At the Edge of the World: The Supplications from the Norwegian Province of Nidaros

AT THE EDGE OFTHE WORLD:
THE SUPPLICATIONS
FROM THE N ORWEGIAN PROVINCE OF NIDAROS
Torstein Jargensen
At the time when the office ofthe papal Penitentiary was at its peak in the
fifteenth and the fust half of the sixteenth century, the archdiocese of Nidaros
was still the northernmost of all church provinces in Western Christendom. To
be sure, the discoveries of new Iands in the Americas in the years before and
after the turn of the century were just in the process of opening up a whole new
world. On the one band, the new discoveries paved the way for political and
economic conquest, on the other they added new and virginal ground for the
Catholic Church to extend its faith, practices and institutional order. The old
world scope as seen from the papacy, and in which Norway held a position as
the last country of the world at the very border of the enormous abyss surrounding
the Iands of the earth, was about to lose its relevance. Ancl, for seafaring
nations like Spain, Portugal, and Norway, the ocean represented an easier
and speedier way oftravel and communication than land. By means ofthe winds
ofthe seas and efficient ships the miles ofthe seas were shorter in terms oftravelling
hours than miles on land, especially if one belonged to the strata of the
population that bad to travel on foot.
Despite these facts the distance from Rome to the metropolitan See ofNidaros
in Norway was still a long journey. However, it is important to note that
long distance in terms of kilometres was by no means equivalent to long distance
in mentality, faith, and conduct. It is not difficult to point out distinctive
features and characteristics of Scandinavian ways of life, social organisation,
behaviour, and thinking in the period; but, when looking at late medieval Norwegian
and Icelandic societies, one also cannot escape notice of the strong imprint
of an overarching common European culture, with its joint set of norms
and practices. As in Naples, Wittenberg, Dublin, or whatever place on the map
of Central and Western Europe at the time, the people of Norway and leeland
were from the cradle to the grave framed by the religious apparatus of the
Catholic Church in all its different aspects. Distance in geography, thus, did not
by necessity imply distance in religious thought and practices. One field to
which this fact applied indeed was the administration of grace and penance by
the Apostolic Penitentiary.
29
The Nidaros material – a brief overview1
The register protocols of the Apostolic Penitentiary contain altogether a
hundred supplications from the dioceses under the province of Nidaros? This
means, for instance, when comparing with the German material, that for every
Norwegian entry there are roughly 500 to 600 petitions to be counted from the
German provinces. Nevertheless, in a Norwegian setting the collection of the
penitentiary supplications represents the most comprehensive discovery of
medieval sources related to the country for the last 50 years.
The archdiocese ofNidaros3 consisted of five dioceses on the Norwegian
mainland during the period concerned. Besides the See of Nidaros itself, these
were Oslo, Bergen, Stavanger, and Hamar. In addition, the province included –
with some variations – five suffiagan Sees on the Norwegian-dominated islands
in the North Atlantic, that is, Skälholt and H6lar on Iceland, the Orkney and
Frero Islands plus Gardar (Greenland). In our material, we also have included 44
supplications from the Hebrides,4 as this group of islands was old Norwegian
territory and the connecting ecclesiastical lines to Nidaros remained long after
the political inclusion ofthese Iands into England and Scotland. For the dioceses
of the Orkneys and Hebrides we have, however, circumscribed the evidence at
the year 1472/1473 as these dioceses at this time were formally transferred to
the newly founded Scottish archdiocese of St. Andrews. For the other dioceses
we have searched the protocols up to the year of the Danish-Norwegian reformation
in 1537. Our last registration dates from September 1 53 1 . With July
1438, as the first dating of a registered – and preserved – supplication from Nidaros,
our material covers a period of a little less than a century. In addition we
have included one supplication from the Danish-Norwegian queen, Dorothea,
wife of King Christi an I.
By the beginning of the fourteenth century the Norwegian mainland is estimated
to have been home to a maximum of 350,000 souls. The numbers feil
drastically from the Black Death and the subsequent plagues that ravaged
1 For a more detailed survey sec Torstein Jmgensen and Gastone Saletnich, Synder og
Pavemakt: Botsbrev fra den norslre kirlreprovins og Suder��yene til Pavestolen 1438-1531.
Diplomatarium Poenitentiariae Norvegicum [Sinners and papal power. Penitentiary
supplications from the Norwegian Church province and the Hebrides to the Holy See,
1438-1531] (Stavanger: MisjonshBgskolens forlaget, 2004) (hereafter Jmgensen and
Saletnich, Synder og Pavemakt).
2 Giving the exact nurober is a question of principles of counting. In this study, I bave counted
entries with lists of persons being granted one and the same grace, but who must have
addressed the penitentiary with different petitions, as one supplication. Also supplications
with an additional case attached to them under the same date count as one entry in our
study. (Jmgensen and Sa1etnich, Synder og Pavemakt, 62, 91-92, 133, 157-158).
3 The name of the city of the metropolitan See has throughout the ages altematively been
Nidaros and Trondheim. Today, the city name is Trondheim, whereas the episcopal see
carries the o1d name ofNidaros.
4 In Norwegian ‚Sudemyene‘ means ‚The Southem lslands‘, which is the background ofthe
Latin diocessi Sodorensis.
30
Europe in the course of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, down to a minimu.
m of 1 50,000 around 1450, that is, a depopulation rate somewbere between
50 and 65%.5 Compared to what is known about the effects of these plagues in
other part of Europe, Norway was one of the countlies to suffer the most severe
loss of people, taken from an already small population.6 Tbis is an important
piece of information to bear in mind wben comparing the nu.mbers of Nidaros
supplications with those from more central and densely populated provinces
througbout Europe. Above all, one sbould not ju.mp too quickly to the conclusion
that the main or only explanation lies in geographical distance. A combination
ofa scarcely populated area and a location on the very outskirts oftbe orbis
christianae probably explains the matter. For a more definite conclusion, bowever,
a comparison of tbe nurober of supplications from different cburcb provinces
beld up against that of population in tbe same areas would be needed.
Table 1. Number and type ofpetitions from the Norwegian dioceses.7
Sta-
Ber- Nidaros Orkn- Skat- van- Sud er-
Case RCD Hamar & crown eyene1 Oslo Holt ger eyenc Total
Matrim. 0 0 2 1 I 5 0 1 0 19
Diversis
formis 6 2 12 0 12 I 4 0 37
Declaratoriis
I I 3 0 I . 4 0 10
Def.oot. I 2 9 3 8 I 1 28 53
Uberiori 0 0 2 I 0 2 0 3 8
Promotis I I 0 0 I 0 0 0 3
Conf 0 0 6 0 I 1 0 2 1 0
Sent. Gen. I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I
Alt. Port. 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 I
No cate-
.. 􀒁. 0 0 I 0 I 0 0 I 3
Total 1 0 6 35 5 26 lO 9 44 145
Source: ASV, Pemtenzzena Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 1-75.
Tbe cbanges and sometimes lack of consistency to be found in the register
protocols in this period when it comes to categorisation naturally also apply to
the Norwegian material. Tbe simple Table 1 , however, sbows bow the Nidaros
supplications were actually classified at the time wben they were treated.
5 Oie Jergen Benedictow, Plague in the Late Medieva/ Nordic Countries: Epidemiologica/
Studies (Oslo: Midde1alderforlaget, 1992), 104-105, 272-273.
6 Andreas Holmsen, Norges historie: Fra de e/dste Iider ti/ 1660 [History of Norway: from
the oldest times until 1660] (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1977), 333.
1 From the dioceses of Fa:ro and Greenland (Gardar) there are no petitions. All contacts with
the Norse population in Greenland were cut off in the 1420’s, although titular bishops to
Gardar were still appointed later in the fifteenth century.
8 Until l472/1473.
31
The number of Nidaros supplications, however, is by far too low to develop
any sort ofbasis for statistic observations. Still, it is ofinterest to show the
following survey of how the 96 supplications from the Norwegian mainland
dioceses and leeland are spread in actual years and to add a few comments:
1438: 1
1441: 1
1454: 2
1456: 2
1457: 2
1458: 4
1460: 2
I46 1 : 2
1463: 1
1464: I
1465 : 2
1467: 1
Tab1e 2: Nurober of supplications per year
1468: 2
1470: 4
I47 1 : 1
1472: 3
1473: 2
I474: 7
1475: 1
1476: 5
1477: 2
1479: 1
1480: 3
1481 : 1
1484: 3
1486: 1
1487: 1
1488: 3
1489: 1
I49I : 2
1492: 1
1493: 4
1494: 1
1496: 1
1498: 1
1499: 1
I500: 8
1 504: 1
1 51 0 : 2
1 5 1 5 : 2
1 5 16: 1
I 5 17: 2
1 5 1 8 : 1
1 5 1 9 : I
1523: 3
1525: 1
1 5 3 1 : 1
The only year clearly distinguished from the rest is 1 500 with its eight
supplications. This can only be explained by the fact that this year was a Holy
Year with its marked increase in the number of pilgrims to Rome. The tendency
in the Norwegian material corresponds weil on this point with the material from
the neighbouring province ofUppsala, as shown by Kirsi Salonen.9
A peculiar feature requiring some further comments is the Jubilee Y ear
1475 with, surprisingly, only one Nidaros supplication, whereas the preceding
year 1474 had seven supplications and the subsequent year, 1476, five. All
seven cases from 1474, however, date from November and December, that is,
on1y few weeks before the beginning of the Jubi1ee Year on Christmas Day; and
all seven supplications derive from Bergen and the See of Nidaros itself. The
most reasonable explanation is that the supplications were handed in, probably
in one pile, by Archbishop Olav Trondsson hirnself in connection with bis stay
in Rome that autumn. Tagether with the electus to Bergen, Hans Teiste, 10 Olav
went to Rome in the summer or early autumn 1474 with the intention, we may
suppose, of taking part in the celebration of the Jubilee Year. However, Olav
died in Rome on November 25,u and Hans Teiste was ordained bishop in Rome
9 Kirsi Salonen, The Penitentiary a.s a Weil ofGrace in the Late Middle Ages: The E:xamp/e of
the Province of Uppsa/a 1448-1527. Suomalaisen Tiedeakatemian Toimituksia – Annales
Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae 313 (Saarijärvi: Academia Scientiarum Fennica, 2001),
255, 281, 348, 362.
10 Elected by the chapter in Bergen on June 22, 1474, on which occasion Archbishop Olav
was also present.
11 Buried in San Agostino Church.
32
on December 18.12 I see no other reasonable explanation than ascribing the
seven supplications to the archbishop bimself and bis retinue. 01av’s successor,
bis nephew Gaute Ivarsson, received bis arcbiepiscopal ordination on the basis
of papal provision in June 1475. No Penitentiary supplications related to this
event have been found.13
Four of the five registered supplications from 1476 stem from Skälholt.
They were granted almost simultaneously in December and must have been
handed in to the Penitentiary together.
Also, the three supplications from 1523 came to the Penitentiary at the
same time and by one band, namely that ofthe last archbishop of the See ofNidaros,
Olav Engelbrektsson. In two of them the archbishop bimself was the supplicant,
the third was handed in on behalf of Hans Rev, who at that time was a
canon in Nidaros, but two years later entered the bishop’s See ofOslo.
Representation – the tip of the iceberg
One important question when discussing numbers is to ask to what extent
the registered cases form a representative selection of cases of the same sort or
to what extent we see here only the tip of the iceberg. A full clarification of this
point lies, of course, beyond the reach of research, but the perspective has to be
taken into account and should necessitate some moderation and caution when
making conclusions based on the existing material. It will be interesting to make
comparisons with the material from other areas as this is being investigated.
Entering into the actual circumstances around the different Norwegian
supplications one sees several elements wbich one may point out as occasional,
such as possibilities of transport to Rome, the resources of the supplicant, and
the general focus and pressure on the case. A search into other contemporary
sources for similar cases which do not seem to have been taken to the pope
might contribute to better answers.
Taking the case .from Nidaros to Rome
Only very few of the Nidaros texts provide precise information on the
time needed to take a case from Norway and leeland to the papacy. In a
supplication from the year 1525, bowever, we find both the exact date of the
criminal act and the date when the case was recorded as settled in the
12 Diplomatarium Norwegicum (bereafter DN), XVII, n. 683; OlufKolsrud, „Erkebiskop Olav
Throndsson av Nidaros. 1459-1474“ [Archbishop Olav Throndsson of Nidaros], Norvegia
Sacra 1924 (Oslo: St. Olavs Forlaget, 1924), 19-34.
13 The only registered supplication from the Jubilee Year 1475 came from the diocese ofOslo
and was granted on August 2. lt may have been handed in by Archbishop Gaute, but there
is no firm evidence, ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 23, fol. 27lr;
Jergensen and Saletnich, Synder og Pavemakt, 79-80, 147.
33
Penitentiary office.14 The entire course of events – the killing, the local
treatment ofthe case, the drafting of a Ietter, the transport to Rome, the dealings
with the proctor, and the handling ofthe case in to the Penitentiary office – took
place between February 8 and July 4, that is, a time span of a little less than five
months. Considering the distance from Norway to Italy and the means of
transport available, there would have been no reason for the supplicant to
complain. From other cases we know that it could take more time, but the
overall picture shows that the process of taking a case from Scandinavia to the
curia in Rome took something between a few months and two years.
The Penitentiary texts in a Norwegian-Ice/andic setting
It has already been made clear that the collection ofNidaros supplications
is too small for making statistical tables – even though some comparative
glimpses aside to material from other countries might be helpful. When searching
for the historic value ofthe Norwegian texts, thus, the primary focus must be
on their content. On this point the penitentiary supplications are indeed more
valuable and informative than a fust glance might perhaps indicate. In a
Norwegian setting a number ofmore than 150 new texts is a substantial addition
to the already existing material.15
Names
As the Penitentiary texts always give the name(s) ofthe supplicant(s), and
often of other persons as well, the texts provide a basis for drawing some 150
named individuals into the light of research. Some of them are familiar in
advance; a few were well-known persons from the upper classes, but whose
vitae become more fully drawn up with the help of these texts, sometimes on
very crucial points. In the case of lceland, for instance, which is the country of
Europe with probably the most complete survey of named individuals within her
borders at the time, we have found that fourteen16 of the total of fifteen persons
14 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Dtv., vol. 73, fol. 1135r-1 136r. Jergensen and
Saletnich, Synder og Pavemakt, 99-100, 165-166.
15 AU hitherto known medieval texts – or better: all medieval sources in the country and
abroad containing some piece of information about Norway – have been collected over the
last 150 years in the Diplomatarium Norvegicum I-XXII (Christiania and Oslo, 1849-
1990). For some years now, these texts have been available on a full-text database – in their
original Latin or Old Norse language – with search possibilities on words either in the text
itself, on the regests, date, or volumes.
16 In addition to the thirteen persons in Jergensen and Saletnich, Synder og Pavemakt, we
have now, on the advice of Stefän Karlsson, Reykjavik, also identified dominum Simonem
mentioned in our entry n. 94 as Sveinn Petursson, bishop ofSkalholt, 1466-1476.
34
mentioned in the ten supplications from Skälholt are already listed in islenzkar
&viskrar. 11
As for the individuals from the Norwegian mainland, the vast majority
seem to step out of the shadows of hist01y for the fi.rst time in these texts. To
identity persans on the basis of the latinised, often very distorted, representations
of their original Norwegian names in the penitentiary protocols is not an
easy task.18 Searches on names in the data base of the Diplomatarium Norvegicum
combined with some creative imagination on how names could be speit will
probably give at least some positive results.
Kinship andfami/y relations
Although the registrations under the de matrimonialibus cases are
generally rather short, their value is quite significant on a number ofpoints. First
of all, some of these texts add substantial information on persans about whom
we possess some knowledge in advance, but whose marriage and family
relations have not yet been fully clarified. An example of such useful
information is given in a supplication from 1484, about the noble member ofthe
Norwegian national council, Arild Kane, and bis marriage to lngjerd
Erlendsdotter, the widow of Olav Guttormson, also a member of the same
counci1.19
Secondly, these texts offer some indications about the matrimonial customs
of the second to fourth degree of consanguinitas and affinitas as actually
practised in the historical Norwegian setting. An interesting difference between
Norway and leeland becomes discemable with the help of this material. In leeland,
all these supplications came from people who were already aware of their
– consumed or not yet consumed – forbidden relations. In Norway, the majority
of the petitioners stated that they were not. As seen tagether with other historic
material, this underpins the general idea of leeland as an extremely transparent
society compared to Norway.
17 islenzkar JEvisknir: fra landnamstimum til arloka 1940 [lcelanders‘ life stories. From the
land-taking time until the end of 1940], I-IV, ed. Päll Eggert Ölason (Reykjavik: islenzka
18 B6kmenntafelag, 1948-1976).
To exemplify this, I will mention that in the papal docu.ments from the time we have found
the name of Stavanger, which after all was a oame of a diocese, speit in more than 20
different ways: Stavuangre, Stawange, Stawarge, Stawagre, Stawage, Stawrangar,
Stavantze, Staffuagar, Stawanger, Stadhangre, Staffi.tangre, Stawangher, Staunagle,
Slanangre, Stalbangie, Stabbangrie, Stauangre, Stauangrie, Stauagre, Stangrane, Stavanger.
Torstein Jsrgensen and Gastone Saletoich, Letters to the Pope; Norwegian Relations to the
Holy See in the Late Midd/e Ages (Stavanger: Misjonslwgskolens Forlaget, 1999), 45, note
30.
19 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et D i v., vol. 34, fol. 18r; Jsrgensen and Saletnicb,
Synder og Pavemakt, 80, 148.
35
Colourful glimpses into actual ep i sodes oflife
When looking at the contents of the penitentiary supplications there is no
doubt that the de declaratoriis texts are the most informative and interesting.
These texts, tagether with some cases under the de diversis formis group, are
generally long, up to three folios, with a Ionger narrative section as their most
substantial part. Here, the Norwegian material seems, not surprisingly, to be
fully in line with that from other countries, as the standards for these texts were
set in Rome and not in the local communities. Even with the low number of such
Norwegian texts it is quite easy to make overviews and to harvest from the
different points of their contents.
The particular format of this group of supplications renders, with its narrative
part, short, but often quite detailed and colourful glimpses into life episodes
ofthe persans involved. Ifnot unique, such actual descriptions ofthe acts
and doings of identifiable persons in something between daily life and exceptional
situations are quite rare amongst the already existing Norwegian texts
from that period. The texts provide short zoomed-in snapshots of one, two or a
few more persans in all the texts with a perpetrator and a victim as the main figures
and with a clergyman in both of the roles or in only the first. These persons
jump out of darkness into the light of history, stay there for a little while, and
then disappear again. But during this little while we see them the picture can be
quite sharp. Above all, one receives a description of the different aspects of the
actual event causing the address to the Holy See, the rise and increase of a conflict
ending up in violence or killing. The texts also add valuable pieces of information
to our knowledge about weapons, tools, clothing, means of transport,
housing, food, and social customs. In a few cases, the Latin texts even enable us
to recognise remnants ofwords from the Norwegian language ofthe time.
An example from the text material – the case of Sirnon Andreasson
Among the Ionger narrative texts of the kind mentioned above, the
following supplication from Stavanger cleric Sirnon Andreasson makes a good
example. As an illustration ofthe richness ofthese texts I will quote this petition
in extenso and in English.
First of all, the narrative of the chain of dramatic incidents is an exciting
story in itself. Along the way, the text gives valuable small notes on pattems of
social gatherings, different kinds of weapons, indirect indications of heavy
drinking, clothing, and reasons for disputes combined with prestige and status,
as weil as references to Civil Law. In good accordance with the standards ofthese
texts, the document also offers a detailed account of a priest who became involved
in unintentional murder. The unfortunate priest’s name was Sirnon Andreasson
(Simon Andree), and the parish in which he served was Spangereid (Spangerydk)
36
near Lindesnes, at the very southern point ofNorway?0 In addition to the name of
the petitioner the document mentions three other names: that ofthe victim, Nikolas
Eyvindsson (Nicolaus Ewind1); that of the bost, Sigvart Beruldsson (Siwardus
Beruld1), at wbose bouse Sirnon and Nikolas were guests at a banquet, and finally
the first name of one ofthe witnesses, Karl (Karolingus), a friend ofthe priest’s.
We are also weil informed about the cause ofthe conflict. The object ofthe
strife is described as dealings about a piece of land that Nikolas Eyvindsson
claimed to bave bad the right to rent and whicb the priest had rented out to someone
else in the meanwhile. The name ofthe farm is mentioned as Dipla (diipla), a
name whicb is also known from other Norwegian sources. The property was obviously
churcb land and not the priest’s private property. The bisbop, not a magistrate,
is referred to as the one wbo could have tried the mortgage deeds Nikolas
claims to bave had on the property.
The supplication text also gives further details about some of the weapons
in use at the time: the lance, dagger, and axe, all evidently easily at band. The fact
that people in their daily life carried different sorts ofweapons for the sake oftheir
safety confirms wbat we know from other sources, that the last decades of the fifteenth
century were insecure times.21
An interesting connection can be seen between the event of this supplication
and a conflict between the clergy and common people that is known to have taken
place in the very same area.22 In 1484, peasants in the district gathered for a meeting
at whicb they wrote a Ietter of protest to the bisbop in Stavanger complaining
that the representatives of the Churcb in the area bad seized properties,23 and re­
questing that the old order of ownership be re–establisbed. The judicial basis ofthe
complaint was the book of land registers, the so-called jordebok, drawn up by a
former bisbop of Stavanger.24 The case also included other grievances, and it was
not settled until a meeting in Bergen on July 31, 1486, wben archbishop Gaute de-
20 Spangereid is referred to in several Norwegian documents from the Late Middle Ages; see
DNXV, n. 101.
21 The second half of the fifteenth century was cbaracterised by a weak royal power during the
reigns of Christian I (1450-1481) and Hans (1483-1513); by the dominance of Hanseatic
merchants, who on several occasions proved that they did not recoil from using force when
their interests were at stake; by piracy along the coasts; and finally by attempts at revolt in dif22
ferent places.
The following documents show how disputes about land were resolved by civil magistrates in
the same area and at the same time as in the case of the conflict between Sirnon and Nikolas:
DNXVDI,n. 94;DNVI,n. 615;DNfX,n. 377;DNXXI,n. 657.
23 From DNXV, n. 101, ofSeptember 8, 1476, we know that the name ofthe ecclesiatical „ombudsman“
ofthe Spangereid church (Spongareidh kyrkio) and adjacent properlies was Thore
Aslaksson, and that he had held this office for the preceding three years. The document confirms
that the bishop had received the accounts from the church properlies in Spangereid from
hirn. Thus, there is a good possibility that Nikolas Eyvindsson’s tenant agreement during the
time ofThore Aslaksson was in order, and that the priest, Sirnon Andreasson, had changed this
to Nikolas‘ disfavour. See also DN XV, n. 110, of August 3, 1487, about the „ombudsman“
for church properlies in Bjelland
24 Bisbop Botolf(1355-1380).
37
cided in favour of the requests of the peasants.25 It is highly possible that Sirnon
Andreasson and his COunterpart, Nikolas Eyvindsson, were also active participants
in this conflict. The fact that it also included a case of murder indicates how strong
this strife must have been. Since the date of the Penitentiary supplication is December
12, 1487, the killing ofNikolas Eyvindsson must have taken place around
the time of the meeting in Bergen the year before.
Sirnon Andreasson, priest of the parish church of Spangerydk in the
diocese of Stavanger, says that he was once a guest at the hause or
inn of Sigvart Beruldsson, a layman from the same diocese. One day
after lunch-hour, the late Nikolas Eyvindsson, a layman from the
same diocese, told the petitioner, whom he had come upon in the sitting-
room: „The Lord have mercy with you, who have rented out the
property“ – called diipla in the native tongue – „to someone else! “
He c/aimed that according to mortgage deeds in his possession, the
land had to be rented to him. The petitioner told Nicolas to produce
the Ietter, and once the Ietter had been examined by the bishop he
would render him what was rightfolly due. Nikolas, however, maintained
that the afaf ir lay within the petitioner’s own discretion and
that he could, if he so wished, implement the said transfer even without
the bishop ’s permission. In turn the petitioner responded that this
was not the case. After this dispule between the petitioner and Nikolas,
Nikolas lefi the sitting room of the house, mounted his horse in
the courtyard and rode away.
A little later the petitioner likewi se took his horse intending to
ride home tagether with Kar/, a layman of the same diocese. Having
travelled for a while from the aforementioned inn, the said Nikolas,
on foot and in arms, silently stepped out of the woods somewhere
near the road along which the petitioner and his friend Kar/ were
coming, intent, as it seemed, on doing harm to the petitioner. He
called on Kar/ to stay away saying that he had to speak with the
priest, i.e. the petitioner. On Karl’s admonition he calmed downfor a
moment, but the former exchange of words flared up again until
Nikolas wielded the lance he he/d in his hand and said to the petitioner:
„A while ago you trusted in the bishop, now Iook at the
weapon in my hands in which I trust! “ Taken by fear the petitioner
retumed to the inn he had just lefi where Nikolas followed him unnoticed
and attacked him with these words: „Mary curse you, devil’s
priest! “ The petitioner, making the sign of the cross, answered: „The
Lord have mercy with you!“ Nikolas repeated his curse another time:
„The devil have mercy with you in hell!“ and again the petitioner answered:
„The Lord bless you! “ whereupon Nikolas answered: „The
devil bless you! “ But the petitioner exclaimed: „The /aws proteer me
25 DN I, n. 951.
38
against you!“ They continued to argue back and forth until Nikolas
brandished a lance in his le.ft and a dagger in his right hand and
would have stabbed the petitioner if he had not been impeded from
doing so by the people surrounding them. As Nikolas continued to go
a.fter the petitioner in a hostile manner the petitioner averted violence
by violence and hit Nilcolas with an axe which by chance was lying on
the ground and wounded him on his upper right forearm and in the
armpit of the same hand, holding the dagger just rasi ed to stab him.
Nikolas died from this wo und about three wee.b later.
A lthough the petitioner was not guilty of this death other than
in the aforementioned manner, but regrets it deeply, etc., and wishes
to serve the Lord in the mentioned vocation, some people, however,
etc., assert that he had thus committed the crime of homicide and become
irregular; to silence the voices ofthese detractors the petitioner
now asks for a declaration stating that he, when the mentioned incidents
Iook place, neither committed the crime of homicide nor incurred
any stain of irregularity, and unhindered by the mentioned incidents,
can serve, etc.
Granted as below, Jul., bishop of Bertinoro, Regent. The Ietter
is to be examined by the bishop of Nocera, Jul. The case is to be
committed to the ordinary who, provided that the necessary inquiries
prove that the petitioner wounded Nikolas in defending hirnselff rom
mortal danger, sha/1 declare as has been requested Rome, at Saint
Peter ’s, 12 December 1487.26
lf we cast a glance at the concluding phrases of the supplication, the imprint of a
canon law scholar is clearly visible. Most likely we see here the pen stroke of
one of the official Apostolle proctors in Rome. These proctors were trained to
know which buttons to press in order to make the case as favourable for the supplicant
as possible. The supplication text in this section consists largely of fixed
formulas. In a case like the one of Simon, the petitioner could plead guilty or not
guilty. When it comes to Simon, he chose, probably on the advice ofthe proctor,
to plead not guilty. His request, therefore, was for a papal declaration to confirm
his innocence, and to be held up against accusations of guilt stated by people
normally referred to as simple and ignorant. Following the normal procedure in
these cases, Simon’s petition was committed to be tried by Simon’s ordinary,
that is, his local bishop. By granting grace on the condition that the local ordinary
confirmed the facts of the case, the papacy, at least to some extent, bad a
safeguard against too-biased resolutions based solely on the subjective versions
of the petitioners. The ordinary who received Simon’s case was Eiliv Jonsson,
bishop of Stavanger 1481-1512. In this case, there is an irony in it, as Eiliv was
one of the Counterparts of the peasants mentioned above. One may probably con-
26
ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 37, fol. 228r-v. For the original Latin
version see Jsrgensen and Saletnich. Synder og Pavemakt, 161-162.
39
clude that bis evaluation of Sirnon Andreasson’s role in the killing of Nikolas
Eyvindsson was not stricter than necessary.
The concluding formulas of the supplication state that the petition was
signed by the then-Regens, Julianus, bishop ofBertinoro.27 In accordance with the
normal procedure for such cases it was left to the Auditol8 for judicial examination.
Canon law and indigenous judicial systems
No systematic studies exist of the status of canon law and other papal
regulations in their relations to the different areas of national law codes and
practices in the cases ofNorway and Iceland. For the actual period, one knows
that the civil judicial system was indeed in operation. The Diplomatarium
Norvegicum contains case after case treated by tribunals at different Ievels, such
as disputes about wills and inheritance, rights to land, farming, fishing, etc., as
weil as different kinds of criminal cases.
When it comes to ecclesiastical law and the so-called reserved cases many
circumstances of a political and practical nature must be taken into account
when trying to establish a survey of the actual state of affairs. Our general impression
is, however, that the general right of the clergy to privilegium fori was
in power. But in Norway, as elsewhere, one has to consider that the force of
muscles and arms in many cases was more decisive than the power of tribunal
decisions. An interesting event in the case of Norway at the time was the National
Council Convent in Oslo in 1478, with King Christian I and all the Norwegian
bishops present.29 At this meeting the council made an attempt to draw a
demarcation line between the jurisdiction of king and Church, especially conceming
marriage, incest, adultery and oaths/perjury. According to the council,
cases of incest in the third and fourth degrees, as well as fomication and relations
with concubines, were irrelevant to the king and came under the Church.
Adultery, or as it is phrased „breaking into another man’s wedlock“, and bigamy
were to be compensated, half to the king and half to the Church. More serious
cases of incest in the first and second degrees and fomication against nature
should result in the perpetrators being declared outlaws, their estate being shared
half and half between Church and king, with the king deciding whether the perpetrator
should live or not. 30
27 Julianus de Matteis de Va/terra, O.F.M.
28 Johannes de Ceretanis, bishop ofNocera, 1476-1492.
29 Perhaps the most important event in Norwegian medieval history on specifying the jurisdiction
of the king/state versus the Church was the so-called composicio (in Norwegian
srettargjerd) of August 19, 1277.
30 Norges Gamle Love, 2.r., ll, n. 166, Lars Hamre, „Erkebispedemmet i Unionstiden“ [The
Archbishopric in the times of the Union], in: Andreas Holmsen and Jarle Simensen, ed.,
Norges nedgang-senmiddelalderen (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1979, 2nd ed.), 196-197.
40
An interesting case from the Norwegian supplications in which we see an
overlapping of canon and civil law is the petition from the Stavanger man, Svein
Igulsson, or Sweno Y geldi, as he is called in the penitentiary protocols. According
to the registered petition, Svein bad made hirnself guilty of repeated severe
incest by having intercourse with his own daughter. Because of this, the
text teils that he bad been imprisoned for some period, obviously on the basis of
verdicts from the civil tribunal. His supplication to the Penitentiary contains a
petition for absolution for incest and adultery, for a dispensation to resume bis
matrimonial life with his wife, and to yield and claim the normal matrimonial
duties. His argument is that he considers bimself too young to continue life
without these goods.31
Concluding remarks
I have given an overview of the newly discovered penitentiary supplications
from the Norwegian cburch province of Nidaros. I have shown that
from its location in the utmost periphery on the northwestem edges of Western
Christendom, the peoples of Norway, leeland and the North Sea Islands were
indeed part of the common late medieval theological, judicial and organisational
setting of the Roman Catholic Cburch. The nurober of registered supplications
from Nidaros is very small compared to the numbers from other provinces, but
they do provide a new opening to increase knowledge about the lives of a
nurober of individuals in this section of the partes in the fifteenth and early
sixteenth centuries and their communication with the Holy See. Together with
the penitentiary supplications from other provinces which are currently under
registration, these texts represent a most valuable basis for new insigbts into a
nurober of hitherto hidden elements of European history in the decades Ieading
up to the great schism ofWestern Christendom.
31 ASV, Penitenzieria Ap., Reg. Matrim. et Div., vol. 24, fol. 108v; Jmgensen and Saletnich,
Synder og Pavemalct, 93, 159.
41
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