly Venetian doge, Enrico Dandolo. From the ruins of the Byzantine Empire, Venice

took its place as the champion of Mediterranean culture. After the sacking of Constantinople,

numerous religious relics flooded into the city of Venice, serving as props by the “republic to

demonstrate her supremacy over Byzantium and to support her claims in the Mediterranean.”2

Prior to the Crusade of 1204, the Republic of Venice was primarily a trading enterprise, with

culture often a sideshow to trade. The politics of Venice were dominated by capitalist doges such

as the father and son duo of Sebastian and Pietro Ziani, who sandwiched the rule of Enrico

Dandolo.3 Despite the rocky relationship between Venice and Constantinople in the 12 th century,

“Venice turned to Byzantium for cultural inspiration.”4 Following the Fourth Crusade, when

Venice took a turn for broader imperialism, a cultural shift occurred that caused Venice to see

itself in a different light and approach its Mediterranean heritage differently than it had before.

1 Fernand Braudel, Civilization and Capitalism, From the 15th to the 18th Century (New York: Harper and Row, 1984), as cited by Paul Gallagher, “How Venice Rigged the First, and Worst, Global Financial Collapse” (Fidelio Magazine, 1995).2 Maria Georgopoulou, “Late Medieval Crete and Venice: An Appropriation of Byzantine Heritage” (New York: The Art Bulletin, 1995), 479. Georgopoulou also cites S. Bettini, “Venice, the Pala d’Oro, and Constantinople” in Buckton, ed., 35-64.3 The doges of Venice were frequently wealthy landlords, or otherwise held stakes in the economic well-being of the republic. In order for a doge to be elected, a near two-thirds majority vote would have to be reached, according to Jay S. Coggins and C. Federico Perali in “64% Majority Rule in Ducal Venice: Voting for the Doge” (Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1998), 710. This makes it clear that economic growth was a focus for the broad majority of Venetians at the time, who routinely elected leaders with economic backgrounds.4 Georgopoulou, op. cit., 479.

2

My research emphasizes the role of relics in changing Venetian culture into the nest from

which an empire could be built. Venice had a long history of collecting relics, dating back to the

theft of the body of Saint Mark from Alexandria by Venetian merchants in 828. The relics

brought back from the sack of Constantinople were even more influential in making Venice the

heir to the Mediterranean, perhaps, than the “sensational riches [the Venetians] discovered in

Constantinople” and the vast territory gained by the division of the Byzantine Empire.5 Certainly,

the collapse of the Byzantine Empire paved the way for Venice to seize control of the

Mediterranean. However, I would contend that the culture of Venice, in particular the way in

which religious relics were perceived and used, was equally responsible for making Venice an

imperial power to be reckoned with in the Mediterranean.

Relics are unlike other commodities or goods in that they are not given their value by any

intrinsic economic properties, but rather by the intangible concepts the relics represent.6 Because

relics are given their value by the community which understands what they symbolize, it is

important to ask why relics of Byzantium were given such power over culture in Venice. Maria

Georgopoulou put it best when she wrote “the incorporation of these objects into the civic center

of Venice played a major role in shaping [Venice’s] political identity.”7 The relics brought back

from Constantinople after the Fourth Crusade were placed at the very center of the city in Saint

Mark’s Basilica. The fact that Venetia held the relics of Byzantium in such high regard attests to

the argument that Byzantine culture was emulated by the Venetians. In this paper, I propose that

the relics brought back from Constantinople after the Fourth Crusade amplified the effect of

5 Jonathan Phillips, The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople (New York: Penguin Group, 2004), 268.6 According to Holger A. Klein, the only “instance in which a specific monetary/economic is assigned to a relic is found not in a Byzantine, but in an Arabic source”: Yahya B. Sa’id Antākī’s Ta’rīkh or Chronique Universelle, ed. and trans. I. Kratchkovsky and A. Vasiliev (Paris, 1932), 770. As found in Holger A. Klein, “Eastern Objects and Western Desires: Relics and Reliquaries between Byzantium and the West” (Washington: Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University, 2004), 283.7 Georgopoulou, op. cit., 479.

3

Venetian culture becoming the heir to the Mediterranean in place of the fallen Byzantine Empire.

One case of this is the cultural success of the Fourth Crusade having brought about a change in

the title of the doge, changing it to ‘quartae partis et dimidiae totius imperii Romaniae

Dominator,’ or ‘Ruler of one fourth and a half of the empire of Rome.’8

In general, historians have tended to focus on the economic or political consequences of the

Fourth Crusade. While these aspects of the crusade are certainly crucial to understanding the

environment of the Mediterranean region at the time, they have been belabored by scholars. With

so much focus on the politics and economics of the Fourth Crusade, it comes as no surprise that

“modern historians tend to devalue spiritual motivation.”9 By addressing the amassing of relics

in Venice after the Fourth Crusade as merely a case study of how the Venetians used religious

relics to appropriate Mediterranean culture, I will likely come into contention with traditional

historiography about how Venetia saw its own Mediterranean heritage at the time. I hope to

provide new insight into the way in which relics in Venice were symbols not only of power, but

also of heritage.

In the sixth century, Venice was but a territory of Byzantium; Venice would not gain full

sovereignty until the early eleventh century.10 During this period, Venetian trade slowly

expanded and grew in influence across the Mediterranean. Inevitably, Venice would fall under

the sphere of influence of the Byzantine Empire. Despite a growth in Venice’s own

Mediterranean influence, the republic still saw itself as culturally subordinate to the Byzantines,

and mimicked many features of Byzantine culture. For example, a medieval rebuilding of a

fourth century cathedral just northeast of Venice at Aquileia is famous not only for its ancient

8 Ibid., 480.9 Jaroslav Folda, review of Donald E. Queller, The Fourth Crusade: The Conquest of Constantinople, 1201-1204 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999). Review published in Speculum.10 Loc. cit.

4

floor mosaics, but also for its paintings of Christ’s passion, which have been called “supreme

examples of [the fusion] of Byzantine and late Romanesque mannerism.”11 Art in 12th century

Venice typically fed on elements of Byzantine art, which demonstrates that Venice was already

attributing intrinsic value to aspects of Byzantine culture.

The agglomeration of relics, both religious and otherwise, into the city symbolized the

knighting of the Republic as the heir to the Byzantine Mediterranean. For example, the famous

bronze Four Horses, which may have come from the Hippodrome in Constantinople, were

displayed prominently in a way that championed the power of Venice.12 Other examples include

the Tetrarchs13 and the purposed columns of Acre.14 The sudden transfer of relics from

Constantinople came to not only represent the shift in eastern power to Venice, but Venice’s own

political independence from rest of western Europe, in particular the other cities of the Italian

peninsula. Venice displayed their spoils of war more publically than other cities at the time. The

public, open display of relics taken from Constantinople after the Fourth Crusade can be seen to

represent a more widespread attitude of Venetian dominance among the public.

If the relics brought back to Venice played such an important role in advancing the position of

Venice in the Mediterranean, it is reasonable to ask how they did not begin to lose their

prevalence when the supply of relics so greatly increased after 1204. The answer to this question

11 Otto Demus, Romanesque Mural Painting (New York: 1970), 89. 12 Michael Jacoff, The Horses of San Marco and the Quadriga of the Lord (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1993), 62-108 passim. Jacoff’s writing was found in the footnotes of Maria Georgopoulou’s “Late Medieval Crete and Venice: An Appropiation of Byzantine Heritage”. See Georgopoulou, op. cit., 479.13 Georgopoulou, op. cit., 479. Georgopoulou cites A. Ragona, I Tetrarchi dei gruppi porfirei di San Marco in Venezia (Caltagirone, Italy: 1963). Later, she references the possible origin of the Tetrarch’s as the Philadelphion of Constantinople, noting a later discovery that the missing foot of one of the statues was found in Constantinople in the excavation of Myrelation. This is cited as C. Mango, Le Développment urbain de Constantinople (Paris: 1985), 28ff.14 F. W. Deichmann, “I ‘pilastri acritani,’” Rendiconti Pontificia Accademia romana de Archaelogia (1980), 75-89. As cited by Georgopoulou (see Georgopoulou, op. cit., 479.). It was later discovered that the columns were actually from an early Christian church of St. Polyeuktos in Constantinople, but early accounts of the pillars mistakenly attributed them to the St. Jean d’Acre.

5

is complicated. As stated before, relics are valued not for their economic worth, but for the value

of the intangibles they symbolize. Even for the merchant empire of Venice, applying economic

value to relics would have been difficult, especially when the great increase in supply would

have rapidly depreciated their economic value,15 Perhaps the value of these relics was not only

placed in the communal understanding of what they represented, but also in the “circumstances

of their acquisition and mode of transfer.”16 Relics in Venice were likely more influential

because they were acquired through the direct military dominance of Venice over

Constantinople.

Perhaps, relics were slow in contraction of value because they had such a longstanding history

in Venice. Historians have described Venice as “the most assiduous collector of relics in the

earlier period” of the middle ages.17 According to Grant Allen, the “Venetian fleets, in the early

ages, brought home so many bodies of saints that the city became a repository of holy corpses.”18

The Venetians held these relics as close to heart as they held their city itself. By the time of the

Fourth Crusade, Saint Mark’s basilica in the center of Venice was well established as a place

symbolic of Venice’s claim to Mediterranean heritage.

It comes as no surprise, then, that when the crusader armies gathered in Venice in 1201, “a

great service was held in the Cathedral of Saint Mark, where Dandolo himself addressed the

assembled congregation” to initiate the crusade.19 Of course, after the crusade, several relics

15 For a detailed discussion of the intricacies of economic evaluation of relics, see A. Cutler, “Gifts and Gift Exchange as Aspects of the Byzantine, Arab, and Related Economies,” (2001), 247-78. As referenced by Holger A. Klein in “Eastern Objects and Western Desires: Relics and Reliquaries between Byzantium and the West”. Klein, op. cit., 283.16 Klein, op. cit., 283.17 Wilfrid Bonser, “The Cult of Relics in the Middle Ages” (New York: Taylor and Francis, 1962), 237.18 Grant Allen, Venice: Grant Allen’s Historical Guide Books to the Principle Cities of Europe (New York: A. Wessels Company, 1907), 21. 19 W. B. Bartlett, An Ungodly War: The Sack of Constantinople and the Fourth Crusade (Gloucestershire: Sutton Publishing Limited, 2000), 75.

6

looted from Constantinople would be housed in this same basilica. Upon entering the city of

Constantinople, “the Venetians recognized much that was of artistic value in the city, and took it

for themselves.”20 The Venetians were able to so easily recognize the relics and reliquaries of

Constantinople at least partially because they had a long history of recognizing and seizing

relics. While the most famous relics taken from Constantinople were the four Bronze Horses that

champion the face of Saint Mark’s basilica,21 these were not the only relics that were taken. The

historian, W. B. Bartlett, rightly points out that “many other priceless objects were taken in this

way, ironically preserving some of the heritage of Byzantium for future generations to

appreciate.”22

Preserving Byzantine culture was certainly not on the minds of the Venetian’s who so

aggressively looted the city. Instead, the Venetian’s looted the city so thoroughly that Venice

would quickly become the cultural center of the Mediterranean: “within a century or two, the city

would be at the heart of that amazing outpouring of creativity known to historians as the

Renaissance.”23 In large part, this was due to the way in which Venice received and used the

relics brought back from Constantinople. Venice displayed relics in interesting ways that differed

from many other cities around the Mediterranean, and used them for different roles. Medieval

relics were used for a broad variety of purposes, from treating medical ailments to justifying

cultural expansion. Wilfrid Bonser asserts that cures could be procured from “direct means, that

is by the “laying on of hands” or else through the medium of inanimate objects such as relics.”24

In contrast, Venice stored “relics, icons, and liturgical vessels … in the treasury of the basilica of

20 Loc. cit.21 The Four Horses which overlook Saint Mark’s Square are not the originals, but rather imitations of the original horses. The original bronze Four Horses are contained inside the basilica.22 Bartlett, op. cit., 154.23 Loc. cit.24 Bonser, “Medical Folklore of Venice and Rome” (New York: Taylor and Francis, 1956), 1 sqq.

7

Saint Mark [for the reason of] enhancing the sacred character of the state church and legitimizing

Venice’s involvement in the crusade.”25 The use of relics as symbols of cultural appropriation,

while not entirely unique to Venice, may have been unique to Venice on the Italian peninsula.26

Venetia’s creative, yet sometimes impractical, display of relics in public spaces is nowhere

more clear than at the entrance to Saint Mark’s basilica. There, the two ‘Pillars of Acre’ stand

proudly, albeit at a bit of an awkward and disconcerting distance from the actual entrance.

Charles Freeman attributes this placement to an Old Testament description of Solomon’s

Temple, in which two bronze pillars in the vestibular entrance are mentioned.27 This placement

of the columns signifies more than just religious appropriation of the famous Temple of

Solomon: it establishes the city of Venice as the heir to the traditions of Acre, and

Constantinople, where the columns were taken from.28 The Venetians’ profound bravura of relics

emulated that of the Byzantines to a great extent. Saint Mark’s basilica was made to be a lockbox

for as many relics as the Church of the Blessed Virgin of the Pharos, a looter’s paradise in

Constantinople until after the Fourth Crusade. As described by Robert de Clari, a lower-class

knight who participated in the Fourth Crusade, the Church was purposed to have held two pieces

of Christ’s cross, the iron lance the Centurion had stabbed Christ with, two nails from Christ’s

crucifixion, a vial of Christ’s blood, the tunic He wore during His passion, part of the robe of the

Virgin, the head of John the Baptist, and the notorious Crown of Thorns.29

25 Georgopoulou, op. cit., 479. Also, c.f. D. Pincus, “Christian Relics and the Body Politic: A Thirteenth Century Relief Plaque in the Church of San Marco” in Interpretazioni Veneziane: Studi di Staria dell’Arte in anore di Michelangelo Murara, ed. D. Rosand (Venice: 1984), 39-57 passim. Pincus cited by Georgopoulou. 26 Jacoff, op. cit., passim. Jacoff argued that Venice displayed their relics in “innovative ways that did not simply duplicate earlier practices of exhibiting antiquities in other Italian cities.” See Georgopoulou, op. cit., 479.27 Charles Freeman, The Horses of Saint Mark’s: A Story of Triumph in Byzantium, Paris, and Venice (New York: The Overlook Press, 2004), 94.28 It was eventually discovered that the columns never belonged to Acre. Rather, they likely belonged to the Church of Saint Polyeuktos in Constantinople, and were seized during the Fourth Crusade. They were mistaken as the columns of Acre for centuries, and remain at Saint Mark’s basilica today, however.29 Robert de Clari, La Conquête de Constantinople (circa 1204). Also, c. f. Robert de Clari, The Conquest of Constantinople trans. Edgar Holmes McNeal (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996). Cited by Bartlett, op.

8

In large part, Venetia used relics to inherit the heritage of the Byzantines, and of the

Mediterranean, by connecting themselves to a tradition of culture. For example, on the north wall

of Saint Mark’s basilica, near the baptistery, there is a rare “chance survival of twelfth-century

mural painting in Venice.”30 Throughout Venice, and most prominently at the cathedral of

Aquileia just north of the city, art reflected a fusion of Venetian and Byzantine culture. Venice

was certainly not the only power to make use of Byzantine relics after the Fourth Crusade. The

relics from Constantinople travelled far and wide around the Mediterranean during the remainder

of the 13th century after the sacking of the city. However, Venice made use of relics and

reliquaries in a way that connected Byzantine and Venetian culture, unlike other powers of the

time.

At the time, “relics, suitably displayed in a lavish shrine or sculptural image of the saint,

might enhance the prestige and attract wealth to a cathedral or an abbey, as in the case of Sainte-

Foy at Conques.”31 Often, saints themselves were used as political relics, such as James of

Compostela32, Martial of Limoges33, or Cyrus of Pavia34. For Venice, relics were even more

significant. In Venice, relics were used to justify the political authority and autonomy of the

city.35 The Venetians established critical reliquaries for the relics they gave such importance to.

As argued by Thomas Dale, crypts and cathedrals “amplified the political function of the

cit. 155.30 Thomas E.A. Dale, Relics, Prayer, and Politics in Medieval Venetia: Romanesque Mural Painting in the Crypt of Aquileia Cathedral (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997), 28. Dale references F. Forlati, “Ritrovamenti in S. Marco – un affresco del Duecento,” Arte Veneta (1963), 223ff.; S. Bettini, “Appunti di storia della pittura veneta nel Medioevo,” Arte Veneta (1966), 26; Brusin and Lorenzoni, L’arte del Patriarcato, 70ff.; Demus, “Ein Wandgemälde in San Marco,” 125-144.31 Ibid., 3.32 Abou-el-Haj, The Medieval Cult of Saints, 19-22. Found in citations by Dale, 3.33 D.F. Callaghan, “The Sermons of Adémar of Chabannes and the Cult of Saint Martial of Limoges,” Revue Bénédictine (1976), 251-95. Found in citations by Dale, 3.34 A.M. Orselli, “La citta altomedioevale e il suo santo patron,” RSCI (1978), 47ff. Found in citations by Dale, 3.35 Dale, op. cit.

9

relics.”36 The methods by which these relics were displayed reflected a tradition of Byzantine

heritage. At Aquileia, the relics are surrounded by paintings harking back to the heyday of

Byzantine culture. Byzantine paintings even adorn the walls of Saint Mark’s basilica.

It is important to remember that, at the time, religious followers across the Mediterranean

were already urged to pay respects to the religious relics nearby. The Spanish Saint Ignatius of

Loyola once remarked that followers should “praise relics of saints, by venerating the relics and

praying to the saints.”37 Religious art was worshipped in similar ways around the Mediterranean

as well. Saint Ignatius further mentioned that followers should regularly “praise church buildings

and their decorations; also statues and paintings, and their veneration according to what they

represent.”38 In this way, the famous Renaissance art of intellectuals like Michelangelo would

seize the stage of religious culture later on.

Venice was different in that relics were not merely symbols of religious zealot or political

superiority. Venice truly saw itself as the heir to a longstanding tradition of Mediterranean

culture, embodied in the relics brought to the city and displayed in ways that emulated that of

Constantinople. In a sense, the transfer of relics from Constantinople to Venice after the Fourth

Crusade represented a passing of the torch – the torch being Mediterranean heritage – to Venice,

after being passed around between the greatest cities of the Mediterranean region. Venice

appropriated Byzantine art and imagery in a similar fashion to relics, following the “success of

the abbreviated legendaries, such as those of the Dominicans de Mailly, Bartholomew of Trent,

36 Loc. cit.37 The Spiritual Exercises of Saint Ignatius, ed. and trans. George E. Ganss, S. J. (St. Louis: Institute of Jesuit Studies, 1992), 358-360. As cited by Ann W. Astell, Eating Beauty: The Eucharist and the Spiritual Arts of the Middle Ages (New York: Cornell University Press, 2006), 195. Saint Ignatius was a Spanish knight from a Basque family who eventually became a priest and lived in the 15th and 16th centuries.38 Loc. cit.

10

and Thomas of Cantimpré [whose] paintings and frescoes … penetrated the religious life of the

faithful.”39

The English journalist and art critic, James Dafforne, commented that “there is considerable

similarity of plan between this church (Saint Mark’s) and that of Saint Sophia’s (the famous

Hagia Sophia in Constantinople).”40 In fact, the “architects employed on the building came from

… Constantinople, and they gave it the form adopted in the famous [Hagia Sophia], that of a

Greek cross.”41 George Gwilt noted that Saint Mark’s “plan is that of a Greek cross, whose arms

are vaulted hemicylindrically, and, meeting in the center of the building, terminate in four

semicircular arches on the four sides of a square … from the anterior angles of the piers,

pendentives gather over, as in Saint Sophia in Constantinople.”42 These architectural similarities

between Constantinople and Venetia are no coincident: Venice conspired to inherit the cultural

traditions of Constantinople in regards to large reliquaries like these churches.

Venice may have used relics for more than simply justifying their claim as heir to the

Mediterranean dominion. In Byzantium, we historians see a long trail of the use of relics by

rulers as a means of establishing superiority over other rulers. Frequently, “recipients of such

sacred treasures must have found themselves in a position of inferiority – a reaction undoubtedly

intended by the giver as part of his political message.”43 Certainly, rulers with broad access to

religious relics would have held power over those without access.44 It would absolutely make

sense that the Venetians, when given widespread access to religious relics after the Fourth 39 André Vauchez, “Saints and Pilgrimages: New and Old”.40 James Dafforne, contribution to The Art Journal: New Series, vol. 1 (London: Hodgson and Graves, 1875), 360.41 Loc. cit.42 George Gwilt the Younger was a famous architect who lived from 1775 to 1856 and was the son of another famous architect, George Gwilt the Elder. He commented on numerous architectural feats around Europe. As referenced in Dafforne, 360.43 Klein, op. cit., 289.44 For a discourse on the intricacies of establishing superiority through the gift-giving of relics, see A. Cutler, “Les échanges de dons entre Byzance et l’Islam,” (1996), 55ff. Cited by Holger A. Klein. c.f. Klein, op. cit. 289ff.

11

Crusade, would have used this newfound power in a similar way to the Byzantines, establishing

dominance over subordinate Mediterranean states. In many ways, the reception of relics in

Venice not only enhanced its culture, but provided the means through which Venice could

establish a Mediterranean empire. Venice learned these techniques from Byzantium directly. A

thirteenth century account by Andrea Dandolo details “Doge Agnellus, a Catholic man, receiving

from Emperor Leo the body of Saint Zachariah the prophet, a particle of the wood of the cross,

and vestments of Christ and His mother.”45

Venice perpetuated the use of relics as symbols of heritage in their colony at Crete shortly

after the Fourth Crusade. For example, the “former Byzantine and now Latin cathedral of Candia

(Crete) duplicated in function the basilica of San Marco in Venice: each contained the relics of

the saint associated with the establishment of Christianity in the local community.”46 In addition,

Venice followed the Byzantine precedent of establishing dominance over subordinate states such

as Zara. Ernst Kantorowicz has demonstrated that the Venetian approbation of the doge, which

was initially based on Byzantine ceremonials, “was one of the most successful ways of imposing

Venice’s claims of sovereignty over upon the local population.”47 In the same manner, Venice

demanded in 1204 that “the clergy of the Dalmation city of Zara take part in the performance of

the lauds service in honor of the doge, the patriarch, and the archbishop twice a year, at

Christmas and Easter.48

To conclude that the cultural impact of relics on the Republic of Venice after the Fourth

Crusade played a more significant role in allowing Venice to become a Mediterranean empire

45 Andrea Dandolo, Chronicum Venetum, ed. and trans. L.A. Muratori (Milan, 1728), vol. 8, chap. 1, line 142.46 Georgopoulou, op. cit., 485. Georgopoulous cites A. Niero, “Reliquie e corpi di santi,” in S. Tramontin et. al., Culto dei santi a Venezia, Biblioteca Agriografica Veneziana n. Venice (1965), 181-208.47 Loc. cit. Georgopoulou references the work of Ernst Kantorwicz, Laudes Regiae (Berkeley: 1946), 151.48 Loc. cit. Again, Georgopoulou cites Kantorowicz, 151.

12

than the politics of the disappearance of Byzantium or the vast gains in territory and wealth is a

complex argument to make. However, with this argument I hope to have challenged traditional

historiography by asserting that Venice also became an empire because the Fourth Crusade

influx of relics enabled Venice to take on its Mediterranean heritage. The torch of heritage in the

Mediterranean was passed back and forth among the great cities of the region since the time of

the Romans, and the clever use of relics by the Venetians allowed them to seize this torch after

the sacking of Constantinople. Even before Venice gained its sovereignty in the early eleventh

century, “Venice turned to Byzantium for cultural inspiration”.49 Venice embraced its historical

Mediterranean heritage through the agglomeration of relics in the city, many of which were

stolen from Constantinople and consecrated alongside the prior collections of art and relics

depicting Saint Hermagoras, and later, Saint Mark, the patron saints of Venice.50 Venice

championed Byzantine art and relics in the very center of their city, based religious architecture

on prior examples in Constantinople, and followed Byzantine examples of political use of relics.

In these ways, we see that Venice emulated Byzantium and approached its heritage in the

Mediterranean differently than it ever had before, paving the way for it to become a powerful

maritime empire.

Notes (Primary)

Clari, Robert de. La Conquête de Constantinople. Circa 1204.

Dandolo, Andrea. Chronicum Venetum. ed. and trans. L.A. Muratori. Milan: 1728.

Sa’id, Yahya ibn Antākī. Ta’rīkh or Chronique Universelle, ed. and trans. I. Kratchkovsky and A.

49 Ibid., 479.50 Dale, op. cit., 51. Dale discusses the replacement of Hermagoras as patron saint with Saint Mark at Aquileia.

13

Vasiliev. Paris: 1932.

The Spiritual Exercises of Saint Ignatius, ed. and trans. George E. Ganss, S. J. St. Louis: Institute of Jesuit

Studies, 1992.

Notes (Secondary)

Abou-el-Haj. The Medieval Cult of Saints.

Allen, Grant. Venice: Grant Allen’s Historical Guide Books to the Principle Cities of Europe. New York:

A. Wessels Company, 1907.

Astell, Ann W. Eating Beauty: The Eucharist and the Spiritual Arts of the Middle Ages. New York:

Cornell University Press, 2006.

Bartlett, W. B. An Ungodly War: The Sack of Constantinople and the Fourth Crusade.

Gloucestershire: Sutton Publishing Limited, 2000.

Bettini, S. “Venice, the Pala d’Oro, and Constantinople.” 35-64.

Braudel, Fernand. Civilization and Capitalism, From the 15th to the 18th Century. New York: Harper and

Row, 1984.

Bonser, Wilfrid. “Medical Folklore of Venice and Rome.” (1956): 1sqq.

Callaghan, D.F. “The Sermons of Adémar of Chabannes and the Cult of Saint Martial of Limoges.”

Revue

Bénédictine (1976): 251-295.

Coggins, Jay S. and Perali, C. Federico. “64% Majority Rule in Ducal Venice: Voting for the Doge”

(1998): 710.

14

Cutler, A. “Gifts and Gift Exchange as Aspects of the Byzantine, Arab, and Related Economies.” (2001):

247-278.

Dafforne, James. Contribution to The Art Journal: New Series, vol. 1. London: Hodgson and Graves,

1875.

Dale, Thomas E.A. Relics, Prayer, and Politics in Medieval Venetia: Romanesque Mural Painting in the

Crypt of Aquileia Cathedral. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.

Deichmann, F.W. , “I ‘pilastri acritani,’” Rendiconti Pontificia Accademia romana de Archaelogia.

1980.

Demus, Otto. Romanesque Mural Painting. New York: 1970.

Folda, Jaroslav. Review of Donald E. Queller, The Fourth Crusade: The Conquest of

Constantinople, 1201-1204. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999.

Review published in Speculum.

Freeman, Charles. The Horses of Saint Mark’s: A Story of Triumph in Byzantium, Paris, and

Venice. New York: The Overlook Press, 2004.

Georgopoulou, Maria. “Late Medieval Crete and Venice: An Appropriation of Byzantine Heritage.” The

Art Bulletin (1995): 479.

Jacoff, Michael. The Horses of San Marco and the Quadriga of the Lord. Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1993.

Klein, Holger A. “Eastern Objects and Western Desires: Relics and Reliquaries between Byzantium and

the West.” Dumbarton Oaks, Trustees for Harvard University (2004): 283.

Mango, C. Le Développment urbain de Constantinople. Paris: 1985.

15

Orselli, A.M. “La citta altomedioevale e il suo santo patron.” RSCI (1978).

Phillips, Jonathan. The Fourth Crusade and the Sack of Constantinople. New York: Penguin Group,

2004.

Ragona, A. I Tetrarchi dei gruppi porfirei di San Marco in Venezia. Caltagirone, Italy: 1963.

Vauchez, André . “Saints and Pilgrimages: New and Old.”