Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
…
12 pages
1 file
In current paper the digital reproduction of two imperial diplomatic documents writing in the Italien chanceries of Holy Roman Empire are presented: the Charter of the Emperor Guido issued in the year 891 February 2 — Diploma di Guido G6, and the Charter of the Emperor Otto I issued in the year 969 April 18-Privilegium Ottonis I DO 371. The both documents were conserved in episcopal archive of Parma in Italy, the history of their movement from Parmenisse archive is not known, they have been purchased by Russian academician N. P. Lihachev in the end of XIX century or in the beginning of XX century, and the documents are in the funds of Institute of History, Russian Academy of Sciences, now. The digital copies of the charters are received on photocopies of the year 1937 edition by S. A. Anninskii.
1 S. Dusanic, Fragment o f a Severan auxiliary diploma: notes on a variety o f the "two-province" diplomata, ZPE 122, 1998,219-228. AE 1998,1116. Dimensions: height 2.5 cm; width 2.4 cm; thickness 0.05 cm; weight 4 .13g.
The registers of Pope Honorius III (1216-1227), like all thirteenth-century papal registers, do not conform to modern expectations of effective record-keeping 1. The volumes in the Registra Vaticana series are neither a complete record of papal letters issued by the chancery, nor organised systematically in chronological order; instead, a fraction of the total documentary output was enregistered "individually or in very small groups" in a rough, and frequently interrupted, chronological order 2. The mismatch between modern expectation and the vagaries of medieval practice is thrown into relief by the fact that only about a quarter of Honorius III's letters were enregistered, and many important political letters were not among them-something which, to us, seems counterintuitive 3. A number of publications, Jane E. Sayers' study of papal government and England chief among them, have furthered greatly our understanding of papal registration practice in the chancery of Honorius III 4. There are three interlocked elements of registration practice under Honorius that would repay further investigation utilising a quantitative methodology, and which have the potential to harness broader scholarly interests. First, what types of documents were issued and when. Second, the identities and geographical location of the impetrants and curial correspondents. Third, what the grouping of documents in the registers and the rhythms of their issue can tell 1 Jane E. Sayers, Papal Government and England during the Pontificate of Honorius III (1216-1227) (Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life & Thought ser 3 21, Cambridge 1984) 71-73.-I am grateful to the editors for the invitation to participate in the conference "Innocenz III., Honorius III., und ihre Briefe: Die Edition der päpstlichen Kanzleiregister im Kontext der Geschichtsforschung" in Vienna in October 2021. My thanks to Gareth Parker-Jones and Tim Guard of Rugby School for temporarily releasing me from my regular duties in order to attend, and to the editors and the audience of the conference for their insightful suggestions on this research. I am obliged to my father, Jonathan, for his help with filters and formulas used in the dataset in Microsoft Excel.
“Negozio del S.r Card. Pasman”. Péter Pázmány’s Imperial Embassage to Rome in 1632 (With Unpublished Vatican Documents) (CVH II/7), written and edited by Rotraud Becker, Péter Tusor, Budapest–Rome 2019. pp. 482. + 3 suppl. (2x2 pictures, 4 facsimilia)
The volume that was prepared in international cooperation redeems an old debt of international and Hungarian historiography. The tumultuous embassage of Péter Pázmány in 1632 was not only an important phase of Hungarian history, especially that of the history of church and diplomacy, but it was also a highlighted event of the history of the papacy and the Thirty Years’ War, whose outbreak was 400 years ago. Georg Lutz, who is an expert of this period, urged the thorough and modern elaboration of the embassage decades ago. The research has relied upon the documents of Pázmány’s embassage published in the 19th and 20th century (especially the documents written by Pázmány and partly the ones addressed to him); on the correspondence of the papal Secretariat of State and the nunciature of Vienna published by Rotraud Becker in 2013 (NBDIV/5; Nuntiatur des Ciriaco Rocci. Ausserordentliche Nuntiatur des Girolamo Grimaldi, 1631–1633); on the verbals of the Secretariat of State published in this volume (about the papal audiences, the negotiations of Pázmány with Secretary of State Azzolini); on the discorsos and on the supplemental documents exploited in the Primatial Archives of Esztergom. The volume is in English, Chapter I–II can also be read in Hungarian; the sources were written in Italian as well as in Latin, of which usage is helped by their abstracts written in English and Hungarian. The English parts were translated by Ágnes Gátas-Palotai; while Rotraud Becker’s chapter (Chapter I) written in German was translated by András Forgó into Hungarian. THE MAIN RESULTS IN POINTS: I. Based on the correspondence of the papal Secretariat of State and the nunciature of Vienna. 1) Not only did Urban VIII and his surroundings find the Roman embassage of the archbishop of Esztergom “undesirable”, but explicitly as a threat. They regarded it as part of the Spanish conduct led by Cardinal Gaspare Borgia, Spanish envoy, against the seemingly neutral but Francophile papal policy. 2) As the Roman relations to the Habsburg courts had to remain correct, they did not pay much attention to the fact that there was a royal order behind Borgia and Pázmány’s conduct; they regarded them as personal enemies. 3) The Hungarian cardinal was secretly watched, his commission was made impossible by the Curia right from the beginning. They did not focus on the imperial requests and their dismissal, but on ceremonial problems, especially on the acknowledgement of the Hungarian cardinal’s title as an imperial legate. 4) The cornered Pázmány was accused of practicing pretence in the papal court and they created such negative atmosphere concerning Pázmány’s defensive letter, Intermittere non possum – whose contemporary copies can be found in every significant European manuscript collection – that he was compared to the hated Borgia and the Curia was considered the attacked party. 5) The conflict of the cardinalate and the legatine commission was mainly stressed in relation to Borgia, the Spanish envoy. Although the cardinals could continue doing the duty of an envoy in the papal court, the number of the appointment of the non-Italian cardinals (cardinali nazionali) significantly reduced after the “riot” of Borgia and Pázmány. 6) Based on the reports of the nuncios about the scandalous Pázmány-affair one can state that there the already weak confidence in the pope’s kindness and the Curia’s explanations has further fallen. As a consequence, the authority and influence of the nuncios of Vienna was also violated in the court of Vienna. 7) Vienna could not be convinced even by the zeal of the Curia; namely, it tried to spread the Roman version of the events by giving particular orders to the nunciature, according to which Pázmány’s improper behaviour was to be blamed for the Curia’s rightful accusations. It is contradicted not only by the cardinal’s reports but also by others’ accounts. 8) The archbishop of Esztergom could not be discredited and destabilised in the imperial court; moreover, it was being seriously considered to send him back to the Eternal City; though, the ardent opposition of the papal diplomacy hindered it in the end. 9) The diplomatic conflict between the Hungarian head of church and the pope created tension also in the relations of the Hungarian church and the Holy See of Rome for decades. II. Based on the verbals of the Secretariat of State that are being published and on the analyses While reading the sources published in this volume, the historical atmosphere comes to life. The papal audiences given during the Hungarian cardinal’s embassage and the negotiations with Azzolini could be experienced in real time even at the distance of 400 years. Thanks to the sources of the Vatican, special prospects of the historical recognition have opened up to the readers. 1) Pázmány’s “change of loyalty” can be detected. In his summarising report of late May, Péter Pázmány finally shared the details of the papal audience of 6 April, 1632 with the imperial Secret Council, despite Urban VIII’s canonical ban and his former vow. The primate of Hungary had to choose between his loyalty as a cardinal and as a member of the Secret Council. The choice was made after a long inner and external struggle only at the very end of his embassage in Rome, in the second half of May 1632. From this time on the archbishop of Esztergom became the rigorous enemy of the Barberini-House, one of the “buzzards” of the court of Vienna in the Italian and papal policy. Not only did the Barberinis regard him as an enemy, but the feeling was mutual. 2) From the verbals of the negotiations with Secretary of State Azzolini it is clear that Pázmány himself suggested and requested many times that they should grant financial aid sooner, in one lamp sum, from the instalments of the Italian tithes. The finally granted 130,000 imperial talers was the biggest lamp sum ever that an imperial envoy could obtain from Urban VIII – despite Roman political interests – during the Thirty Years’ War for the purposes of the Catholic League. 3) An important result of our verbal-analysis is that we could learn that, although being in a more disadvantageous tactical situation, the Hungarian prelate – who was actually choleric – also masterly employed the tools of diplomatic pretence like that of the curial prelates. However, it should be noted that the tone and content of his reports written to Vienna and of his negotiations only differed a couple of weeks later, while it can be detected in the correspondence of the Secretariat of State right from the beginning. 4) For the Hungarian as well as international historiography, the purpura is a crucial element of Pázmány’s historical identity. He himself did not attribute much significance to his title of cardinal (in his opinion “his red hat served nothing else but to hang it above his grave”), which offers an insight into his personality and his monastic soul. 5) It is important for the result of the research that the Congregazione dello Stato occurs in the files; moreover, one can study the daily routine of the papal decision making and the preparatory work of the Secretariat of State. Lorenzo Azzolini was the actual head of the papal foreign policy; he was still an official, though, his activity and influence was an important step towards the establishment of the cardinal secretary of state’s position. 6) The Hungarian primate’s conduct in Rome exceeded the relations of the emperor and the pope by far and functioned on the highest level of European diplomacy. Not only did he secretly negotiate with Borgia, but the Spanish and the Austrian-Habsburg envoy mutually acted in front of the Roman diplomacy. Instead of the “Borgia-crisis”, one can and should speak about the “Borgia-Pázmány-crisis” in relation to the most dramatic events of the Roman diplomacy during the Thirty Years’ War. 7) Pázmány’s hint given to Azzolini on 12 April, namely that he would move to Rome for several years to serve the Church, shows that the plan of his permanent Roman imperial embassage and his cardinal protectorate did not occur during his mission in 1632, as it has been believed, but on the contrary: his commission was the first (and last) episode of a long-established plan of a Roman diplomatic role. 8) During the embassage, the Hungarian primate’s attempt to involve the pope in an anti-Swedish league was a complete and clear failure. However, Urban VIII’s Francophile policy should not solely be blamed for this fiasco and should not only be analysed in the context of Rome and Vienna’s relations. The text that Pázmány brought to Rome was unacceptable not only for the papal court but also for the court of Madrid due to its phrases on the Low Countries. Therefore, the archbishop of Esztergom had to represent such a program that hadn’t been supported by the Spanish monarchy in its written form. The league between the Austrian and Spanish Habsburgs was finally realized in 1634. 9) The last and most sensational result of our research: Pázmány intended to publish the most important documents of his embassage in Rome. Pázmány crossed out the addresses and cadences and added titles, sometimes even comments. A fair copy was also made of the labelled text-versions. Pázmány edited the most important documents of his embassage; he compiled the documents that depicted the empire’s situation the best, and then he contrasted them with the documents of the abortive and diversionary debate over his title as a legate. Finally, the manuscript was not edited and was placed in the primatial archives. Such an antipapal publication would not have achieved its goal that the archbishop of Esztergom understood after all. The “Pázmány-Borgia-affair” is a turning point in the history of the papacy. The termination of the papacy’s role among the great powers sealed in the Peace of Westphalia can be dated back to this time.
Exemplaria Classica, 2017
One of the most curious manuscripts of the De uiris illustribus is Biblioteca dei Girolamini, XL pil. VI, no. XIII. This manuscript has been thought either to go back to the early Veronese humanist Giovanni de Matociis, or to contain authentic ancient information. We demonstrate that the manuscript has nothing to do with Matoci, but is closely linked to Giacomo Filippo Foresti, a latefifteenth-century historian. Its chief feature of interest is that it shares some readings with another branch of the tradition of the DVI, the Corpus Aurelianum, thus providing new evidence for the circulation of that text.
Presentation topic: "Written Acts as a Tool of Government of the Roman Curia: The Correspondences between Rome and the Apostolic Nuncio of Vienna during the Pontificate of Innocent XI Odescalchi (1676-1689)" (29 November 2021, Fourth pannel: NUNCIOS AND THEIR MISSIONS) Conference presentation on 29-30 November 2021, Zagreb: "From Words to Acts: Written Sources for the Reconstruction and Understanding of Diplomatic Negotiations", organised by the Croatian Institute of History.
2019
The book contains critical edition of 48 documents, issued by rulers of medieval Serbia and Bosnia and addressed to Venice. The edition consists of abstract, list of former editions, text, translation in Serbian language, commentary and photographs of the extant copies. It is preceded by two extensive chapters dealing with historical context in which the documents were created and with characteristics of the documents themselves.
SSRN Electronic Journal, 2019
The collection of the Western European manuscripts gathered by N.P. Likhachev (1862-1936) and currently stored in the Scientific and Historical archive of the St. Petersburg Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences contains, among other documents, the vast majority of this array comes from Italy (about five thousand documents), of which about a third are original notarial deeds. There are over ten thousand storage units related to the history of Italy in the collection of the West-European section of the archive of St. Petersburg Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The collection is divided into fonds, and the focus of this research will be on the sixth collection that was named «Venice and its possessions», where you can find notarial deeds analyzed by a team of scholars within the framework of our project. The manuscripts studied by our team provide information about economic and social aspects of life in the rural communes of the Val d'Astico located in the Northern Vicentino. Here we describe the geographical and historical peculiarities of the region in order to place the documents in the particular context and to proceed with its better understanding. All of these documents are instrumenta rather than imbreviaturae, and at least when it comes to the deeds drawn by Pietro di Zennaro we can treat this set as a certain unity. Within this study, one of our main objectives of the team work was preparation of these documents for critical publication. The source material studied here still has to be contextualized and researched in more profound manner; however, we can clearly see now that the investigation of the deeds stored in the Western European section of the Scientific and Historical archive of the St. Petersburg Institute of History of the Russian Academy of Sciences is more than promising.
Several significant papal letter collections survive from late antiquity: the largest and best known are those of popes Leo I and Gregory I, but other sizable collections have survived from three fifth-and sixth-century bishops of Rome: Innocent I, Gelasius I, and Hor-misdas. In the following essay I analyze four of these corpora from three perspectives: first, their transmission, that is, the form in which they were handed down through various stages to medieval canon law collators; second, the rationale(s) behind selection processes in the making of anthologies of papal letters in the fifth through seventh century up to the Middle Ages; and, finally, the ways in which both papal authors and collators sought to increase Roman authority in these areas. These perspectives permit some conclusions to be drawn regarding changing preservation practices in the Roman chancery (scrinium) from the fourth to sixth century. I argue that, in contrast to other collections studied in this volume , papal letter collections were intended not to fashion the image of the author but to shape the image of the office of Roman bishop. THE FIRST PAPAL LETTER CORPORA Because of the nature of medieval canon law collections and the rationale behind their compilation—namely, providing authoritative views on questions of clerical discipline and doctrinal error—the content of papal letters that survive is remarkably homogeneous. This, together with a preference for letters addressed to important figures such as members of the imperial family and other well-known bishops, has meant that such corpora are good sources on particular themes—especially religious controversy and clerical discipline—but poor on others. Almost all letters by bishops of Rome from Innocent I (401/2–417) to Pelagius II
Religion & Theology, 2024
Cadernos de História da Educação, 2024
Nuclear Fusion, 2024
Journal of Lightwave Technology, 1991
Zeitschrift für Individualpsychologie, 2011
South Asia Journal, 2019
Investigación y docencia en Derecho: Nuevas perspectivas, 2019
OBM genetics, 2024
Круглий стіл «Створювальне знання: теоретико-методологічні та практичні аспекти» (Національний університет «Одеська морська академія, 14 червня 2019 року), 2019
Marife Dini Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2008
Bulletin of the American Physical Society, 2017
European Journal of Applied Physiology, 2021
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 2021
International journal of pharma medicine and biological sciences, 2022