East-Central Europe and the Penitentiary (1458-1484)

EAST CENTRAL EURO PE AND THE PENITENTIARY
(1458-1484)
Piroska Nagy and Kirsi Salonen
The aim of this contribution is to give a first overview of ongoing research
rather than to offer final answers to the questions it raises. We will discuss
the petitions to the Penitentiary from East Central Europe during the years
1458-1484, that is, from tbe beginning ofthe pontificate of Pius li until the end
of the pontificate of Sixtus IV. By East Central Europe, we understand the area
of Western Christendom situated eastwards of Italy and of the German territories,
and westwards ofthe overwbelmingly Orthodox Iands.
Our definition of this territory and its name, East Central Europe, are not
rooted in well-defined medieval entities. There were great differences in the
consideration and status of the different parts of this East Central Europe in tbe
Middle Ages, wbicb were never considered as a unity.1 It is only recent bistorical
inquiry wbich bas constituted them as an individual region of Europe, especially
in tbe context of tbe political division of Europe after tbe Second World
War. Their common Iot of state socialism for half a century generated, on its decline,
an important reflection on tbe common bistorical features of the countries
of „Mitteleuropa.“2 Thus, recent bistorical studies bave shown that the Iands and
1 The area defmed here as East Central Europe crosses territories of the Holy Roman Empire
and regions with mainly German-speaking populations. Therefore the researched material
is also partly included in the Repertorium Poenitentiariae Germanicum, prepared by the
German Historical Institute in Rome; six volumes have been published so far by Ludwig
Schmugge and his collaborators, with indices by Hildegard Schneider-Schmugge, covering
the period from Eugene IV to Sixtus IV (Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1996 ff.). The Polish cases
have been published in the Bullarium Poloniae 6 (1447-1464), ed. hena Sulkowska-Kuras
and Stanislaus Kuras (Rome-Lublin: Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski, Fundacja Jana Pawla
n, 1998).
2 See Jenö Szücs, ‚“‚be Three Historical Regions of Europe. An Outline,“ Acta Historica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 29 (1983), 131-184; also published in Civil Society
and the Stare: New Europeon Perspectives, ed. John Keane (London: Verso, 1988), 291-
332 (hereafter Szücs, ‚“‚be Three Historical Regions“); on the link between the idea and the
historical context, see Jänos M. Bak, „Königreich Ungarn: Staatstrukturen und Rolle in
Ostrnitteleuropa im 14.-16. Jahrhundert,“ in Ostmitteleuropa im 14.-17. Jahrhundert – eine
Region oder Region der Regionen? ed. Marian Dygo, Slawomir Gawlas and Hieronim
Grala (Warszawa: „DIG“, 2003) (hereafter Ostmitte/europa im 14.-17. Jahrhundert), 41-
50, esp. 41-42.
102
churches we consider here had some common features that make it sensible to
study them together as an entity_l Most of the peoples concemed in the area
converted to Christianity quite late,4 between the millenium and the fourteenth
century (Lithuania), which means that Christianization progressed far slower
here than in the West. Almost all these territories were (with the exception of
Bohemia-Moravia), at some period or all through their existence, influenced by
Orthodox Christianity.5 When the whole Latin world was roughly centered
around the regions ofltaly, France, and the westem part ofthe empire, and when
Rome, with the papal curia, was the symbolic and administrative center of
Christendom, the East Central European Iands seem to have belonged to the
edges or borderlands of Western Christendom. Because of their ties with the
neighbouring cultures some of these societies could be described as ‚frontier societies.
‚6
In the second half of the fifteenth century, the area defined in this way7
comprised the kingdoms of Hungary, Poland-Lithuania, the Czech Iands (or Bohemia-
Moravia) integrated into the Holy Roman Empire, and a nurober of
smaller entities, like Carniola (part of the Holy Roman Empire and ecclesiastically
dependent on the archbishop of Aquileia, today’s Slovenia), Croatia, Dalmatia,
Albania-Epirus, and what one calls today the Baltic countries (medieval
Prussia and Livonia).
3 See, among others, Sziics, „The Three Historical Regions;“ Francis Dvorni.k, The Making of
Central and Eastem Europe (London: Polish Research Centre, 1949), 262; Oscar Ha1ecki,
Borderlands ofWestem Civi/ization. A History o[East Centra/ Europe (New York: Ronald
Press Company, 1952), 136-140 (bereafter Halecki, Borderlands); for a recent treatrnent,
sec Ostmitteleuropa im 14.-17. Jahrhundert.
4 For an extensive bibliography and the status questionis, see Gäbor KJaniczay, „The Birth of
a New Europe about A.D. 1000. Conversion, Transfer of lnstitutional Models, New Dynamics,“
in Eurasian Transformations, Tenth to Thirteenth Centuries: Crystallizations, Divergences,
Renaissances, ed. Johann P. Amason and Bjom Wirtrock (Leiden: Brill, in
press).
5 For the Balkans, see John V. A. Fine, The Late Medieval Ba/Irans. A Critical Survey from
the Late Twelfth Century to the Ottoman Conquest (Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press,
2000) (bereafter Fine, The Late Medieva/ Balkans); for Poland-Lithuania, see Juliusz Bardach,
„La rencontre des Eglises catholique et orthodoxe sur !es territoires orientaux du
Royaurne de Pologne et de Lituanie aux XIV-XVle siecles,“ in The Common Christion
Roofs ofthe Europeon Nations. An International Colloquium in the Vatican. Pontifical Lateran
University- Catholic University ofLublin (F1orence: Le Monnier, 1982), vol. 2, 817-
826; see also Evelyne Patlagean, „Les Etats d’Europe centrale et Byzance, ou l’oscillation
des confins,“ Revue historique 304, no. 4 (2000) : 827-868.
6 See Nora Berend, At the Gate of Christendom. Jews, Muslims and ‚Pagans‘ in Medieva/
Hungary c. 1000 – c. 1300 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001), especially
chapter 1 : „Hungary: A Frontier Society;“ see also Robert Bartlett and Angus MacKay, ed.,
Medieval Frontier Societies (Oxford: Cisrendon Press, 1989).
7 In order to represent this territory on the map of fifteenth-century Europe, we refer to two
rnaps: Paul Robert Mag6csi, Hi storical Atlas ofCentral Europe. From the Early Fifth Century
to the Present (rev. ed., London: Thames and Hudson, 2002), rnaps I 0 and 1 3 .
103
In the later Middle Ages, the registers of supplications presented to the
Penitentiary and coming from the whole ofWestem Christendom were kept in a
uniform way at the papal curia. Therefore, through the registered data one can
compare the content and numbers of cases, and infer from them basic information
about the intensity and frequency of the relations of one diocese, region, or
country with the Holy See, particularities in canon law, and differences conceming
their relative importance in the affai.rs of the curia. This possibility of
comparison allows inserting East Central Europe into the framework of general
European history. However, for a firm interpretation of the data and a clear understanding
of the phenomena behind them, it will be necessary to compare
them with other kinds of evidence for the period, which can complete or sometimes
modify the information found here.
The period of our interest starts with the pontificate of Pius ll, when the
copying of incoming supplications into the registers of the office was reformed. 8
This study concentrates on the pontificates of Pius II, Paul ll, and Sixtus IV,
covering a 26-year period from 1458 until 1484, volumes 7 to 33 of the registers.
Petitions .from East Central Europe to the Penitentiary
During this period there were 2814 petitions from East Central Europe to
the Penitentiary (691 under Pius II, 917 under Paul II, and 1206 under Sixtus
IV).9 Comparing these numbers (Table 1) to all the petitions directed to the
Penitentiary during these years (in total 77,426 cases: 15,656 under Pius ll,
24,731 under Paul II, and 37,039 under Sixtus IV), one notices that 3.6% of all
petitions directed to the Penitentiary during that period came from the East Central
European areas (4.4% under Pius ll, 3.4% under Paul li, and 3.3% under
Sixtus IV). Thus, the proportion of petitions from East Central Europe to the
Penitentiary remained re1atively small during the whole period, without great
variation.10
Comparing the corpus of the East Central European petitions and their
types to the totality of cases handled in the Penitentiary during the years 1458-
1484, one recognizes different proportians in the violations of canon law, reflected
especially by the categories of de diversis formis, with 29% of petitions
from the area, and de declaratoriis, with 16%, altogether 45%. For the totality of
the cases from the same period these categories are significantly less important
8 See Kirsi Salonen ’s contribution on „The Penitentiary under Pius 11“ in this volume.
9 The data used here are based on the studies of Kirsi Salonen concerning the time ofPius 11,
and on a research project at the Department of Medieval Studies of Centtal European University
(Budapest). One case in the tables represents one entry in the registers of the Penitentiary,
without consideruing the nurober of persons applying. On the difficulty of counting
the data, see also Salonen, „The Penitentiary under Pius 11,“ note 8.
1° For the explanation of the supplication categories, see Salonen, „The Penitentiary under
Pius ll,“ 47-48.
104
(21% de diversisformis and 4% de declaratoriis). Possible explanations may lie
in the remoteness of the regions concemed – this could explain that people applied
to the curia only for important reasons and saw canon law violations as
such. Also the proportion of the confession petitions (21%) among the cases
from East Central Europe is higher than that in the whole material (14%). On the
other hand, fewer marriage petitions (16%) and illegitimacy cases ( 1 0%) seem
to have arrived in Rome from East Central Europe compared to all the cases
handled by the Penitentiary (35% and 1 9%). The proportion of the de promotis
cases (8%) corresponds to the generat trend ofthe whole material (8%).
Table 1. Petitions (in percentages; N=2814) from East-Central Europe
to the Penitentiary (1458-1484).
ECE ECE ECE ECE total Total Europe
Category Pius ll Paul ll Sixtus IV 1458-1484
Matrim. 12% 13% 23% 16% 35%
Diversis 33% 37% 23% 29% 21%
Declarat. 12% 17% 1 7% 16% 4%
Def.Nat. 9% 10% 10% 1 0% 16%
Uberiori 0% 00/o 1% 0% 3%
Promotis 9% 7% 8% 8% 8%
Con{ess.11 25% 16% 18% 21% 14%
Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Source: ASV, PemleT!Zierza Ap., Reg. Matrzm. et Drv., Val. 7-33.
The numbers vary quite strongly from one pontifi.cate to the other.
Explanations for this phenomenon may only be found by thorough studies of the
local contexts. For instance, one notices a steady increase in the proportion of
the marriage petitions during the period studied; under the pontifi.cate of Pius II
they formed only 12% of the petitions, but during the pontificate of Sixtus IV
they almost doubled to 23%. At the moment, no definite explanation for this
development may be given. A sim.ilar situation occurs for some other changes
and developments. Conceming the de diversis formis cases, their number, after a
slight proportional increase from Pius ll to Paul li (33% and 37%, respectively),
declined ( only 23% under Sixtus IV). Comparisons with the subsequent
pontifi.cates will allow us to see if this tendency to decline continued. lt is also
worth noting that the declaratory cases frrst followed a proportional increase
from Pius ll to Paul ll (12% and 17%, respective1y), then stabilized under Sixtus
IV (17%).
The number of confession petitions varied without a general trend of decline
or growth. On the whole, 21% of the East Central European petitions were
11 The „confession“ category of our tab1e contains all the supplications related to confession
matters, i. e. all the cases registered in the chapters de confessionalibus perpetuis, de confessionalibus
in forma ‚Cupientes, ‚ and even de sententiis genera/ibus.
105
sent to ask for a confession Ietter, while the global proportion shows only 14%.12
A possible explanation for this slight over-representation may be that these letters
from East Central Europe came mostly from pilgrims to Rome. A person
who visited Rome could easily ask for a Ietter of confession for hirnself or herself
once he or she were there; back home, it constituted visible proof ofthe ac­
complishment of the pilgrimage as well as a kind of spiritual autonomy. For a
layman, the Ietter of confession allowed its holder to choose his own confessor
(de confessionalibus perpetuis); for a priest it meant the authorisation to absolve
his parishioners from sins that normally were reserved for papal decision (de
sententiis generalibus), and it represented a growth in spiritual power. Frequently,
several confession letters for different persons were asked for in the
same petition at the same time. Thus, the value of a confession Ietter from the
curia was high in the eyes of the faithful coming from remote countries, as proof
of an important effort accomplished for the sake of spiritual comfort as weil as
an authoritative means to gain greater autonomy in spiritual matters.
Another possible explanation for the over-representation of the confession
petitions in comparison to the totality of cases is that in other territories there
were many papal legates with the right to sell indulgence letters – which were in
effect similar to confession letters. As East Central Europeans could not proeure
this kind of grace locally, they might have turned to the papal curia. A parallel
situation has been noticed for Swedish confession letters; during the years when
indulgence sellers were active in Sweden there were no petitions to the Penitentiary
for confession letters. From Finland, where the indulgence sellers hardly
set foot, one finds petitions during the periods when no Swedes turned to the
Pe ru.t ent1. ary fio r th ese matters. 13
Interna/ division within East Central Europe
East Central Europe is large and heterogeneous. Therefore, it is challenging
to investigate whether there were different kinds of needs for grace in the
various parts of this area. Table 214 shows that most of the East Central European
cases come from the Hungarian dioceses (33%), while the Polish cases are
in the second position (28%). This distribution corresponds roughly to the
demographic importance of the two largest Countries of the region – the population
of Hungary with Slavonia at the end of the fifteenth century is estimated to
12 We are grateful to Ludwig Schmugge for giving us the opportunity to use these still-unpublished
data.
13 Kirsi Salonen, The Penitentiary as a Weil ofGrace in the Late Middle Ages. The Example
ofthe Province of Uppsala 1448-1527, Suomalaisen Tiedeakatemian Toimituksia – Annales
Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae 3 1 3 (Saarijärvi: Academia Scientiarum Fennica,
2001), 362, 364-367 (hereafter Salonen, The Penitentiary).
14 The numeric data oftbis table are provisory and may, because ofunclear dioceses, present
a small margin of error.
106
bave been between 2.9 and 3.4, or for certains, it attained even 4 million,15 wbile
the estimations concerning Poland are between 2.5 and 3.2 million16 – wbich
would mean that the greater distance separating Poland from Rome did not play
a role in the frequency of petitions. Christians from other regions did not send so
many petitions to the Penitentiary. Tbis is an understandable state of affairs, if
one reasons in terms of the population, 17 size, and wealth of a country.
Table 2. Number of case types from East Central Europe ( 1 458-1484).
Territory Matr. DF Decl. DN Uber. from. Conf. Total %
Hungary 52 335 155 55 0 6 1 274 932 33%
Czech lands 5 30 1 1 13 0 17 3 1 107 4%
Dalmatia 160 62 18 12 0 33 1 1 296 1 1%
Croatia 89 39 1 8 1 2 0 21 8 187 7%
Albania 44 52 14 41 1 3 1 1 1 194 7%
S1ovenia 23 14 1 1 17 0 3 2 70 2%
Po land 5 1 220 188 102 8 46 1 7 1 786 28%
Baltic Iands 30 61 25 19 4 5 83 227 8%
East 2 3 4 0 0 0 6 1 5 0%
Total 456 8 1 6 444 271 13 2 1 7 597 2814 100%
Source: ASV, Pemtenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., Vol. 7-33.
Tbere were 1 8 dioceses in the kingdom of Hungary, many of them quite
rieb and important, such as Esztergom (its tax to the Holy See was 4000 florins
during the period studied), Pecs (3300 florins), Zagreb (2000 florins), and NagyVarad
(2000 florins).18 Generally, fifteenth-century Hungary was a quite releu
See Andräs Kubinyi, „A magyar kiralysäg nepessege a 1 5 . szäzad vegen“ (The population
of the Hungarian kingdom at the end of the fifteenth century), in Magyararszag törteneti
demografiaja 896-1995. Mil/ecententiriumi e16adasok (The Historical Demography of
Hungary 896-1995. Lectures for the millecentenary of Hungary), J6zsef Kovacsics, ed.
(Budapest: Központi Statisztikai Hivatal, 1997), 93-110, here 1 10; and Pa! Engel, „Az
Anjou- es Zsigmond-kori Magyarcrszag törteneti demogräfiäjänak problemäi“ (The historical
demographic problems of Hungary in the age of the Anjou and Sigismund), in ibidem,
1 1 1-1 16, especially 1 16. See also Erle Fügedi, “The demographic Iandscape of East Central
Europe,“ in East-Central Europe in Transition. From the Fourteenth to the Seventeenth
Century, ed. Antoni Maczak, Henryk Sarnsonowicz and Peter Burke (London and Paris:
Cambridge University Press and Editions de la MSH, 1985), 53 (bereafter: Fügedi, “The
democraphic 1andscape“).
16 Fügedi, „The demographic 1andscape;“ György Szeke1y, „Cseh- es Lengyelorszäg a kesö
közepkorban“ (Czech Lands and Poland in the late Middle Ages), in Europa ezer eve: a
közeplror II (A Thousand Years of Europe: the Middle Ages II), ed. Gäbor Klaniczay
(Budapest: Osiris, 2004), 265 (bereafter Szekely, „Cseh- es Lengyelorszäg“).
17 In the field of demographic data for the area, however, the state of surviving documentation
does not offer comparab1e data for a11 the regions.
18 Conceming the taxes an (arch)diocese had to pay to the Holy See in the Middle Ages, see
Konrad Eube[, Hierarchai Catholica Medii Aevi svi e Summorum Pontificum S.R.E. Cardinalium,
Ecclesiarum Antistitum Series ab anno 1198 usque ad annum 1431 perducta e
107
vant country in Europe; its relative political weight grew considerably with the
accession to the throne of the empire of Sigismund, king of Hungary, and with
the function of the kingdom, as a „bastion of Christendom“ in the defense
against the Ottomans. Hungary had well-developed relations with the papacy,
although for political reasons they were not without troubles.19 Among the Hungarian
petitions, one may underline the overwhelming importance of the violations
of canon law, and among them many criminal cases: the de diversis formis
and de declaratorisi cases form 36% and 17% of the total, respectively; this
means that tagether they represented more than half of the petitions coming
from the kingdom to the Penitentiary.
The kingdom of Poland-Lithuania
20 also consisted of important and great
dioceses, wbich seem to bave been even richer and more valuable in tbe eyes of
the Holy See than those of Hungary, if we judge from the taxes they paid:
Gniezno (tax 5000 florins), Wroclaw (4000 florins), and Cracow (3000 florins).
Poland, however, is more remote from Rome than Hungary, and in parts of it
Christianization was still relatively recent, as Lithuania converted only in 1386.
Although numerically less important than the Hungarian petitions, the Polisb
petitions present a similar structure: 52% of them belang to the de diversis formis
and de declaratoriis types. This is interesting because in the Scandinavian
countries, especially Sweden and Finland, one finds a similar pattern.21 In third
position, in both the Hungarian and Polish material the supplications for confession
letters show a rather high proportion compared to the remaining types.
They represent 29% of the Hungarian cases and 22% of the Polish. All the other
types of petitions are far less important. Such a similar structure of the petition
series in the two great kingdoms of the area requires explanation, the more as
the two countries determine, by their overwhelmiug importance (33% and 28%,
respectively, of all the East Central European petitions) the case-type profile of
the wbole region.
From the other territories and areas, Bohemia-Moravia, Dalmatia, Croatia,
Albania, Slovenia, and Prussia, there are many fewer petitions. One general reason
is certainly that they were far smaller, both in terms of territorial extent and
documentis tabularii praesertim vaticani ll (Münster: Regensberg, 1914), passim. According
to the Hierarchia Catholica the maximum tax was 12,000 Florins (Rouen and Wincbester),
while the rninimum (if something bad to be paid) was 33 1/3 florins.
19 Peter E. Koväcs, „A Szentszek, a török es Magyararszag a Hunyadiak a1att (1437-1490)“
(‚lbe Holy See, the Turks and Hungary under the reign of the Hunyadi), in Magyararszag
es a Szentszek kapcsolatcinak 1000 ive (Budapest: Magyar Egyhaztörteneti
20 Munkaközösseg, 1996), 97-117.
See Norman Davies, God’s Playground. A Hütory of Po/and, vol. 1 : The Origins to 1795
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982), chapter 5; Daniel Stone, The Polish-Lithuanian State
1386-1795 (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001), chapters 1-2 (hereafter Stone,
The Polish-Lithuanian State).
21 Concerning the Swedish pattem, see Salonen, „The Penitentiary under Pius II,“ as weil as
eadem, The Penitentiary.
108
population. The only astanishing case in this set of explanations seems to be that
of the densely populated Czech lands, which should have produced more petitions
if it depended only on size, distance, and demography. Here, however, the
variations in numbers seem to have bad quite different reasons.
Despite its relatively small territory, Dalmatia represents the third place in
the number of East Central European petitions to the Penitentiary. This need not
astonish, though; it fits weil with the general situation of Dalmatia in later medieval
Europe. Frequent communication and strong relations with the papal curia
and, thus, also with the Penitentiary, may be explained by the fact that the
whole Dalmatian coast belonged to the „empire“ of Venice. Dalmatian towns
had a very similar development to Italian towns in economic and social terms;
Dalmatia was an extension of Italy. Thus, the numbers from the archives of the
Penitentiary only confum what one knows about this part of Christendom. They
clearly show that the Dalmatian towns of the Adriatic coast, with a numerous
and important ltalian population, did not belong to the ‚periphery‘ of fifteenthcentury
Christendom, but rather to a periphery ofltaly.
An important observation in the Dalmatian cases is the relatively high
number of petitions concerning marriage matters ( 160 cases out of the total of
296, that is, 54%). This specificity of Dalmatia, which is echoed also in neighboring
Croatia, may be explained by the local marriage customs?2 Among all
the other categories the most important ones are the de diversis formis cases,
with 21% of the total. Tagether with the declaratory cases, 27% of the cases represent
violations of canon law.
Regarding Albania and Croatia, there are alrnost 200 registered cases
from each. Each is situated an equal distance from the papal curia and consists
of more or less the same number of relatively small dioceses. However, the
structural differences of the distribution of the cases merit a few remarks. In
Croatia, one finds almost the same importance of matrimonial cases (47% ofthe
total) as in Dalmatia, which may be explained by the same reasons, the existence
of strict marriage rules in local society. Secondly, there is also a proportion of
canon law violations similar to Dalmatia: 30% of the de dec/aratoriis and de diversis
formis cases together. In Albania, matrimonial cases declined in proportion,
though still remaining quite high (23%). The most important ones there
were the de declaratoriis and de diversis formis cases, together 34%.
One needs an explanation for the relatively low number of petitions from
these regions at the margins of Italy. Of course, the Situation was different, as
Albania was a missionary front of the Roman Church in the Orthodox Balkans,
which started to be organized from the twelfth century onwards, while Croatia
and Dalmatia were firm Catholic lands.23 Beside the small size of the areas, the
22
See Ana MarinkoviC’s article in this volwne.
23 Alain Ducellier, L ‚A/banie entre Byzance et Venise, Ve-XVe s. (London: Variorum 1987)
(hereafter Ducellier, L ‚Aibanie), cbapter I I : „Aux frontieres de Ia Romanite et de
!’Orthodoxie au Moyen Age: Je cas de I‘ Albanie.“
109
low nurober of registered data may probably have originated from the dang er of
Ottoman conquest. The Ottomans were in contiDual progress towards the West
after the fall of Constantinople in 1453, when they quickly captured even the
westem part ofthe Balkans. Christian resistance in the area depended essentially
on the Hungarians. After John Hunyadi’s death (1456) and that of Pius ll
(1464), the idea of a concerted westem crusade against the Ottomans vanished
for a while. During the decades of our study, there were ceaseless wars and hostilities
in the southem and southeastem areas of the kingdom of Hungary. Bosnia
was taken in 1463, Hercegovina in 1465, and finally Albania in 1479?4 lt
would be interesting to investigate case by case the evolution of the presence of
the dioceses affected by Ottoman conquest in the Penitentiary registers. However,
the Ottoman presence does not seem to have affected the nurober of petitions
corning from the Balkans immediately in a catastrophic way, even if the
conquest produced the desertion of the local clergy, frequently of Italian or
Dalmatian origin.25 In order to establish ifthere was any immediate effect ofthe
Ottoman conquest on the contacts of these regions with Rome, two methods
might help. One should compare the data with those from the first half of the
fifteenth century, which is not possible in the present state of research and
documentation. Neither the ways of registration nor the numbers are comparable.
Thus only further comparison of the data with other types of evidence from
the region may allow answering the question. In any case, it seems that religious
relations were not at all interrupted – just like the Reformation did not stop immediately
the flow of Swedish petitions to Rome.26 This fact may also be explained
by the Ottomans‘ methods of conquest. Like medieval Muslim conquest
in general, it did not involve religious conquest, but the integration of the conquered
non-Muslim population into the empire as a category apart, the dhimmi,
paying special taxes. Consequently, conversions to Islam in the conquered Iands
were not directed by a coercive policy but by the possibilities of social integration
and power reserved for Muslims in the Ottoman state, and as such, they intervened
only after a few generations in the dorninated territories.27 In the long
term, another defense of the Catholic faithful, frequently abandoned by their
clergy, was slow conversion to Orthodoxy.
Conceming the nurober ofpetitions to the Penitentiary, the Baltic dioceses
follow Dalmatia. This seems to be astonishing considering their remote situa-
2245 See Fine, The Late Medieva/ Balkans, 548-612.
26 Ducellier, L ‚Aibanie, cbapter 1 1.
See Kirsi Salonen, “The Supplications from the Province of Uppsala, Main Trends and Developments,“
in this volume.
27 Antal Molnär, Katolikus missztO!c. a h6do/t Magyarorszagon I (1572-1647) (Catholic
missions in Hungary under the Ottoman rule [1 572-1647D (Budapest: Balassi, 2002), 30-
31; D6ra Kerekes, „I denrite d’enfance et identite de service: memoire et solidarite ethniques
des renegats dans !’Empire Ottoman,“ in Construction d’identites dons l ‚histoire
europeenne du Moyen Age a nos jours. Actes des col/oques franco-hongrois, ed. Piroska
Nagy and Peter Sahin-T6th (Rouen: Presses Universitaires de Rouen, forthcoming).
110
tion, but may be explained by the presence ofthe Teutonic Knights. Through the
knights, the Baltic area feil under German influence which, in its turn, affected
the frequency of contacts and the number of petitions to the Penitentiary. All the
Baltic dioceses were relatively small and rather poor, therefore insignificant in
the eyes ofthe curia (the tax listed for the archdiocese ofRiga was only 800 florins,
while the highest tax paid to the Holy See by a Baltic diocese was that of
Ösel, 1 300 florins). Nevertheless, there were proportionally many petitions registered
from the Baltic dioceses to the Penitentiary. Many petitions came especially
from those dioceses that were situated along the coast of the Baltic Sea
and which were under German domination, Hanseatic towns (Reval!fallinn) or
areas connected directly to the Teutonic Knights (Riga). Even though the influence
of the Teutonic Knights in the Baltic region started to decrease towards the
end ofthe Middle Ages (especially after the revolt ofthe Prussian Union against
them in 1454, the 13 Years‘ War that followed and the peace of Torun28), their
effect can still be feit in their relations. The dioceses along the Baltic Sea were
accustomed to keep contacts with the Holy See. The Teutonic Knights had always
had special Iegates or representatives residing at the curia and handling
important issues in favor of the order, and other persons, for payment. These
well-established contacts might have made it easier for individual Christians of
the Baltic area to turn to the authority of the popes, although one has no evidence
for the channelling of supplications via the Knights.
The Balkan regions are followed in number of petitions by the Czech
lands. The weak absolute number of petitions from Bohemia-Moravia may be
explained by the small size of the territory; however, as there were only three
dioceses there, one also may consider that there are proportionally many petitions
coming from the individual Czech dioceses. Two of them were wealthy
and important: Olomuc (tax 3500 florins) and especially Prague, a very populous
cicyl9 and also important in European terms, both from the political and cultural
point of view (tax 2800 florins). Litomysl was less relevant (tax 800 florins).
Bohemia-Moravia has to be seen in its specific political and religious
context in the fifteenth century due to the Hussite movement, which troubled
communication with Rome. During the period we are interested in, communication
with Rome was intense, but petitioning was less as most of the country was
attached to the moderate form ofHussitism?0
As far as the typological structure of the petitions is concemed, one finds
the same kind ofproportions both in the Baltic Iands and Bohemia-Moravia: the
28
See Stone, The Polish-Lithuanian State, 29-31; Halecki, Borderlands, 136-140; Aleksander
Gieysztor, „The Kingdom of Po1and and the grand duchy of Lithuania,“ in New Cambridge
Medieval History, vol. 7 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 737.
29 Around 1415 Prague had 35,000 inhabitants (Szekely, „Cseh- es Lengyelorszag,“ 258).
3° For more about the influence of the Hussite phenomenon on communications with the
Penitentiary see Lucie Dole􀃋lovä, „‚But if You Marry Me.‘ Reflections of the Hussite
Movement in the Penitentiary (143&–1483)“ in tbis volume.
1 1 1
de diversis and declaratory cases make up 38% of the petitions in both territories,
followed by the confession Ietter requests, 37% and 29% respectively. This
is the same typological structure as that observed in Hungary and Poland, even
though the proportions changed in a way that demands further explanation by
further research.
Tbe region of today’s Slovenia was composed of only two dioceses, both
relatively small: Ljubljana (Laibacum, tax 150 florins) and Koper (Iustinopoli s,
100 florins). Such a small importance explains the small number of petitions.
Their distribution, however, is reminiscent of the proximity of Dalmatia and the
situation near the Adriatic coast; even ifthe totality of de diversis and declaratory
cases makes 36%, the number of matrimonial petitions is also high, representing
33%.
Conclusions
Studying the number of supplications, it seems clear that one has to reason
first in demographic and only secondly in geographic terms. There are many
petitions from the areas such as Hungary and Poland, which were densely
populated and urbanized in terms of the area (which means far less populated
and urban than the West) and bad well developed relations with the papal curia,
which considered them important. If the geographical situation of a diocese or
region situated far away from the papal curia made the way to the Penitentiary
longer, a long distance did not necessarily mean that the connections were
fewer, as one can see in the case of the Baltic dioceses, from wbicb there were
relatively many petitions despite long distances. The political situation within
eacb territory bad its own influence on the relations and may explain fluctuations.
On the basis of tbis survey, we may now underline a few features whicb
seem to be East Central European tendencies in the late medieval Penitentiary
registers. Tbree trends may be revealed:
• In the wbole area, the most numerous petitions were sent to the Penitentiary
demanding grace for canon law violations.
• Tbe area is equally cbaracterized by the high number of petitions for confession
matters, but their overall proportion is tbe same as in the general
situation ofEurope.
• These two trends are altered in the Adriatic area by a regional specificity
that bad a local explanation: the overwhelming importance of matrimonial
cases, extraordinary in Dalmatia, lesser but comparable in Croatia and
Albania.
Further comparison with the structures of the material from the northern and
southwestem peripberies of Christendom sball allow to find out if these trends
were specific for East Central Europe or also for other peripheral areas. Future
researcb into the local contexts and comparison with otber source types will also
help to better understand the meanings, causes, and variations ofthese features.
1 12
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