venice’s maritime empire in the early modern period 163
characteristic of the early modern Venetian terraferma.131 This character-
ization can easily be extended to Venice’s overseas territories.
Venetian magistrates were not required to have legal training, and
Venice’s judicial traditions left much room for individual judgment.132
Nevertheless, the rectors had to take into consideration local statutes,
feudal customs, and privileges of which they were often entirely igno-
rant. They were therefore greatly dependent on the collaboration of local
experts and mediators. Problems of language and communication neces-
sitated using interpreters. In small territories, where the Venetian rettore
had to face these difficulties single-handedly, the challenge must have been
even greater, especially since governors of small and distant territories
tended to be young and inexperienced.133 Yet being outsiders was also an
advantage in solving disputes between local subjects. In fact, the judicial
activity of the Venetian magistrates was fundamental to enhancing Venice’s
claim of providing impartial justice for all its subjects.134
Angelo Ventura has depicted what he described as the crisis of the
Venetian administration of justice in the 16th-century terraferma. The local
nobilities acted as judges in courts of first instance, including the basic
inquests of criminal cases, and when they were the accused, intimidated
testimonies and influenced inquests and verdicts by using patronage and
violence. The plebeians, who generally preferred Venetian judges, were
often unable to reach them. Venice simply lacked means, and probably
also motivation, to impose its authority and laws outside the boundaries
of the lagoon city. Ventura notes that the crisis of the Venetian judicial
administration was a symptom of broader problems in the Venetian state
and that it was quite evident already in the 16th century, although later it
became even worse.135
Does this description, provided it is accurate, also apply to the overseas
territories? One explanation suggested by Ventura for this situation was
the Republic’s lack of means to impose its laws and authority on a society
ruled de facto by local potentates. The gloomy picture that arises from the
few examples brought by Ventura from the stato da mar is confirmed by
131 Edward Muir, “Was There Republicanism in the Renaissance Republics? Venice after
Agnadello,” in John Martin and Dennis Romano, eds., Venice Reconsidered. The History and
Civilization of an Italian City-State, 1297–1797 (Baltimore/London, 2000), pp. 137–67.
132 Cozzi, “La politica del diritto,” pp. 33, 38; O’Connell, Men of Empire, p. 80.
133 E.g., Oliver Jens Schmitt, Korčula sous la domination de Venise au 15e siècle. Pouvoir,
économie et vie quotidienne dans une île dalmate au Moyen Age tardif (Paris, 2011), p. 2.
134 Cozzi, “La politica del diritto,” pp. 31–78; O’Connell, Men of Empire, pp. 75–96.
135 Ventura, Nobiltà e popolo, pp. 440–54.