STANPA

Some chroniclers tell that those peoples after whom Veneto was named, Heneti (after called Veneti) in 1184, at Antenore’s command, escaped from Troia and sheltered on the shores of the Adriatic and there settled.
By degrees, they expanded along the rivers Sile and Dese and on the lagoon shores, founding the towns of Anteneroa (Altino), in memory of their leader, Opitergium (Oderzo), Ceneta (Ceneda), Bellunum (Belluno), Feltria (Feltre), Accelum (Asolo) and occupied Tarvisium (Treviso) and Padua (Padova).
These peoples were in good terms with the Roman Senate and with its permission they founded the Latin colony of Aquileia, that soon became one of the most important trade centre (after Rome, Milan and Capri) with its own mint.
For their loyalty to Rome, Venetian cities had first the honour of becoming Roman subject and, in the 1st century B.C. they became Latin colonies.
All the cities founded from then on, had Latin names, such as Julia Concordia (Concordia), Forum Julium (Cividale), Julia Parentium (Parendo) and they formed the tenth Italic region, together with Venice and Istria.
We ascribe the oldest testimony about settlements along the Venetian lagoon in the Roman period, to Livio, who describes this area as “a narrow coastal strip with sheets of water and ploughing lands”.
Under the Roman Empire, the islands along the lagoon had a flourishing civilization: this is testified by ruins, ancient monuments, altars, tombs, cinerary urns, medals.
All these archaeological finds have been discovered in 1967 in the outskirts of Altino, and in 1969 on the area of the former Roman necropolis, along Via Annia, not far from the city; the excavations have also brought to light some paleovenetian tombs and ashes that may be dated around the 5th century B.C.
Nevertheless, all these excavations have not been enough yet to trace out the whole profile of the ancient city, which probably stretched on small rises, along Via Annia and Via Claudia Augusta.
The archaeological finds, especially the remains of mosaic flooring, lead us to think that these villas were very luxury; this idea is confirmed by Marziale, who wrote about Altino: “Aemula Baianis Altini villis…vos eritis nostrae portus, requiesque senectate, si juris, fuerint otia nostra sui”.
The plan and the façade of these villas are the same of the most ancient palaces in Venice, such for example Fondaco dei Turchi. Its structure and the typical portico with side turrets remind the original configuration of the city during the late- roman period.

It was in 153 or 128 B.C. that Annio, a roman consul, built a road (Via Annia) that linked up Aquileia with Rome: from this date on, Aquileia begins its fast development.
Geographers and historians of the Roman Age, such as Stradone, Plinio il Vecchio, Tolomeo, and others, considered Altino one of the city of Veneto and the main point of the road from Aquileia to Rome.
When the Barbarian invasions begun, people moved to Torcello and quitted their city, that soon became a malarial marsh. In the 5th century , Altino was already a squallid land without life and people.
At the beginning of this century, Altino has been reclaimed and many archaeological finds have come to light. Through remains of tombs and of gravestones, archaeologists and historians have learnt the names of ancient families living there in the past.
The urns found are a kind of miniature models of the monuments: they are quadrangular, with a spherical or conic shaped top and polygonal pillars, adorned with leaves and wine-branches.
The only part of the city without tombs was the city centre, which was not surrounded by walls.
The history and the art of Altino are tightly connected with Aquileia’s ones: polychrome floors with geometrical and floral decorations, found in Altino, remind for their technique the better known floors of Aquileia.
In this city, the most important Roman centre in Veneto, excavations have brought to light the ancient town planning scheme, large, well protected by big walls and crossed by a small river that linked up the city with the lagoon of Grado, that is with the sea.
Archaeologists also discovered, in the city centre, a “Holy Road”(Via Sacra) that was flanked with cypresses, columns, arches and many buildings.
The location of the city, in the vicinity of Carnia and Carso, on the edge of Eastern Alps, natural border between Italy and transalpine peoples, required, already in the 2nd century, a strong wall fortification against Barbarian invasions.
The abundance of mosaic in Aquileia, Oderzo, Concordia, Grado is due to the ancient Roman peoples who lived on the shores of the Adriatic: actually, without the roman mosaics of Aquilieia it would be impossible to understand the peculiar flourishing of mosaic works on the seaboard from Ravenna to Pola (Croatia).
The technique of “opus tessellatum”, used to decorate floors with geometrical ornaments, is very similar to the one of Roman wall paintings.
The other technique of “opus sectile”, with multicolour marbles and geometrical figures, was used to floor basilicas and was handed on for centuries.

Both these techniques have been used to build the Basilica of San Marco, according to a taste that tended towards an anti-geometrical and anti-perspective synthesis.
In Venice this trend is also evident in other churches, such as SS. Ilario e Benedetto, SS. Vito e Modesto,SS. Sergio e Bacco.
Unlike Altino, in Torcello, where people from Altino moved, important traces of the ancient civilization are still intact; Torcello was a real city, rich of monuments and buildigs but later it was also quitted because the river Sile made the climate unhealthy and the area uninhabitable.
The deserted city became a stone quarry, used to get the material necessary for the fast expansion of Venice. In time, tides modified the shape of the island: now it is much smaller than it used to be, with few houses, a small council palace, a palace for the podestà, an ancient cathedral and the Byzantine church of Santa Fosca.
Series of excavations around the Duomo have found, among other archaeological finds, also traces of Roman colonies: a coin of Carlo Magno and an Arabian coin of the 9th century are the most interesting finds.
In front of the church of Santa Fosca, archaeologists found an ancient cemetery of the 10th–11th century, on the site of which there was the main square of the city and the palace where, from 1300 on, justice was administered.
Toward the end of the 7th century (697 A.D.), with the intensification of the emigration from dry land to islands, the original church was rebuilt and enlarged, and became Episcopal seat, gaining in this way a big prestige.
Nowadays, only the lower part of the central apse remains; in 864 there was a second rebuilding: the church was enlarged with the addition of two side aisles and a presbytery with a new crypt.
The façade is adorned with an atrium (enlarged in the 14th century) and with pillars and columns joined by wooden architraves.
Among the many Barbarian invasions in Veneto, the Longobard one, in 568, was the most important for the history of Venice because it deeply influenced the balance at that time existing among lagoon peoples and it caused a flow of emigration from coastal regions towards islands.
Before this raid, lagoon was inhabited by scattered peoples, politically subject to Eastern Empire and under the government of tribunes, appointed by local families.
From a document of Cassiodoro, where the author asks Venetian tribunes for oil and wine, it’s clear that in the first decades of the 5th century, Venetians were already a large population with a peaceful life: they practised fishing and traded in salt ; they were also great navigators.
These social and also political and economical conditions, suddenly changed with the invasion of Longobards in 568; it caused two flows of emigrations: the first one to the South, through Grado, along the shores, and the second one toward the lagoon islands.

In this way Venice was divided in two parts: the insular one and the mainland.
Aquileia and Concordia were the first cities to be attacked and their population moved to Grado and Caorle.
In 602 it was the turn of Padua: its inhabitants took refuge in Rivolto, Metamauco, Albiola, Gluges.
In 638 Altino definitively fell: citizens and bishop escaped to Torcello, Ammiana, Murano Mazzorbo and Olivolo.
When, in 639 also Oderzo (the last Byzantine stronghold) was destroyed, refugees colonized the neighbouring island of Civitas Nova Eracliana, and by degrees settled in many other towns of the northern and central area, on the shores from Grado to Cavarzere, immune from foreign raids.
These peoples turned inhospitable areas into a region rich of culture, job and houses; the settlements proceeded toward seaports.
The mainland of Venice has always been separated from the maritime part of the city also because of different laws and interests: the first one followed the fate of Italic provinces occupied by Barbarians, but the second one kept its autonomy and acquired a roman-like system; moreover its isolation due to the position, helped the city in keeping the purity of native traditions.
To have a complete picture of the structure of the two regions, we can get information from the “chronicle Sagornina” written by deacon Giovanni: continental Venice stretched from the border of Pannonia as far as the river Adige; its capital was Aquileia; on the contrary the insular part consisted of the islands of the Adriatic Gulf.
This is what author wrote about their position:
“Nune vero singolarum nomina insularum necesse est convenienter esprimenre: prima illarum Gradus dicitur…, secunda nanque insula Bibiones nominatur, tertia vero Caprulas vocitatur, quarta quidem insula est anc Evachianam jetere, quinta insula Equilius nuncupatur…, sexta insula Torcellus subsistit…, nona insula Metamaucus dicitur, decima vero insula Pupilia manet, undecima Minor Gluces dicitur, duodecima insula Clugies Major nuncupatur. Et etiam in extremitate Venecie castrum quod caput Argillis dicitur. Sunt etenim apud eandem provintiam quam plurime insule abitabiles”.
The inhabitants of these islands, faithful to roman traditions, remained immune from outside influence. They settled in Torcello, Murano, Città Nova, Caorle, Malamocco and successively they were followed by civil and religious authorities.
At the beginning there were two flows of immigration: the first one from Agro Altinate towards the central area of the lagoon, the second one from Aquileia and Friuli towards Grado.
These events paved the way towards the birth of Venice.
In fact, in order to stop Longobards from moving forward, toward the lagoon, it was necessary to set up a stronghold: Eraclea, capital of maritime Venice. This was the heart of the new young State: here first commercial and social agreements with the Reign of Italy were stated, here first political experiments were made.

In thisOver the centuries, the city of Eraclea suffered a slow and gradual decline, especially caused by the floods of the rivers Livenza and Piave.
When the capital of maritime Venice was destroyed, the region’s standard of living considerably got worse, even though, according to what deacon Giovanni wrote, the Doge Orso Partecipazio in 881 “apum civitatem novam Eraclianam palacium construere fecit… pulchrae immaginis demum una cum capella componere fecit…”.
The new seat of the government was fixed in Malamocco (ancient name: Metamauco) in 742.
Historians tell that the ancient Metamauco had its port not on the seaside but on the inland waters, that’s to say on the lagoon, in fact, a maritime port would require additional works to build dams and docks and it was impossible to realize such a port in the 6th century, given the scarcity of stones.
From a geological point of view, Malamocco was subject to a constant water erosion.
The archpriest of the local church of Santa Maria in 1108 wrote about the island: “multis perturbationibus atque maris incommodis” and in 1110 “pluribus periculis penitus dirupta, marisque profligationibus et incendi devastationibus miserabiliter submersa”.
The disappearance of the city was the obvious epilogue of these natural phenomena.
In 810, Pipino, the son of Carlo Magnus, conquered Metamauco: his project was to occupy also the islands of Rialto, where fugitive people had settled, but since the site was marshy and therefore dangerous for his ships, he gave up.
In this occasion, the islands of Rialto proved an excellent stronghold to defend the lagoon from external attacks: for this reason they became the new seat of the government.
Before that moment these islands had never had any importance.
To make clear when the city was founded, we can quote a passage from the chronicler-deacon Giovanni. He wrote:
“Deinde cum essent anni ad incarnatione Domini octigenti quator, apud Rivoaltensum insulam Venetici comuni decreto Ducatum sede habere maluerunt”.
This text contains one mistake: instead of “quator” there should be written “quatuordecim”; in fact, afterwards, the author writes “eo quidem anno” talking about the emigration of Venetians to Rialto, when Michele was defeated in 813.
This must be considered the year of Venice’s foundation.
According to another tradition, Venice was founded the 21st of March of 421 A.D. by the consuls of Padua. This tradition based itself on a recent document that a scrupulous historian cannot take into consideration since it contains many mistakes, especially about the dating.

Even if it can be true that the first settlement in Rialto’s islands took place in 421, this date cannot be considered the one of the foundation of the present Venice, and even less of its government; in fact, it first had its seat in Eraclea and then it was moved to Malamocco.
As regards the geographical aspect of the islands, at the very beginning the landscape consisted in nothing more than sheets of water, marshes and canal mouths that separated Venice from other small islands.
Among the islands of the ancient archipelago of Venice, there were: Scopulo, then Dorsoduro (hard ground) whose name was due to the particular solidity of the clayey ground; Luprio, divided in two parts: in one of the two today there is the church of San Giacomo Dell’Orio, in the other one the church of San Marcuola; Canalecto o Canledo, now Cannaregio, which was a marshland; other two islands, Gemine or Gemelle (twins) occupied the area where today the churches of SS. Filippo e Giacomo, San Provolo, San Severo, San Zaccaria stand.
On the extreme eastern end the city, there was one of the biggest islands: Olivolo or Castrum Olivoli, then called Castello (castle) where a big castle, property of Antenore, stood.
The canal of Vigano divided from this group of islands another one, Spinalunga (long spine), then called Giudecca. This name is not due, as many historians think, to the fact that here there were some Jewish synagogues: in fact, already in the 13th century, when there weren’t many Jewish people yet, the island was already called Zudeca.
This name seems to came from the Latin verdict “ludicatum facere”, which granted some Venetian families few lands of Spinalunga.
Anyway, it’s not easy to understand how the islands looked like in the past, because by degrees some canals were filled in, some others opened.
In 810, when the inhabitants of Malamocco moved to Rialto, on the island of the future city there were still humble dwellings of salt mine workers and of fishermen, but the immigrants were of higher class.
The first real urbanization on the banks of the Grand Canal, in the 9th century was undertaken by an elite of merchants and politicians who wanted to assert their authority and prestige.
The founders of Venice were used to have a high standard of living and they wanted to create around themselves a luxury setting.
That’s why the Venetian society of the first centuries had a distinctive feature: it was aristocratic but at the same time engaged in commercial, military and administrative activities.
Venice, unlike almost all the other cities, during its history has not undergone radical changes in its architecture and has always maintained, since its foundation, the same structure.

If comparing the ancient plan of Temanza, probably dated around the half of the 9th century, with a present one, we discover that Venice’s topography gradually enlarged but never changed radically.
Venice developed without a precise geometrical scheme: its town planning structure is not the result of a preset project; it has always been related to the requirements of its life, the character of maritime and insular city, the activity of its population, its means of transport.
As we already know, at the very beginning of their history Venetian people had to overcome the inhospitality of the place, to build safe refuges, to drain marshlands, to divert natural canals to build landing places and houses (made of wood because the soil was muddy and could not support buildings made of stones).
While dry land was only the place where houses stood, water was the fulcrum of life: that’s why the building structure is tightly linked to this element and every house has its landing place.
The town planning of the Serenissima is rather elementary: the city develops along the S-shaped Grand Canal, the main channel of communication. This famous water way, considered the most beautiful street in the world, is the backbone of the city and at the same time delimits it as in the past the Roman “cardo et decumanus” did.
Since the beginning, there have been two main points of city life: Rialto, commercial point, and San Marco, political and religious point.
In the 11th century, the city developed on the left bank of the Grand Canal, in the zone comprised between SS. Apostoli e San Bartolomio: here there was the market, a place of great importance for a society most consisting of merchants.
This part of the city was obviously linked to the others, Luprio, Santa Maria Formosa and Olivolo, through water ways.
This system of communication characterized the peculiar development of the city and strongly influenced urban life.
In fact, the choice of Venetian merchants of setting up the commercial pole in Rialto, was due to the fact that this site was surrounded by canals, main ways of communication.
In the 9th and 10th centuries, the city structure passed through many phases, consequent on different economical conditions.
When city life wasn’t yet politically and socially organized, canals turned out to be not only commercial ways but also ways for external assaults: for this reason the most ancient churches and districts rise in inner areas and never along canals.
In ancient maps of the lagoon, it’s possible to find indications about the location of the so-called “cavane”, shelters for boats; they probably were similar to the present ones, set up on small lagoon islands, near the estuaries. They were huts supported by trunks of trees and covered with branches and brushwood.

These huts sometimes were equipped with inner intermediate floors, used as temporary accommodation by fishermen; the sites where “cavane” rose, by degrees were enlarged by adding earth , becoming in this way embryos of future islands. Gradually, small chapels, churches and then even monasteries rose near them.
After a first period of urban adjustment, an organized State rapidly imposed, and the importance of water ways increased.
As a result of the commercial and maritime development, many military arsenals were built in the area of Castello; commercial buildings rose together with the palace of government on “insula San Marci”.
As the city developed, also building industry developed, bringing an increase of foot-traffic; for this reason, it was necessary to build new bridges and larger pedestrian precincts.
At the beginning, bridges were mostly made of wood and not very arched, sometimes even flat like drawbridges in order to let horses and carts travel.
The most important stage in Venice’s town planning evolution, was when the primitive market area joined San Marco’s one, through pedestrian connection.
San Marco’s Square, with its Doge’s Palace, rises in front of the lagoon, screened from open sea by the islands of Giudecca and San Giorgio.
The areas of San Bartolomeo and SS.Apostoli were extremely important because they developed along the main water routes, linked to Grand Canal.
They were also focal points for the connections between lagoon islands and mainland.
Pedestrian areas, secondary branches and even houses were oriented, orthogonally and parallelly, depending on the course of the Canal.
This linear and geometrical layout was the same of the first settlements of fishermen living in wooden huts.
Shifting from a close mercantile society to a new open one, the city modified its structure and enlarged its former plan, characterized by “campo” (small square) and “sagrato” (church courtyard), site of local markets, in a new one with shops disposed on square perimeters and along small narrow streets (“calli”).
Some of these narrow streets were named after the most important families living there ( calle Ca’ Zeno, Da Mosto, Da Rampini). Some others were named after trades.
This kind of toponymy lead us to think that similar trades were concentrated in the same area.
The gradual architectonical development, undertaken by the Serenissima, did not destroy former structures, but integrated the old with the new ones.
Changeable economical conditions and necessity of new spaces influenced town planning development.

It was necessary to impose a basic plan to connect private houses to squares, fulcrum of social and commercial life.
In the 10th century, urban settlements increased; many military and representative buildings, markets and shops, new noble palaces with private landing places and courtyards rose.
Even if the city scheme kept, it is obvious that the number of buildings grew.
Since the beginning of their history, Venetians attached so big importance to religious architecture, that inhabitants of each small island self-taxed in order to collect money for the edification of churches.
In the zone of Rialto, parishes were not born from the disintegration of a big one; the land of every single parish was very little, usually no more than one island, a well limited area with only one church.
In the 9th –10th century, Venice was already strewn with churches; it’s probable that the date of the foundation of the church of San Giovanni Crisostomo (1080) reported by the historians Tassini and Corner is not correct because, since the way from rialto to SS. Apostoli ( where the church stands) was the main artery of commercial life, it was probably built long before that date, around the 9th century.
As regards civil architecture of the first centuries, unfortunately there are no concrete remains: the house that belonged to Teophilato from Torcello is the only one we have testimony about. We just know from some chroniclers that it was made by stones and marble.
Nevertheless, we can try to make clear how these first houses looked like.
Venetian house was a peculiar creation, thought to meet specific trade needs; in fact, it must serve not only as habitation but also as storeroom or sometimes as shop.
Ancient building had the typical structure called “fondaco” (from Arabic “fonduck”, market) characterized by a ground floor used as storage, a mezzanine for offices, while upper floors served as habitation.
Growth of business required more space for storages and offices; for this reason houses were enlarged and new floors were added to the old structure.
Since the birth of the city, Venetian palaces have never been in need of defensive structures: insular nature was already a natural defence from external dangers; moreover Venice has always been, even inside, a safe place.
It’s also important to notice that in Venice noble palaces were close to ordinary people’s houses: this is undoubtedly a proof of civilization and modernity.
Buildings’ structure is tightly connected to canals’ one; while in ordinary cities each house is an independent element, in Venice every single façade, prospect, every smallest structure fits the global architectonic economy.

If this city seems to be born as a unique block, this is due to its intrinsic coherence, to its chromatic continuity.
That’s not all; all the cities crossed by a river or a canal, such for example Rome or Florence, seem to be cut in two parts and the bridges that join them have just a functional role.
In Venice, on the contrary, the Grand Canal is an element of the harmonic whole, is an integral part of the city, its most beautiful “street” bordered by the magnificent façades of palaces.
Bridges, often crooked to suit the serpentine windings of the Canal, complete this continuity of image.
For this reason palaces’ façades are not consistent with the palaces themselves, but with the overall image of the bank. This incoherence between façade and building can be found also in late-roman art: in this sense Venice’s architecture is the last example of the typical structures that may be found on the Adriatic’s shores in Roman maritime villas with central portico an lateral turrets.
In Venetian palaces, however, it’s evident a lack of plasticity; there are no protrusions, no jutting out windows or balconies.
Also this element comes from the Roman tradition, through the mediation of Ravenna’s art. The artistic heritage of Ravenna in Venice would be more evident if only the ancient seats of this art (Cittanova, Equilio, Altino, Caorle, Malamocco) had not been destroyed.
The influence of Ravenna is evident in the veneration of Saints Apollinare, Salvatore, Vitale, Sofia and Sergio.
As regards the structures of the first Venetian churches, the basilica’s scheme adopted is the Ravenna’s one, with a typology of nave larger than the Roman one; in fact, there isn’t a big difference among the churches of Ravenna, of Grado and of Venice.
The most typical feature of Venice, especially in its architecture, is a particular taste for colours, another heritage of the artistic world of Ravenna.
This influence characterzed Venice’s artistic culture, at least till 1000 A.D.
For example the basilica of Torcello, risen in the 7th century, in its structure, its decoration and its mosaics shows the imprint of Ravenna.
Another proof of this strict relation is one of the most important creation of the western art of that period: the bell tower.
The bell tower, square or cylindrical, among the others architectonical elements, is the one that more strongly opposed religious tendencies of Byzantium, where bell tower was still unknown. It met the new requirements of religious life; in fact, together with the church, the bell tower had a centralizing function. Moreover, being a public building, whose architectonical beauty was mostly external, it shifted the artistic interest outdoors, giving impulse to the construction of external columns, windows, trabeations and church courtyards.

Other examples of these bell towers can be found in Tessera and Caorle.
Under the dogeate of Pietro Tribuno (888-912), population was threatened by invasions of Ungari and a strong defensive wall was erected from the castle of Olivolo to the church of S. Maria del Giglio; this wall must protect the most exposed to danger side of the city, from the lagoon to the mouth of the Canal.
Since that moment, the settlement with its markets, palaces, diocesan centres, houses, changed into a real city.
In the area between San Marco and Rialto, among the others, there was the family Partecipazio; from the testament of the doge Giustinano Partecipazio (829) we learn that the family owned many lands on lagoon islands; in the same text we also read a mention about the house of Teophilato from Torcello:
“quidquid exinde remanserit de lapidibus et quidquid circa hano (p)etram jacet de casa Teophilato de Torcello hedificentur basilica beati Marci Evangelista, sicut supra imperavimus”
As we already know, this is the first house we have note about.
We have no information about the architectonical structure of the building; we only know that it was built before the 9th century and was covered with stones, the same materials used for the Basilica of San Marco; this technique, called “crustae”, comes from the building tradition of Imperial Rome.
The document is also important because attests a common usage in Venice: recycling materials from old building for new ones.
Unfortunately, little has remained of civil building preceding the 12th century.
There are two opposite tendencies in the artistic storiography about Venice: the “exarcal” one and the Byzantine one.
The exarcal school considers Venice as a direct heir of Ravenna and therefore artistically in continuity with late Roman tradition; the Byzantine one, on the contrary, considers Venice as a province of Byzantium and its art characterized by oriental models.
In fact, Venetians accepted and personalized both of them: late Roman and Byzantine style.
The influence of Byzantium is particularly evident in civil architecture especially in its external decorative elements; on the contrary, it is possible to find late Roman schemes in civil buildings’ interiors.
It was between the 9th and the 13th centuries that Venice became what we can see today.

San Marco’s Square has always been the political, religious and social fulcrum of the city; that’s why there was a constant correspondence between the political system of the Maritime Republic and the structure of the square, opened with one side on the sea and with the others toward the city.
In the 9th century, the Doge’s palace rose in the area of San Marco’s Square, as seat of republic government.
Originally, it was an articulate architectonical complex with high defensive walls and turrets.
In the palace there were: the private habitation of the Doge, central figure of the new State, the law Courts, stables and servants’ lodgings.
Unfortunately, there are no remains of this primitive structure, because it burnt down when, in 976, a conspiracy removed Doge Candiano the 4th from his office.