Reverendissime in Christo Pater et Domine, Domine et Amice carissime ac plurimum observande.
Post ⌊⌋ meas satis prolixas, quas, utcumque fessus adhuc ex itinere male pinxi, accepi a meo ⌊⌋ et ⌊⌋ a nuntio Dominationis Vestrae Reverendissimae, qui 1537-03-09⌊heri1537-03-09⌋ applicuit,
ex quibus mentem Dominationis Vestrae Reverendissimae, quemadmodum mihi visum est, plane intellexi. Quod in primis scribit se non parum
cf. Adagia 1526 No. 2930 Perplexus ⌊perplexamcf. Adagia 1526 No. 2930 Perplexus ⌋
moleste ferre interpretationem de indigenis nostris ⌊Cracoviae⌋ factam[1], iure quidem id facit Dominatio vestra Reverendissima, nollem tamen, ut hoc ipsum gravius, quam oportet, in animum admitteret, quandoquidem communi ea in re habito consilio, quid responderi expediet et oporteat, Deo intellectum praestantes inveniemus.
In ⌊⌋ quod scribit Dominatio Vestra Reverendissima consultius fore, ut ⌊conventus futurus⌋ propter temporis angusti intercapedinem in ⌊Marienburgo⌋ loco solito relinquatur[2], minime reluctarer, si Dominatio Vestra Reverendissima certo posset adesse, cuius praesentia tum maximopere ⌊respublica nostra⌋ opus habitura est. Si vero res, ut nuper in ⌊Elbingo⌋, non succederet, nollem ego eam molem, quae nobis incumbit, in ⌊Marienburgo⌋ solus ferre – solus, inquam, sine Dominatione Vestra Reverendissima, cum multa eaque ardua in rebus nostris publicis se offerent. Neque opinor dominos Polonos ad nos venturos[3] ⌊Thoroniam⌋ praetergressuros. Quicquid ea in re ⌊maiestas regia⌋ statuerit, ferendum est.
De litteris a ⌊maiestate regia⌋ praemittendis, etiam si uno die, priusquam ⌊conventus⌋ celebretur, nobilitati et civibus reddantur, satisfactum putabo, cum prius sciant tempus ⌊futuri conventus⌋ et causas a maiestat[ibus] regiis utrisque ⌊Cracoviae⌋ designatas. Ceterum, ut locus sciatur, necessarium esse arbitror. Ego me velim et a tempore et loco esse liberum, cum in nullum magis quam in me unum , si sine Dominatione Vestra Reverendissima praesum, omne odium et malorum hominum iniqua calumnia conici soleat. Unde et me velim aegritudine quapiam praepediri, ut sine iis turbis quoquomodo, quod vitae reliquum est mihi, transigere liceret, utpote non admodum vitae, cuius me saepe cepit taedium, avido etc.
A domino ⌊Ioanne Czimmerman⌋ nullas accepi, quae si oblatae tempus, quo adiri debeam, a me postulaverint, non gravate praestabo. In articulis sic me geram, ut Dominatio Vestra Reverendissima consuluit atque voluit.[4]
⌊⌋ a me Dominatio Vestra Reverendissima exemplum responsi nobilitati[5] a ⌊maiestate regia⌋ dati. Quod ex scripto non fuit prolatum, sed ⌊reverendissimus dominus Plocensis⌋ ex quibusdam annotatiunculis in margine nostrae consultationis[6], cuius Dominationi Vestrae Reverendissimae misi copiam, additis verbo dumtaxat a ⌊maiestate regia⌋ respondit, neque usu in aula regia receptum est, ut istiusmodi responsa scripto firmentur. Quae Dominationi Vestrae Reverendissimae scripsi ita, ut omnes audivimus, sic ea in notitiam Dominationis Vestrae Reverendissimae deduxi. Ea, quae ⌊magnificus dominus palatinus Marienburgensis⌋[7] Dominationi Vestrae Reverendissimae misit, ad eum a domino ⌊Ioanne a Werden⌋ ex nostra omnino mente, ut ad Dominationem Vestram Reverendissimam perferrentur, fuerunt missa.
De ⌊concilio⌋ nihil est quod boni sperare debeam. Fuit, ut prius scripsi,
⌊Cracoviae⌋ ⌊nuntius quidam ⌊pontificis⌋⌋[8], qui ad minimum tribus mensibus, priusquam certo concilium ⌊Mantuae⌋[9] constitui debuit, pollicitus est ⌊pontificem⌋ id ⌊Regni⌋ praelatis denuntiaturum. Quod hucusque neque successit, neque quando
succedere debeat, sciri potest stantibus his inter ⌊caesarem⌋ et ⌊Gallum⌋ bellis, qui in Christianos omnem ⌊Turcarum⌋ vim , cuius ad praesens non parva pars esse in ⌊Hungaria⌋ fertur, maxime autem in ⌊Germaniam⌋ inducere conatur.
Equos Reverendissimae Dominationis Vestrae ⌊hinc⌋ integros ad Dominationem Vestram Reverendissimam mitto cum summa, qua possum, gratiarum actione, atque utinam istiusmodi profectio numquam mihi deinceps sit necessaria, a qua, quantum possum, cum damno factus cautior, me continebo in posterum. Hoc unum laudis a nostris nobilibus obtinui, quod dicor impensis ⌊Gdanensium⌋ hanc totam profectionem, in qua supra trium mensium spatium absumpsi et in qua praeter decem equites (erant enim plures) quadraginta equos alui, transegisse. Nihilominus tamen nulli quam Dominationi Vestrae Reverendissimae debeo, cui immensas ago gratias, quod adhuc pacientiam mecum habeat . Si eam pecuniam a fratre meo[10] Dominatio Vestra Reverendissima accepisset, iam illam ⌊Fuggaris⌋, quibus ea satisfeci, deberem, neque illos frustrarer, ... licet per duos annos sese subsequentes graves impensas fecerim. Nihilo secius tamen, modo domi manere liceret, nihil mihi in gratia Dei deesset vel deesse posset. Dominus providebit etc.
Sigillum maius datum est feria sexta ante Invocavit[12] ⌊reverendissimo domino Plocensi⌋, minus ⌊domino Iacob castellano Gostinensi⌋[13]. Copiam litterarum ratione iuramenti, quas ⌊dominus palatinus Pomeraniae⌋ attulit, his adiunctas mitto. Quod reliquum est, me paterno Dominationis Vestrae Reverendissimae amori ex corde commendo Deumque precor, ut illam quam
diutissime sospitet prosperetque in omnibus.
⌊Lubaviae⌋, X Martii MDXXXVII
Postscript:
Reverendissime mi Domine. In scheda prioribus litteris, quas nuper nuntius meus attulit, inclusa scribit me lamentari et in cunctis meis litteris conqueri de impensis et molestia. Quae lamenta, si imprudens emisi, et querelae ne Dominationis Vestrae Reverendissimae animum offendant, oro. Non parum in rebus duris ferre solet leniminis, ubi tuto in sinus amici id, quod grave et onerosum est, effundere licet, etiam si ab amico nil speretur levaminis. Quantum
patriae debeam, non me praeterit, ad cuius commodum et honorem si quas feci graviores, quam forte oportebat, expensas, non ducor paenitudine, verum nostratium ingratitudine moveor, quod id honoris mihi non tribuant, quod de meis impenderim, sed, quasi ab aliis stipendio conductus, tam splendide et honeste cum principibus viris in aula regia convixerim. Neque me secus atque
cf. Ov. Tr. 3. (7) 42 Irus et est subito, qui modo Croesus erat; Prop. 3. 5. 17 Lydus Dulichio non distat Croesus ab Iro; Mart. 5. 39. 8-9 Croeso divitior licet fuissem, / Iro pauperior forem; Adagia 1526 No. 574, 576 ⌊⌊⌋ esse arbitrorcf. Ov. Tr. 3. (7) 42 Irus et est subito, qui modo Croesus erat; Prop. 3. 5. 17 Lydus Dulichio non distat Croesus ab Iro; Mart. 5. 39. 8-9 Croeso divitior licet fuissem, / Iro pauperior forem; Adagia 1526 No. 574, 576 ⌋, non excedens, quod ioco mihi Dominatio Vestra Reverendissima scripsit pro paroemia “vas du kanst, dos thu”[14], hunc modum hucusque in magnis rebus et expensis satis longo tempore versatus in debito servavi tenore servaturusque, porro pro paterna admonitione gratias habeo immensas, illamque et consilium Dominationis Vestrae Reverendissimae secutus sum in omnibus. Cui me iterum iterumque commendo.
[1 ] The “principle of indigenousness” (i.e. native citizenship of a given land) ensured exclusive rights to hold offices and posts in Royal Prussia for its residents. The meaning of the concept of indigenousness was the subject of a long-lasting dispute between the Prussian gentry, which aimed for systemic unification with the Crown, and the Prussian Council, which represented the interests of great landowners and wealthy burghers. The key issue in the dispute was the possibility of acquiring citizenship by settling in Prussia. This conflict, fueled by the Polish gentry, which strove to obtain starosties within Royal Prussia, was one of the topics of the charges against the Prussian Council presented to the king at the 1536/37 Diet by the Prussian gentry’s legation. The Royal Prussian gentry’s legation to the 1536/37 Diet included: Chełmno district judge ⌊Jerzy Plemięcki⌋ and aldermen ⌊Fabian Wolski⌋ and ⌊Maciej Mgowski⌋ (cf. e.g. cf. MAŁŁEK 1976 p. 131 ⌊Małłek, 1976, p. 131cf. MAŁŁEK 1976 p. 131 ⌋). The indigenousness issue was then discussed at the springtime Prussian assembly in 1537, where the interpretation of the concept was developed in accordance with the councilors’ views, and sent to the king(cf. cf. Prusy Królewskie p. 52-65 ⌊Prusy, p. 52-65cf. Prusy Królewskie p. 52-65 ⌋)
[2 ] During the Diet in Cracow, Jan Chojeński proposed that the springtime Prussian assembly be held not in Malbork, as planned, but in Toruń, for the convenience of the royal commissioners who were to take part in the assembly (cf. also ⌊⌋)
[3 ] The demand that royal commissioners take part in the Prussian springtime assembly in 1537, to help resolve disputes, was contained both in the gravamina submitted at the 1536/37 Diet and in the opinion about them issued by the Prussian Council. The commissioners were ⌊Łukasz Górka⌋, ⌊Janusz Latalski⌋ and Łęczyca castellan ⌊Piotr Służewski⌋ (cf. cf. LENGNICH doc. No. 76, p. 193-198 ⌊Lengnich, doc. No. 76, p. 193-198cf. LENGNICH doc. No. 76, p. 193-198 ⌋)
(see also ⌊⌋, ⌊⌋, ⌊⌋, ⌊⌋
[4 ] From the mid-15th century the
Warmia Chapter presented every bishop elect with election capitulations (the articuli iurati) for him to sign. These obligated the bishop to defend the rights and privileges of the Church in Warmia and to recognize that the Chapter and the bishop were partners in managing the diocese. The capitulations also concerned more detailed issues of finances and jurisdiction. (cf. cf. BORAWSKA 1984 p. 75, 76, 209 ⌊Borawska, 1984, p. 75, 76, 209cf. BORAWSKA 1984 p. 75, 76, 209 ⌋ (also further references there), and also Articuli iurati Episcopi Ioannis Dantisci (copy from the 16th/17th century AAWO, Dok.Kap.A4/36))
[5 ] The Royal Prussian gentry’s legation to the 1536/37 Diet included: Chełmno district judge ⌊Jerzy Plemięcki⌋ and aldermen ⌊Fabian Wolski⌋ and ⌊Maciej Mgowski⌋ (cf. e.g. cf. MAŁŁEK 1976 p. 131 ⌊Małłek, 1976, p. 131cf. MAŁŁEK 1976 p. 131 ⌋). The Prussian gentry’s legation presented the king with gravamina containing about 20 objections, mainly against the Prussian Council and against the domination of the great cities (especially Gdańsk) over the region. The gravamina concerned economic matters (taxes, commerce, customs duty, measures and weights, minting of coins),legal issues (court procedure, court fine amounts, interpretation of the law on indigenousness, codification of Chełmno law, attacks by noblemen from neighboring voivodeships, accusations against Johann von Werden), administrative matters (the procedure of convoking general and particular assemblies, marking of territorial borders in Prussia), and defense (vetting) (print: cf. LENGNICH No. 73, p. 173-183 ⌊Lengnich, doc. No. 73, p. 173-183cf. LENGNICH No. 73, p. 173-183 ⌋)
[6 ] For more about the written opinion of the Prussian Council legation on the gravamina, presented to the king - see ⌊⌋
[7 ] Georg von Baysen was to be in the Prussian Council’s legation to the 1536/37 Diet, but did not go because of illness (cf.cf. MAŁŁEK 1976 p. 134 ⌊ Małłek, 1976, p. 134cf. MAŁŁEK 1976 p. 134 ⌋)
[8 ] Pamphilus de Strassoldo as the papal nuntio was present at the Cracow Diet from November 18 to ca. December 15, 1536. One of his main tasks was to give the bishops the papal bullae and brevia convening a General Church Council (see also ⌊⌋)
[9 ] Just as Dantiscus expected, the General Council called by Pope Paul III in 1536 in Mantua and in 1537 inVicenza did not take place due to the political situation. The Council was ultimately held in 1545 (the Council of Trent)
[10 ] One of Dantiscus’ brothers – ⌊Bernard⌋ or ⌊Georg von Höfen⌋
[12 ] feria sexta ante Invocavit – February 16, 1537
[13 ] In fact, Paweł Wolski was appointed Vice-Chancellor; he was the Gostynin starosta and Sochaczew castellan; the name Iacob probably found its way into the text by mistake; acc. to printed lists of officials based on entriesin the books of the Crown Register, Wolski was nominated for the post of Vice-Chancellor on January 3, 1537, and not, as Dantiscus states, February 16 (cf. cf. Urzędnicy 10 No. 635 ⌊UrzCentrPol No.635cf. Urzędnicy 10 No. 635 ⌋)
[14 ] vas du kanst, dos thu – Old German: Was du kannst, das tu, (Eng.: Do what you can)