Pre-Reformation Scottish Marriage Cases in the Archives of the Papal Penitentiary

PRE-R.EFORMATION SCOTTISH MARRIAGE CASES
IN THE ARCHIVES OF THE PAPAL PENITENTIARY
Irene Furneaux
For a marriage to be deemed canonically legal, couples bad to marry
outside the prohibited degrees of consanguinity and affinity which, until 1215,
bad stood at seven. Pope Innocent III, concemed about illegal marriages, relaxed
these degrees from seventh to fourth at Lateran IV in 1 2 1 5, but this remedy still
placed prohibitive restrictions on the choice of partners, especially amongst the
nobility in a small country such as Scotland. The Penitentiary registers are a rieb
source for discovering how these prohibitions affected the attitudes of tbe
Scottish people.1 Cosmo Innes quoted tbe comment of the Archbishop of St.
Andrews, John Hami1ton who, writing in 1 554, stated that „such was tbe connection
between families in Scotland, that it was scarce possible to match two
persons of good birtb wbo should not come within tbe forbidden degrees; and on
tbat account (ut sunt hominum ingenia semper in vitium proclivia) many married
without dispensation.‘.2
Tbe marriage cases from Scotland are mostly concemed with the degrees
of relationships in which the couple found tbemselves. lt was discovered during
the research tbat an inordinately high volume of supplications reached tbe Penitentiary
during tbe years 1500-1508. From 1438 until l 500, tbe average number
of cases going to Rome every year was 10. From 1500 to 1508, this figure suddenly
increased to an average of 41 cases each year before decreasing again
from 1509 to 1533 with an average of 5 cases. In considering these figures we
1 I would like to take this opportunity to thank James J. Robertson from the Faculty of Law at
the University of Dundee for allowing me easy access to the archive which was acquired
under the auspices of the Ross Fund; also for his patience in assisting me with my research
and for all the scholarly advice he has so willingly imparted. His article on Scottish legal
research done in the Vatican Archives gives a good overview of the material kept there.
James Robertson, „Scottish Legal Research in the Vatican Archives: A Preliminary Report“,
Renaissance Studies 2 (1988), 339-347. Leslie J. MacFarlane has also touched on the
subject. Leslie MacFarlane, „The Vatican Archives: With Special Reference to Sources for
Medieval British History“, Archives 4 (1 959), 29-44, 84-1 0 I.
2 Cosmo Innes, Liber Officialis Sancti Amiree (Edinburgh: The Abbotsford Club, 1 845), xxv.
See also on this topic John Barry, William Hay’s Lectures on Marriage (Edinburgh: The
Stair Society, 1967); James Brundage, Law, Sex and Christian Marriage in Medieval
Europe (Chicago: University ofChicago Press, 1987).
60
must ask ourselves why there should have been such a surge of supplications
from 1500 to 1508.
In 1503, King James IV ofScotland married Margaret Tudor, daughter of
Henry VII of England, thus affording him „a unique opportunity to expand the
scope ofthe cult ofthe Stewart monarchy“,3 a course which he quickly pursued.
In the Sixth Parliament of James IV, held at Edinburgh in 1 504, an Act was
passed stating That it be liefful to our Soveraine Lord to set all his Iandes in few,
and the Act directly following was worded That it salZ be liefful to everie man
baith Spiritual and Temporal, to set their Iandes infew.4 With these acts came,
as Jenny Wormald notes, „one of the most dramatic changes in Scottish society
with a sudden infusion into the local level of a new group of landed proprietors,
many of whom succeeded in greatly increasing their wealth‘. s James J. Robertson
suggests that in fifteenth century Scotland, there was a deliberate evolution
of the law of leases and three acts changed a personal right into a real right.
Firstly on April 16, 1429, an act passed which gave tenants security for a year
unless the landowners wanted the land for their own use. Next an act giving the
tenant real right to possession was passed on January 19, 1450, whereby tenants
were permitted to stay on their lands until the end of their leases irrespective of
changes in ownership of the lands and then finally, an act passed on November
20, 1469, gave the tenant protection against distraint by a landlord’s creditor,
thus ensuring that the tenancy and possessions were secure. He further suggests
that with the introduction of the instrument of sasine, which records a conveyance
in writing instead of by a charter, which relies on its authenticity with witnesses
and seals, reflected an increasing commercialism in society and long with
this commercialism came the encouragement of feu farming by an act of March
6, 1458, making land the subject of commerce6 However it was not until the Act
of 1504 that feu farming began in earnest and that as Leslie Macfarlaine states:
„Its popularity bad mucb to do with rising land values, but more with the fact
that the feuars at last bad security of tenure, which would now be beritable, and
that they also were possessed of the rights which went with the fey.“7 Thus,
people who could afford it bought land, secure in the knowledge that their land
was now heritable and they bad security of tenure. These were the people most
3 Michael Lynch, Scotland a New History (London: Pimlico, 1998), 160.
4 Thomas Murray of Glendook, The Laws and Acts of Par/iament made by James the Fri st
and hsi Royal Successors Kings and Queen ofScotland (Edinburgh, 1682), vol. 1, 187-188
(hereafter: Murray of Glendook, The Laws and Acts).
5 Jenny Wormald, Court, Kirk, and Community. Scotland 1470-1625. (London: Amold, 1981;
reprint Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1992), 80 (hereafter Wonnald, Court Kirk
and Community).
6 James J. Robertson, „Tbe Development of the Law“. in: Jennifer M. Brown, ed., Scottish
Society in the Fifteenth Century (London: Amold, 1977), 144-149.
7 Leslie J. Macfarlane, William Elphinstone and the Kingdom of Scotland 1431-1514 the
Struggle for Order. (Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press, 1995), 415-416 (hereafter
Macfarlane, Wilil am Elphinstone).
61
likely to be responsible for the large increase seen in the nwnber of marriage
supplications to the papal Penitentiary in the years 1500 to 1508.
The Jubilee Year of 1 500 would possibly have prompted the increase of
supplications seen in 1499-15008 and in 1500-1501,9 when there were 29 and
60 cases respective1y (conversely, in the Jubilee year of 1475, there had been
only twenty-eight cases). Much oftbis activity around 1500 is perhaps due to the
piety of the faithful, but unfortunately one cannot k:now if there was a fall in
numbers afterwards, because for 1502-150310 only a fragment of the records
survived in the register.11 Among the fragments oftbis volwne are four Scottish
supplications and all four are dated November 10, 1503, during the Sede Vaconte,
two weeks before Julius della Rovere was crowned Julius ll.
In 1503-1504 however, Scottish activity began to build up, with 33 cases
recorded in vol. 52,12 but again one cannot say for certain if tbis build-up progressed
because the volwnes for the first and second pontifical years of Julius II,
namely 1504-1505 and 1505-1 506, are also missing. lt is a great pity that the
two volumes crucial to the study of marriage in Scotland are missing but it is to
be assumed that in all probability the nurober of cases did increase, because in
1506-150713 one finds an astonishing 102 marriage supplications followed by
39 in 1507-150814 and 21 in 1509-151015• Piety can be dismissed as the reason
for this sudden increase in the Scottisb supplications; indeed the records suggest
another reason as will be seen from tbis breakdown of a ten-year period from
1498/1499 to 15 10/1 51 1 ofthe various categories within the register.
As can be seen, in the year 1506-1507, there was a slight increase in de
diversis formis, de promotsi et promovendis and de defectu natalium categories.
By far the 1argest category is de matrimonialibus whicb peaked, the same year
as the king gave his commissioners authority to feu ferme Ettrick forest, profitability
of this can be seen from the rent received. In 1501, before the act of Parliament,
the forest bad brought in 525f 13s 4d which by 1510 had risen to
f7,269.16
8 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 49.
910 A SV,Penitenzei riaAp., Reg. Matrim. etDiv., vol. 50.
11 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 51.
See also Kirsi Salonen, The Penitentiary as a Weil of Grace in the Lote Middle Ages. The
Example ofthe Province of Uppsala 1448-1527. Suomalaisen Tiedeakatemian Toimituksia
– Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae 3 1 3 (Saarijärvi: Academia Scientiarum Fen12
nica, 2001), 425 (hereafter Salonen, ThePenitentiary).
ASV, Penitenzierio Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 52.
13 ASV, Penitenzierio Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol 53
14 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 54
15 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 55.
16 Macfarlane, Willtarn Elphinstone, 415.
62
Table 1. Scottish cases in the Penitentiary records.
Vol. Marriage Diversis Dec/ar Promol Defnat Confess Uberiori
47 41 0 2 0 14 1 0
48 29 3 0 0 15 2 0
49 60 4 0 1 1() 5 0
50 52 4 0 0 3 0 0
51 4 0 0 0 3 0 0
52 33 0 3 3 8 2 􀇐
53 102 6 0 4 25 0 0
54 39 3 0 0 14 0 0
55 21 5 0 2 5 0 􀇏
56 1 8 6 0 1 2 0 0
Sub total 489 3 1 5 1 1 99 10 0
Faculties:
53 36
55 35
56 60
Totals 620 31 5 11 99 10 0
Source: ASV, Pemtenzzena Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 47-56.
The Statute of 1504 gave men permission to set their Iands infeu. This
new faculty sparked a frenzy of activity from the newly landed classes to ensure
the legitimization of their marriages and their offspring. As their land was
heritable, it became essential to ensure clarity in the Iine of succession; thus one
sees multiple entries from the same kin groups. The regularization of their
marriages would have consolidated their holdings.
Many of the irnportant families of Scotland, and especially those from the
borders, were well represented in the surge to legitimize their marriages and offspring
to ensure succession. There was much inter-marrying between families,
making a canonically legal marriage almost impossible. Most of the cases in the
register concem either single or double relations of consanguinity, but there are
variations occurring throughout the material.
Gilbert Hay and Agnes Gordon11 were cousins and stood in second degree
of consanguinity but received dispensation nonetheless, as did Alexander Kildayre
and Elizabeth Murray18 who were second cousins. Multiple entries include
William Gordon and Jeneta Ogilvy19 who made supplications three times within
four years, first they declared the fourth degree of affinity, then the third and
third degrees of consanguinity, and finally third and third and fourth degrees of
consanguinity. This possibly arose from squabbling within the family regarding
the lawful ownership of land, in which case William and Ioneta may have pre-
17 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div. , vol. 53, fol. l lOv.
18 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrmi . et Div., vol. 52, fol. 166r-v.
19 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 49, fol. 170v-171r; vol. 52, fol. 121r-v.
63
sumed it prudent to ensure that the wording ofthe supplication made their marriage
as watertight as possible to ensure their children’s inheritance. The same
may possibly be true for Jacob Maitland and Margareta Douglas20 with first the
fourth degree of consanguinity and the fourth degree of affinity and then with
fourth degree of consanguinity and fourth and fourth degrees of affinity. George
Chesum and Helena Scot are slightly different, in that their second supplication
concerned Helena‘ s relationship not only to George‘ s first wife but also to his
mistress, whom he bad known carnally many times. Helena must bave balked at
this, but may have felt it necessary for her children’s future.21 It must also be
kept in mind that at the time many nobles in Scotland, in line with the rest of
Europe, kept a mistress, sometimes more than one?2 With regard to the spiritual
relationship (cognatio spiritualis), Margaretta Newton’s father was godfather to
Jacob Scot and bad „held him at the baptismal font“, and thus was affine to
Margaret. 23
Interestingly, two of these supplications come from paupers. These persons
may have been without cash at the time of their petition, but they or their
offspring must have stood to inherit in the future; although the Penitentiary described
them as paupers, it made them pay the fees, possibly forcing them to
scrape together the money to have their marriages and offspring legitimized.
Michael Banatan and Catherina Cairncross24 may bave been disappointed at the
outcome of their supplication, as not only did they have to pay, but also the case
was committed to the Abbot ofthe Cistercian Monastery ofMelrose, where they
bad to do their penance. These two cases consequently were not classed as gratis
pro pauperi presenti [free for paupers present in Rome], which is in contrast to
another supplication by a couple claiming to be of poor status.25 These few cases
illustrate that in a small, closely knit, endogamous society based on kinship,
there was a remarkable knowledge of who was related to whom, which today
would seem irrelevant to all but a few.
After 1 508, there was again a decrease in the use of the Penitentiary by
the Scots for marriage supplications. One possible reason for this was the increasing
use of Faculties to dispense couples within the prohibited degrees; 19
ofthem were requested by Church offleials between 1506 and 1535, where my
research to date ends. I have chosen a few of these entries to illustrate the types
of faculty for which these ecclesiastics supplicated. These samples also show the
change in the register that first appears in the Scottish material in January 1 5 1 0
20 21 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 53, fol. 93v; vol. 53, fol. 128r. ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 49, fol. 146r-v; vol. 53, fol. 133v.
22 George Duby, Medieva/ Marriage. Two Models from Twelfth-Century France (Baltimore:
John Hopkins University Press, 1991), 93-94; Duby mentions Count Ba!dwin ll whose funeral
was attended by 33 of his sons and daughters, ten from his wife and 23 illegitimate
offspring.
23 ASV, PenitenzieriaAp., Reg. Matrim. etDiv., vol. 53, fol. 133v.
24 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 55, fol. 561 v.
23 See below.
64
where the inclusion of the cost of the petition along with the name of the proctor
appeared at the beginning of the entry. The regular appearance of only a few
names would suggest that proctors were allocated to cases from certain countries,
hence the appearance of Galteri in the Scottish material in 1 5 1 7 and he is
still handling Scottish cases 1 8 years later in 1535.
On February 16, 1 507, the vicae6 acting on behalf of Alexander Stewart,
the fifteen-year-old illegitimate son of James IV, who had been trained and educated
from birth for a high position in the church and who was now Archbishop
of Saint Andrews/7 made a supplication for a license to dispense 24 couples
with no stipulated time Iimit. At this stage, the cost is not recorded in the register.
In the same year, on June 1 6/8 Patrick Murray, treasurer of Dunblane, made
a petition for a license to dispense twelve couples, with neither time Iimit nor
cost. Entered on July 30, 1 5 1 0,29 Gavin Douglas, provost of the Church of the
Blessed Giles in Edinburgh, made a supplication for a license to dis􀁁ense ten
couples to run for four years with still no cost as yet. On July 15, 1 5 1 0, 0 Gilbert
Strathachin, Canon of Brechin, made a petition for a license to dispense 25 couples
over four years at a cost of 201 papal ducats, and then on November 24,
1524,31 Gavin Dunbar, Archbishop of Glasgow, made a supplication for a license
to dispense ten couples over four years at a cost of 121 ducats.
On April 13, 1 527,32 John Dingwall, Provost of the Holy Trinity Church
near Edinburgh and Chancellor of Aberdeen, in taodem with Gilbert Strathachin,
who was then Master Canon of the Church in Aberdeen and Moray, made a
supplication for a license for John to dispense 23 couples at a cost of259 ducats,
and for Gilbert to dispense 2 1 couples at a cost of 2 1 1 ducats, respectively, over
five years. It would seem that they had decided to enter supplications together
and dispense each other’s Faculties, as John Dingwall’s contains the words
„supplicate that the Pope would license him who is an Apostolic Notary or Gilbert
Strathachin [a clerk canon of Aberdeen and Moray also an Apostolic Notary],“
and Gilbert Strathachin’s33 supplication has the same wording vice versa.
Gilbert Strachachin is regularly mentioned in the letters of James IV as being in
Rome, so the possible reason for sharing the Faculty arises, as John Dingwall
would also have gone to Rome at some point. Within the text of John Dingwall’s
supplication we discover the reason for these Faculties:
26 Presumably a Dominican named John Adamson.
27 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 53, fol. 41v-42r. On the tender age ofthe
Archbishop: Norman Macdougall, James IV (East Linton: Tuckwell,, 1 997), I 56; Wormald,
Court, Kirk, and Community, 80; Robert Hannay, T11e Letters of James the Fourth. 1505-
/513 (Edinburgh: Scottish History Society, 1953), xxix; John Dowden, The Bishops of
Scotland (Glasgow: James Maclehose, 1912), 37.
28 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div. , vol. 53, fol. 133r.
29 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div. , vol. 55, fols. 433r-v.
30 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 55, fols. 3 1 6v-317r.
31 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrmi . et Div., vol. 73, fols. 1795r-1796v.
32 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrmi . et Div., vol. 75, fols. 305r-306v.
33 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Dvi ., vol. 75, fols. 306v-307r.
65
Many of the faithful in Scot/and, to make peace and friendship
among relatives and avert enmity and dissention and for other reasons
arrange marriages within the forbidden degrees but because
of the great di stance from the Apostolic See cannot obtain dispensation.
The final Faculty supplication found until now is dated March 6, 1533,34 again
from John Dingwall of the Holy Trinity in Edinburgh, in which he made a supplication
for a license to dispense 25 couples at a cost of301 ducats. John names
one John Thomton, presumably to share the dispensing but, alas, the subsequent
folio is missing, so we cannot k.now for sure. Also, the time scale and cost of the
dispensation would have been on this folio. In all, these Faculties cover 30 years
and number in total 195, which gives an average of thirteen dispensations per
year.
From the prices found, one can average out that a dispensation cost 12.5
ducats to the holder of a Faculty, which was the same price as at the Penitentiary.
However, in making a supplication to Rome costs would have been added
for the procurators along with their travel expenses, bed and board and, certainly,
many incidentals along the way. So, a dispensation granted in Scotland
was cheaper. This remains unk.nown but it would be an interesting topic for investigation.
The traffic in expensive appeals, which employed a large contingent
of Scottish lawmen who traveled regularly to and resided in Rome, and which
was „lavishing money to Rome“, was a constant worry to the k:ing. As early as
1493 he exborted bis subjects to „refrain from the practice“, with little effect;
and again in 1560 an Act was passed requiring supplications to be given to the
Lords of the Session, which met with the same result. lt is not until after the
Reformation, in 1 581, that an Act was passed describing the evils of appeals in
declamatory language. 35
In accounting for the drop in supplications to the Penitentiary while the
Scottish faculties remained relatively stable in numbers, several possible reasons
can be suggested. First, it is highly likely that couples, still making supplications
to Rome, belonged to -the upper classes of Scottish society, the great landowners
and those newly enriched by the recent changes enabling them to Jeu their Iands.
They would have been the only ones able to afford this avenue and, in fact, the
only Scottish supplication componat cum camera and componit J ponti.ficus tbat
I found was on March 5, 1 5 13,36 when a couple from Candidacasa Diocese paid
an enormous 48 ducats for their dispensation from cognatio spiritualis and the
third degree of both consanguinity and aflinity. It is interesting to note that this
entry in the register was written during sede vacante, twelve days after Julius II
died and six days· before Leo X bad been elected. In sharp contrast to this, in
34 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 80, fol. 229-23 1 (old foliation).
35 Lord Patrick Fraser, Treatise on Busband and Wife accordni g to the Law of Scotland (Edinburgh:
T. and T. Clark, 1876), vol. I, 10.
36 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 58, fol. 209v.
66
152337 I found a couple from Glasgow Diocese, the only paupers to receive a
free dispensation with declaratory letters .fiat de speciali and gratis pro pauperi
presenti.38 The ecclesiastical Faculties would have been within easy :financial
reach of the newly ernerging merchant classes, but when we consider that the
forbidden degrees of consanguinity and affinity were so prohibitive to canonically
legal wedlock within such small a country, a total average of thirteen dispensations
a year from each source does not seem to be a great number.
A second reason could be that the people were heeding the king’s exhortations
on the evils of appeals to Rome and beginning to use the Courts of the Officials;
but the Scots, in sharp contrast to the English, seemed reluctant to use
these courts and preferred dealing directly with Rome.39 This could be accounted
for by the fact that Scotland, with the exception of Galloway and Orkney,
bad been part of the Roman See from 1 1 92, when with the bull cum universis,
Celestine III granted Scotland the position ofjilia specialis, answerable only
to Rome, and this distinction was confirmed by Innocent m and again by Honorious
III. The status of fi/ia specialis was granted by Urban Ill ( 1 1 85-1 1 87)
only referring to the diocese of Glasgow, but with cum universis it became the
constitutional basis of the ecclesia Scoticana until 1472, when St. Andrews became
a bishopric.40 It would have been interesting to access the records ofthese
Courts but, due to many fi.res and some overzealous reformers, most church records
were destroyed and only fragments of these Court records remain.41 We
must also remernher that Scottish couples were still, at least until 1 5 10, occasionally
using the Dataria Apostolica which was, of course, more expensive than
the Penitentiary. This register will provide another insight into marriage in
Scotland once it has been fully researched.
When observing the profusion of records that survive in England, such as
those in to be found in York which have provided great insight into medieval
marriage,42 it is a vexing source of frustration to the Scottisb historian to find so
few records from which to chart the history of the interchange between the peo-
37 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 69, fol. 146v.
38 It bas been noted that these supplicants were not necessarily poor, but sometimes a dispensanon
was granted for free when the officials ofthe Penitentiary wanted to grant a favour to
someone who was close to the office or to the Pope. The real pauperes bad to make an oath
of povery in order to get their graces for free. Salonen, The Penitentiary, 85.
39 David Ditchburn, Scotland and Europe. The Medieval Kingdom and lts Contacts with
Christendom, 1214-1560 (East Linton: Tuckwell, 2000), 88; Wormald, Court, Kirk, and
Community, 79.
40 Leslie Macfarlane and. J. Mclntyre, ed., Scot/and and the Holy See (Edinburgh: The Heritage
Commission ofthe Scottish Catholic Hierarchy, 1982), 5.
41 Sirnon Ollivant, The Court of the Official in Pre-Reformation Scotland (Edinburgh: The
Stair Society, 1982). In this volume, Ollivant lists all the surviving records of the courts in
St. Andrews and Edinburgh.
42 Frederik Pedersen, Marriage Disputes in Medieval England (London: Hambledon Press,
2000). This fascinating and comprehensive study of the York material illustrates the abundance
ofrecords that survive in England.
67
ple, the church, and the courts. Occasionally however, a civi1 action appearing in
the Acts of the Lords of Council records peop1e seeking redress for broken contracts
of marriage. On December 2, 1500, an action was raised against John
Menteith of Caverca by David Bruse of C1ackmannan for !.500 for the wrangus
postpoyng and difef ring til raise and bring hame ane dispensacione fra the
Court of Rome for the compleating and solempnyng of Iauchjuli matrimonie and
marriage betuex the said John and Marione Bruse . . . John eventually produced
the dispensation and promptly raised his own action against David for restitution
of {401.43 On January 27, 1503, Henry Lova1e of Ballummy raised an action
against Thomas Maxvale ofTeiling for
the wrangus withalding fra him of fifteen ducatis of gold of the chawmer
( curia1 ducats) . . . fifteen pundi s usuale money of the realme, deliverit be
him and his factouris in his name to the toune of Bruges for the raising
and hamebringin furth of the court of Rome of ane dispensacione for
matrimonie completit betuex Andro Lovale, son and aire apperand to the
sade Henry, and Ysabell Ogilby, dochtir till umquhile David Ogi/by of
that ilk . . .
The Lords gave Thomas two weeks to appear, ifnot, they would ‚decern‘ him to
have agreed to pay.44 It seems that Thomas Maxvale was a law agent in Bruges,
possib1y working with the Scottish procurators at the curia to carry dispensations
to and from Rome. In this case, we can discem a disregard for the forbidden
degrees, as this marriage bad already been comleatit and some investigation is
needed to see if they actually were dispensed. So prohibitive were the degrees
that it appears that many Scots married within them, ignoring the rules
promulgated by the church unti1 such time, as with Henry Lovale, that it suited
them to make supp1ication to Rome or, as in the case of David Bruse, once they
were matched to the mutual satisfaction of their fami1ies or as with Henry Lovale,
when it suited them to make a petition to Rome.
A third discemab1e reason for this drop is that, the 1ater the year, the more
social and religious unrest was gripping Scotland, as there was a general dissatisfaction
with the Roman Church. Books were now being printed and brought
into Scotland mostly by the east coast merchants who traded in the Baltic and
the North Sea, and although very expensive, they were eagerly purchased by the
nobility, the nouveau riche, and the ernerging merchant classes who were by
now quite wealthy and literate.45 Professor Nicholson’s analysis of sales of land
in James N’s reign shows that the gentry sold more, whereas the 1 1 merchants
from Edinburgh and 14 others sold little and bought much, illustrates the merchant’s
wealth. Jenny Wormald’s observation that „A more sinister form of
contact with Europe, from the church’s point of view, was the Lutheran litera-
43George Neilson and Henry Paton, ed., Acts of the Lords of Council in Civil Causes 1496-
1501 (Edinburgh: His Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1918), vol. 2, 456.
44 Alma Calderwood, ed., Acts ofthe Lords ofCounci/ 1501-1503 {Edinburgh: Her Majesty’s
Stationery Office, 1993), vol. 2, 192.
45 Wonna1d, Court, Kirk and Community, 79.
68
ture which began to circulate in the east-coast boroughs, prompting a paniclcy
act banning it in 1525′“‚6 illustrates that the laity in Scotland were becoming
more interested in this new religion which was sweeping across Northern
Europe. However, Martin Luther’s writings and other Lutheran texts were being
distributed as fast as they could be printed and Scotland was slowly beginning to
move toward the Reformation; so it is possible that people were beginning to
find dissatisfaction with the Church and its remoteness in Rome. A nobleman
may have thought it worthwhile to pay a large sum for a dispensation, but a cautious
wealthy merchant may have thought otherwise.
1t will be interesting to discover if devoutly Catholic Scottish couples
continued making supplications to Rome after 1567, when an act was passed by
the Scottish Parliament Anent lawful marriage of awin blude, in degries not forbidden
be God his Word,47 outlawing the Roman Church and reducing the forbidden
degrees of consanguinity and afiinity from the fourth degree to the second.
This was backdated to 1558, and all marriages within the scriprural degrees
were ratified.
Finally one has to ask again. what drove the Scots to make supplications
in such large numbers from 1 500 to 1 508, piety or profit. Possibly piety in the
Jubilee Year of 1 500 prompted an increase but, on the other band, the intention
of the king to Jeu the land in the near future may have been weil known within
the noble families, many ofwhose patriarchs were royal advisors. The very substantial
increase after 1 5 0 1 , which saw many of the great families of Scotland
legalizing existing and new marriage alliances to consolidate their heritable tenure,
Ieads me to the conclusion that this must have been driven by profit.
􀁼6 Ibidem, 91.
47 Murray ofGlendook. The Laws and Acts, n. 15.
69
Appendix:
􀑿
William TurnbuB and Biseta Ridal
Robert TumbuU and Ioneta Sc:ot
Thos Tllmbull ofBedderoul and Mariota Sc:ot ofHayning
James TombuB and Catherine Cranston
John Cran1ton and Agnes Sc:ot
Jasper Lawdor and Mariota Cranston
Andrew TurnbuB and Margaret TurnbuB
Roger Sc:bewel and Catberine Tumboll
Andrew Schwel and Joneta Donglas
John Camc:ross and Elizabetb TurnbuB
Michael Banatan and Catberina Cairnc:ross
James Tumbnil and Agnes Sc:bewel
John Scbewel and Joneta Morison
Philip Scbewel and Margareta Scbewel
Iobn Campbel and Margareta Campbel
John Mac:kay and Mariota Campbel
Duncan Macgregor and Elizabetb Campbel
Duncan Murtard and Mariota Campbel
George Cockbum and Elena Douglas
Iames Donglas and Catherina Stewart
Jacob Emmetterlant and Margareta Dong)a1
Iacob Maitland and Margareta Donglas
William Donglas and Elizabetb Auehinlecke
Alexander Kildayre and Elizabetb Murray
William Murray and Margaret Stewart
Thomas Murray and Elizabeth Levynston
Charles Murray and Elizabetb Murray
Alexander Stewart and Margaret Murray
David Murray and Catberine Edmonston
Walter Sc:ot ofTurlschanlan and Eliz. Scot ofMighoty
William Scot ofSeycalvis and Eliz. Sc:ot ofQuhonnys
Jacob Scot and Margaretta Newton
Walter Sc:ot of Siretoun and Margaret Langlands
Georgc Chesum and Helena Sc:ot
George Chcsselm and Helcna Sc:ot
Robert Scot and J ohantetc Scot
Patrick O&iJby and Ioneta Calder
William Gordon and Joaneta Ogllvy
William Gordon and Ioneta Ogilvy
William Gordon and Ioanc Ogilby
James Gordon and Catberine Balze
George Bardi and Elizabctb Gordon
Gilbert Hay and Agnes Gordon
lohn Stewart and Mariota Gordon
John Auchoryeguhy and Margaretc Gordon
William of St Clare and Elena Gordon
Duncan Forbes and Mariona Gordon
lacob Gordon and Margaret Gordon
lohn Mcculloch and Margaret Gordon
70
􀄀
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
St Andrews
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Lismore
Lismore
Lismore
Lismore I Dunkeld
St Andrews
St Andrews
Glasgow
Glasgow
St Andrews
St Andrews
Dunblanc I Dunkeld
Dunblane I Dunkeld
Dunblane I Dunkeld
Dunblanc I Dunkeld
Dunkeld
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Glasgow
Moray I Aberdeen
Moray I Aberdeen
Moray I Aberdeen
Moray I Aberdeen
Moray
Moray I Aberdeen
Moray I Aberdeen
Moray I Aberdeen
Moray
St Andrews I Moray
Aberdecn
Moray I Aberdecn
Candidacasa
Paupers
Paupers
The Long Arm ofPapal Authority
Edited by
Gerhard Jaritz, Torstein J.ergensen. Kirsi Salonen
MEDIUM AEVUM QUOTIDIANUM
SONDERBAND XIV
Gedruckt mit Unterstützung der Kulturabteilung
des Amtes der Niederösterreichischen Landesregierung
nlederösterreicll kuHur
CEU MEDIEV ALIA 8
TheLongArm
of Papal Authority
Late Medieval Christian Peripheries
and Their Communication
with the Holy See
Edited by
Gerhard Jaritz, Torstein J0rgensen, K.irsi Salonen
Bergen · Budapest · Krems
2004
Copy Editor: Judith Rasson
Cover lliustration: Pope Pius II, Hartmann Scbedel, World Cbronicle (Nuremberg, 1493), fol. 250
Joint Publlcation by:
Centre for Medieval Studies (CMS)
University of Bergen, P.O.Box 7800, N-5020 Bergen, Norway
Telephone: (+47-55) 58 80 85, Fax: (+47-55) 58 80 90
E-mail: post@cms.uib.no, Website: http://www.uib.no/cms/
ISBN 82-997026-0-7
􀀔
Department of Medleval Studies
Central European University
Nädor u. 9, H-1051 Budapest, Hungary
Telephone: (+36-1) 327-3024, Fax: (+36-1) 327-3055
E-mail: medstud@ceu.hu, Website: http://www.ceu.hu/medstud/
ISSN 1587-6470 CEU MEDlEY ALIA
‚􀆦 􀁝 􀁖CE U PRESS … 􀆥
Central European University Press
An imprint of the Central European University Share Company
Nädor u. 11, H-1 051 Budapest, Hungary
Telephone: (+36-1)327-3138, 327-3000, Fax: (+36-1)327-3183
E-mail: ceupress@ceu.hu, Website: http://www.ceupress.com
and
400 West 591b Street, New York NY 10019, USA
Telephone: (+l-212)547-6932, Fax: (+1-212) 548-4607
E-mail:mgreenwald@sorosny.org
ISBN 9-63 86569 5 6
Library ofCongress Cataloging-in-Publication Data:
A CIP catalog record for this book is available upon request.
Medium Aevum Quotidianum
Gesellschaft zur Erforschung der materiellen Kultur des Mittelalters
Körnermarkt 13, A-3500 Krems an der Donau, Austria
Telephone: (+43-2732) 847 93-20, Fax: (+43-2732) 847 93-1
E-mail: imareal@oeaw.ac.at , Website: http://www.imareal.oeaw.ac.at/maq/
ISBN 3-90 1094 17 2
© Editors and Contributors 2004
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in retrieval systerns, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the permission of the Publisher.
Printed in Hungary by Printself(Budapest).
T ABLE OF CONTENTS
Abbreviations related to the collections of the Vatican Secret Archives . . ….. … 7
Preface . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …. . . . . . . 8
Piroska Nagy, Peripheries in Question in Late Medieval Christendom . . ….. .. . 11
Kirsi Salonen, The Penitentiary under Pope Pius TI. The Supplications
and Their Provenance . . . . . . … . . . . . . . .. … . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Torstein Jergensen, At the Edge ofthe World: The Supplications
from the Norwegian Province of Nidaros . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . …. . . … . … 29
K.irsi Salonen, The Supplications from the Province of Uppsala.
Main Trends and Developments . . . .. . .. . . . . . … . . . . . . . . . . . . . … . . . . . . .. . . . . 42
Irene Fumeaux, Pre-Reformation Scottish Marriage Cases
in the Archives of the Papal Penitentiary . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Jadranka Neralic, Central Europe and the Late Medieval Papal Chancery . . … 71
Etleva Lala, The Papal Curia and Albania in the Later Middle Ages . …. . . . . . . . 89
Piroska N agy and Kirsi Salonen, East-Central Europe
and the Penitentiary (1458-1484) ……………………………………. 102
Lucie Dolezalova, „But if you marry me“: Reflections
on the Hussite Movement in the Penitentiary (1438-1483) ………….. 113
Ana Marinkovic, Socia1 and Territorial Endogamy
in the R.agusan Republic: Matrimonial Dispenses
during the Pontificates ofPaul li and Sixtus IV (1464-1484) ……….. 126
Gastone Saletnich and Wolfgang Müller, Rodolfo Gonzaga (1452-1495):
News on a Celebrity Murder Case . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . 145
5
Blanka Szegbyovä, Church and Secular Courts in Upper Hungary
(Fourteenth to Sixteenth Century) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 151
Ludwig Schmugge, Penitentiary Documents
from Outside the Penitentiary . . . . . . . . . . … . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . .. .. : …………… 161
Gerhard Jaritz, Patternsand Levels ofPeriphery? ………………………….. 170
List of Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . 173
6
ABBREVIATIONS RELATED TO TBE COLLECTIONS OF THE
V ATICAN SECRET ARCHIVES
ASV = Archivio Segreto Vaticano
Arm. = Armadio
Congr. Vescovi e Regolari, Visita Ap. = Congrega zione dei Vescovi e Regolari,
Visita Apostolica
Instr. Mise. = Instrumenta Miscellanea
Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div. = Penitenzieria Apostolica, Registra
Matrimonialium et Diversorum
Reg. Vat. = Registra Vaticana
Reg. Lat. = Registra Lateranensia
Reg. Suppl. = Registra Supplicationum
Reg. Aven. = Registra Avenionensia
RPG = Repertorium Poenitentiariae Germanicum
7
PREFACE
The present publication contains selected papers from two international
conferences: the first was held at the Centre for Medieval Studies, University of
Bergen (Norway), in October, 20031 and the second at the Department of Medieval
Studies, Centrat European University, Budapest (Hungary), in January,
2004.2 The purpose of these meetings was to gather researchers interested in the
history and significance of the papal curia and, in particular, the Apostolic Penitentiary,
in the later Middle Ages. The main emphasis was placed on a comparative
approach and on the role of peripheral areas of Western Christendom in
their communication with the Holy See.
There are various kinds of centre-and-periphery hierarchies.3 There are
geographic, social, economic, and cultural peripheries and centres.“ The generat
textbooks … address materials from the geographical and social peripheries of
privileged cultures only as adjuncts to their central narrative …. The history of
Scandinavia and Eastern Europe become excursus to a central narrative.'“‚
However, conceming the communication of the Holy See with various areas
of Christendom in the Middle Ag es, the irnpact of ‚peripheries‘ has attracted
a new interest in recent years. Since the opening of the archives of the Apostolic
Penitentiary to researchers in 1983 relatively few scholars have exploited the
sources, but recently their number has increased. Most of them have studied the
supplications to the Penitentiary of petitioners from their own home countries
and edited material on a national basis. The German Historical Institute, under
the leadership of Ludwig Schmugge, has already published several volumes of
entries concerning German-speaking territories. Also, the Norwegian and Icelandic
material has recently been released by Torstein Jßi’gensen and Gastone
Saletnich. Sirnilar enterprises are in process in several other countries: Poland,
Denmark, Sweden and Finland, England and Wales. The examination of territo-
1 „The Lote Middle Ages and the Penitentiary Texts: Centre and Periphery in Europe in the
Pre-Refonnation Era.“
2 „Ad Confines. The Papal Curia and the Eastern and Northern Peripheries of Christendom
in the Later Middle Ages(l41h
– 151h c.).“
3 For this and the following, see Teofilo F. Ruiz, „Center and Periphery in the Teaching of
Medieval History,“ in Medieval Cultures in Contact, ed. Richard F. Gyug (New York:
Fordham University Press, 2003), 252.
4 Ibidem, 248.
8
ries on the geographic peripheries in their relation to Rome has been a main focus
in these studies.
The archival material of the Penitentiary and the communication of the
papal curia with the various regions of late medieval Europe should, however,
not be studied only on national Ievels. There is an increasing need for such
studies to be supplemented by comparative searcbes for differences and analogies
in how Christians from different corners of Europc used the papal offices
and were treated by them. It is well known that even though the regulations of
canon law were in theory the same for everyone, regional differences in interpreting
and applying them emerged in the Late Middle Ages. The need to turn to
the papal authority in matters of canon law varied depending on the role of local
bishops and the presence or absence of papal Iegates or collectors, who often
bad the power to deal with similar matters in partibus. Also, people in the
centml territories of Christendom bad different opportunities for turning to the
papal curia with their requests than those living on the peripheries of the
Christian world.
Questions like these played the central role in the discussions of the two
conferences noted above. In this book we will render an overview of the present
status of this new field of research. As an introduction, Piroska Nagy deals with
the question of how to apply centre-periphery models to a comparative analysis
of the sources. Kirsi Salonen uses the Penitentiary registers from the period of
Pope Pius II to analyse the supplications, their provenance, and the role of peripheries.
Two peripheral parts of late medieval Europe and their significance concerning
the communication with the Holy See represent the main part of the
publication: Northem Europe and East Central Europe. Comparative analyses of
Scandinavian and Scottish source material from the Penitentiary Registers are
made by Torstein Jsrgensen, Kirsi Salonen, and lrene Fumeaux. The studies on
East Central Europe are introduced by an inquiry concerning the general importance
of the area for the papal curia (Jadranka Neralic), and an overview of the
communication of the Holy See with Albania (Etleva Lala). Piroska Nagy and
Kirsi Salonen offer a quantitative analysis of East Central Europe and the Penitentiary
(1458-1484), followed by contributions on individual territories, such
as the Czech Iands (Lucie Dolezalova) and Dalmatia (Ana Marinkovic). The
contribution by Gastone Saletnich and Wolfgang Müller indicates that in any
studies of the roJe of peripheries one must not neglect the more central areas.
Blanca Szeghyova and Ludwig Schrnugge show that local archives and their
contents are an indispensable additional source for comparative analyses.
Many friends and colleagues have helped in preparing this book for print.
We are pleased to thank the personnet of the Penitenzieria Apostolica, especially
Padre Ubaldo Todeschini, for reading the manuscript and suggesting useful corrections.
We are also much obliged to the skilled staff of the Sala di Studio in
the Vatican Archives, who patiently brought us volume after volume of the reg-
9
isters and helped with other problems. Judith Rasson from Central European
University deserves our gratitude for copyediting our text.
Finally, we wish to thank the academic institutions which in a more direct
way have promoted this project: the Centre for Medieval Studies at the
University of Bergen, the Department of Medieval Studies at the Central
European University in Budapest, the Institut filr Realienkunde of the Austrian
Academy of Seiences and the Academy of Finland, and the Department of History
at the University ofTampere.
Bergen, Budapest, and Tampere, November 2004
Gerhard Jaritz, Torstein Jergensen, Kirsi Salonen
10