The Political and Social Vocabulary of John the Deacon’s ‘Istoria Veneticorum’ by Luigi Andrea Berto (review)

This volume offers an English translation of a revised version of Luigi Andrea Berto’s Il vocabolario politico e sociale della ‘Istoria Veneticorum’ di Giovanni Diacono(Il Poligrafo editore, 2001). The book analyses the chronicle Istoria Veneticorum, a fundamental source for the study of medieval Venice for culture or language historians. Berto effectively uses a thematic approach to examine the manner in which political and social vocabulary was used in the chronicle, with a close consideration of the text’s original context.

The chronicle, comprising two books, records in chronological order events from the Lombard invasion of Italy [ c.569] up to the period of rule of Pietro II Orseolo (991–1008). It recounts the complicated events surrounding the medieval Venetian dukedom, for instance, the attempt by Duke Obelerio to dethrone Duke Giovanni Particiaco in 830. The unsuccessful coup had terrible consequences for the residents of the Malocco who had supported Duke Obelerio.

Berto also attempts to extend our knowledge of John the Deacon, the author of the Istoria Veneticorum, and the general conditions in which he wrote the chronicle. There is actually no explicit reference in the text to the Istoria’s author or authors. However, the mention of a certain deacon John in the chronicle’s final section, has led to authorship being conventionally assigned to John the Deacon. While there is more evidence to support this hypothesis, it is rather difficult to believe that a single author is responsible for the composition of the Istoria Veneticorum. Part of the chronicle is made up of fragments taken word-for-word from other works, and, furthermore, some episodes seem to be written in styles of other time periods. Interestingly, some of the events recorded in the chronicle extend beyond the lifetime of John the Deacon: the struggle, for instance, between Duke Orso Particiaco (864–81) and the Patriarch of Grado Pietro caused by the disagreement over the election of Abbot Domenico as bishop of Torcello.

Berto’s linguistic analyses are organised thematically, using categories such as space, social definitions, and kinship. A number of examples are worth citing. I found it fascinating, for instance, to learn in Chapter 1, ‘Dukes, Sovereigns, and Holders of Other Offices’, that the names of rulers differ in relation to the geographic location. Certain sovereigns from Constantinople were referred to as augustus, while those in the West were not: ‘we have already pointed out that none of them are ever given the epithet of augustus, but we do find the use of cesar’ (p. 49).

In Chapter 5, Berto tackles the vocabulary of place names. We read that, for example, provinciaseems to describe an ecclesiastical province, and ducatus, is sometimes used as a synonym to ‘the office of duke’, but its meaning can alter according to whether it is preceded by the adjective dignitasor stands alone (pp. 147–49).

In Chapter 6, Berto compares the collective terms for people used in the Istoria Veneticorum, for example, vulgusand plebs(p. 223). We learn that the former was used pejoratively, while the latter seems to have been applied only in generic contexts, such as when the plebselected the deacon Giovanni as Bishop of Olivolo (p. 224). There is also a mention of the term natio, which was known to express ethnic affiliation but John the Deacon did not use it (p. 242).

Berto’s study is careful and thorough, and overall, by making this important source available to English-language scholars, this volume makes a significant contribution to studies of medieval Venice. It is highly recommended to students and scholars of medieval culture and linguistics.