Salve Venetia, gleanings from Venetian history; vol. ICrawford, F. Marion (Francis Marion)
History
Salve Venetia, gleanings from Venetian history; vol. I
Crawford, F. Marion (Francis Marion)
Venice (Italy) -- History
A grudge of long standing existed at that time between the houses of
Faliero and Steno. In the summer of 1343 a certain Paolo Steno
approached the house of Piero Faliero at San Maurizio late in the
evening, and calling out a German serving-woman, called Elizabeth or
Beta, with whom he seems to have been acquainted, he persuaded her with
specious arguments, or with the promise of reward, to let him enter the
room of Saray, who some say was the beautiful daughter of the master of
the house, but who Romanin says was a slave, as her name would seem to
indicate. A recent authority, Lazzarini, says that Romanin was mistaken;
but however this may have been, Saray, who was taken by surprise,
defended herself desperately, but could not escape the embraces of Paolo
Steno. A regular action was brought against the latter, and a number of
documents in the criminal archives of the Forty, dated in August and
September 1343, prove that the culprit was condemned to be imprisoned a
year in the lower dungeons called pozzi, and to pay a fine of three
hundred lire. The German serving-woman, who had escaped beyond the
frontier, was condemned in default to have her nose and her lips cut
off, and was perpetually banished; an accomplice, a servant in the
house of Faliero, was imprisoned six months in the lower dungeons, and
then banished. Three years later the mother of Saray, on her death,
named ‘Saray Steno’ among her children in her will, and it would appear
from this that Steno had satisfied justice and repaired his fault by
marrying the girl; but in this case it is certain that he did not long
survive the date of the deed, for before the conditions of the will
could be fulfilled we find that Saray was already the wife of a certain
Niccoletto Callencerio of Oderzo. It is impossible to say how far this
incident was the cause of the hatred between the families of Faliero and
Steno, but we may be sure that when Michel Steno insulted the Doge
eleven years later he was already influenced by the existence of the
family grudge.
On the tenth of November 1354 a request came before the Council of Forty
to proceed against the authors of certain words written in the Hall of
the Hearth in the ducal palace against the Doge’s nephew. There is no
mention of the Dogess. Amongst those cited to appear before the tribunal
within eight days we find the name of a Steno called Micheletto, the
diminutive of Michel, and son of the late Giovanni, coupled with that of
Piero Bollani, as the principal authors of the insulting lines, and a
certain Rizzardo Marioni is accused of having scrawled obscene symbols
beside what his companions had written. Besides these, certain other
noble youths were cited to appear, but were acquitted for lack of proof
that they had taken part in the deed. It must be taken for granted that
Romanin was not acquainted with the document cited by Lazzarini, since
he says that no proofs exist that Steno was either accused or punished.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account