Cadorin. Pareri di XV. Architetti. 8vo, Venice, 1838.
Filiasi. Memorie storiche. 8vo, Padua, 1811.
Bettio. Lettera discorsiva del Palazzo Ducale. 8vo, Venice, 1837.
Selvatico. Architettura di Venezia. 8vo, Venice, 1847.
[100] The year commonly given is 810, as in the Savina Chronicle (Cod. Marcianus), p. 13. “Del 810 fece principiar el pallazzo Ducal nel luogo ditto Bruolo in confin di S. Moisè, et fece riedificar la isola di Eraclia.” The Sagornin Chronicle gives 804; and Filiasi, vol. vi. chap. 1, corrects this date to 813.
[101] “Ampliò la città, fornilla di casamenti, e per il culto d’ Iddio e l’ amministrazione della giustizia eresse la cappella di S. Marco, e il palazzo di sua residenza.”—Pareri, p. 120. Observe, that piety towards God, and justice towards man, have been at least the nominal purposes of every act and institution of ancient Venice. Compare also Temanza, p. 24. “Quello che abbiamo di certo si è che il suddetto Agnello lo incominciò da fondamenti, e cost pure la cappella ducale di S. Marco.”
[102] What I call the Sea, was called “the Grand Canal” by the Venetians, as well as the great water street of the city; but I prefer calling it “the Sea,” in order to distinguish between that street and the broad water in front of the Ducal Palace, which, interrupted only by the island of San Giorgio, stretches for many miles to the south, and for more than two to the boundary of the Lido. It was the deeper channel, just in front of the Ducal Palace, continuing the line of the great water street itself which the Venetians spoke of as “the Grand Canal.” The words of Sansovino are: “Fu cominciato dove si vede, vicino al ponte della paglia, et rispondente sul canal grande.” Filiasi says simply: “The palace was built where it now is.” “Il palazio fu fatto dove ora pure esiste.”—Vol. iii. chap. 27. The Savina Chronicle, already quoted, says: “In the place called the Bruolo (or Broglio), that is to say, on the Piazzetta.”
[103] “Omni decoritate illius perlustrata.”—Sagornino, quoted by Cadorin and Temanza.
[104] There is an interesting account of this revolt in Monaci, p. 68. Some historians speak of the palace as having been destroyed entirely; but, that it did not even need important restorations, appears from Sagornino’s expression, quoted by Cadorin and Temanza. Speaking of the Doge Participazio, he says: “Qui Palatii hucusque manentis fuerit fabricator.” The reparations of the palace are usually attributed to the successor of Candiano, Pietro Orseolo I.; but the legend, under the picture of that Doge in the Council Chamber, speaks only of his rebuilding St. Mark’s, and “performing many miracles.” His whole mind seems to have been occupied with ecclesiastical affairs; and his piety was finally manifested in a way somewhat startling to the state, by his absconding with a French priest to St. Michael’s, in Gascony, and there becoming a monk. What repairs, therefore, were necessary to the Ducal Palace, were left to be undertaken by his son, Orseolo II., above named.
[105] “Quam non modo marmoreo, verum aureo compsit ornamento.”—Temanza, p. 25.