Letter #2427
Ioannes DANTISCUS to [Sigmund von HERBERSTEIN]Braunsberg (Braniewo), 1541-05-26
English register:
Dantiscus received Herberstein’s letter from Vienna, dated March 22, on May 10, [1541] in Marienburg (Malbork). He informs him that he wrote to him twice (during Herberstein’s stay in Vilnius in 1540 and in January 1541), and explains why these letters did not reach the addressee.
Through a messenger of Prussian duke Albrecht [von Hohenzollern], who is going to Regensburg, Dantiscus has sent a letter to Cornelis De Schepper with similar explanations. He points out that recently letters have been disappearing suspiciously.
He sends the news: the King of Sweden [Gustaw I Vasa], has armed a great fleet. Denmark is in a state of war again, because the truce with Burgundy has just expired. Duke Albrecht is watching to make sure there is no harm to him in this, and he also fears an alliance between Sweden and the Livonian Order. England, Scotland and France are keeping their fleets in readiness. In Royal Prussia, especially in larger towns, the fire of heresy is spreading. Dantiscus has hope in God for peace and understanding on matters of religion, but also thinks the example should come from the top [from Pope Paul III].
He treats Herberstein’s remark that the present [Hungarian] affairs would need the presence and experience of Dantiscus, as a friendly compliment and not an impartial opinion. He feels helpless in the face of the problems of the new times, and can only help by praying. He asks Herberstein to commend him to King Ferdinand I’s attention and asks for news from Regensburg.
Manuscript sources:
Prints:
| ||||||
Text & apparatus & commentaryPlain textText & commentaryText & apparatus
Magnifice et Spectabilis Domine, amice carissime ac honorande. Salutem Magnificentiae Vestrae et omnia precor faustissima.
Accepi
Nescio quo fato litterae meae, quod et de iis subvereor, ad Magnificentiam Vestram, ad quam non nisi sincero scribuntur animo, non
attingunt. Scripseram, cum novissime Magnificentia Vestra Vilnae ageret[7] cum generoso domino
cf.
Pro novis, quae scripsit, Magnificentiae Vestrae magnas habeo gratias, referrem quidem, si quid eiusmodi apud nos haberetur. Ne tamen novarum rerum omnino has legat vacuas, quae ad nos mari perlata sunt, sic in compendio feruntur.
Quod Magnificentia Vestra annotavit, ad negotia, quae modo tractantur[17], auctoritatem meam desiderari, fit magis amico quam iusto de me iudicio, nihil ego eiusmodi in me agnosco, quod ad haec tempora commodum esse possit. Et quantum coniicere possum
ea, quae hoc nostro saeculo fiunt, non humanis viribus seu consiliis dirigi componive concessum esse, sed in solius Dei consistere potentia[18]. Proinde si quid a me vel me longe praestantioribus praestandum sit, id non nisi lacrimis et intimis
orationibus, ut omnia in melius convertantur, a Domino Deo obtinendum. Qui Magnificentiam Vestram, quam, quemadmodum in
Datae
Magnificentiae Vestrae additissimus
Postscript:
Non velit Magnificentia Vestra, pro veteri inter nos benevolentiae coniunctione, gravari ad me de iis, quae in
[1 ] In Cracow, Morstein was to give a fascicule of letters to Georg Hegel, the Fuggers’ factor in Cracow (see IDL 2394: BCz, 245, p. 233, the left margin)
[2 ] We know only five letters of Dantiscus’ from ca. January 10, 1541: 1) to Cornelis De Schepper (see footnote 5); 2) to Jost Ludwig Decius (office copy, BCz, 245, p. 237, in the middle of the page); 3) to Maximiliaan van Egmond-Buren (rough copy in Dantiscus’ hand, BCz, 245, p. 237-238); 4) to an unidentified clergyman, probably one of the canons of Warmia (office copy,BCz, 245, p. 237, at the top; cf. footnote 28!!!); 5) to Sigismund Herberstein (lost)
[3 ] Jost Ludwig Decius described the matter of Dantiscus’ parcel of January 10 being lost, and Herberstein’s perplexity stemming from not knowing what had happened to De Schepper’s letter to Dantiscus of August 18, 1540 (see CEID 1.1 letter No. 31, footnote 4), in a letter to Dantiscus dated June 16, 1541: De litteris, quae sic interciderant Ioannis Mornstein negligentia, non parum sollicitus fuit et dominus olim Nipczytz,qui si vixisset non nihil habuisset difficultatis, mihi vero interierunt apochae pecuniariae et litterae aliae necessariae. Non tamen videtur hic vel studium vel quaevis malevolentia intervenisse alia, etenim vir omnino bonus est. Graviter tulit dominus Sigismundus hactenus sibi non responsurus, omnino persuasus cum suas tum domini Cornelii litteras interceptas, abinde sibi dominum Cornelium alienatum, scribens quod parum recte rem curasset. Sed nunc redibunt in gratiam omnes et ego liberabor a negligentiae nota. Scio et ego quorundam in piscandis epistulis studia et vere etiam atque etiam videndum est, quem quis ad consilia admittat, non quod sibi tam a vero metuendum sit, quam cavendum, ne quid falsi narretur (cf.
[4 ] A reference to the court of Sigismund I and Bona Sforza, who resided in Vilnius from May 1540 to May 1542 (cf. GĄSIOROWSKI 1973 p. 267 ⌊Gąsiorowski, p. 267cf. GĄSIOROWSKI 1973 p. 267 ⌋)
[5 ] Most likely a reference to the unrest linked to the Reformation
[6 ] Dantiscus offered a similar opinion with regard to the lost letters that he had sent from Heilsberg (Lidzbark Warmiński) on January 10, 1541 (cf. footnote 12) in his letter to Cornelis DeSchepper of March 4, 1541: Omnia apud nos, quod prius non fuit, fiunt suspecta. Brevi, quomodo res acta sit, experiemur. Haec Te latere nolui, ut scias ad Te et alias omnes esse duplicatas, quas non misissem, nisi illarum a me in novissimis facta fuisset mentio, ne, amici mei, putaretis me confingere, quod
semper, ut nosti, a me fuit alienissimum (rough copy in Dantiscus’ hand, cf.
[7 ] Herberstein left Vienna on September 1, 1540 arriving in Cracow on September 7, to leave on September 10 for Vilnius - capital of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. From may 1540 to May 1542, Sigismund I resided there with Queen Bona Sforza and Sigismund II Augustus. It was Herbersteins task to talk to the king of Poland about the situation in Hungary after the death of Janos I Zapolya. He arrived in Vilnius on September 26 at the latest, and departed on October 5 (see Gąsiorowski, p. 267; Herberstein 1855, p. 324-326; Herberstein 1560, f. D4r; Voigt, p. 279-280; EFE, XLVIII, No. 378. p. 132, No. 379, p. 134, No. 383, p. 142; No. 394, p. 174-175.
[8 ] Decius left Cracow for Silesia on October 16, two days before Herbersteins arrival in Cracow from Vilnius (see Herberstein 1855, p. 327; EFE, XLVIII, No. 378-379, p. 132, 134, cf. IDL 2379: BCz, 245, p. 237cp
[9 ] After dispatching the letter to De Schepper on March 1, 1541, Dantiscus realized that his previous letter to De Schepper, dated January 10, 1541 (IDL 2268), had been lost with the entire fascicule of letters of the same date (see IDL 2551). Therefore he ordered that it be reconstructed from the copy and, with an additional letter of explanation dated March 4, re-sent it to De Schepper (IDL 6473). It is probably that letter, together with other letters of Dantiscus (to Nicolas Perrenot de Granvelle and other people close to the emperor) and his own letter of April 4, 1541, which Duke Albrecht von Hohenzollern sent to the Sigismund I’s envoy Stanisław Maciejowski, who was to persuade the Reich diet to annul Duke Albrecht’s banishment (cf. Elementa, XXXVI, No. 702, p. 154-155, LVII, No. 1927, p. 73-74)
[10 ] Around 1540 Gustav I Vasa was convinced he was under threat of an attack not only from the emperor and the legitimists, but primarily from Denmark and Ducal Prussia. King of Denmark Christian III did not actually plan an attack, or at least Gustav I’s fears were seriously exaggerated. The situation was resolved by a Swedish-Danish treaty signed in Brömsebro on September 14, 1541 (Roberts, p. 124-129)
[11 ] A reference to the three-year truce signed in May 1537 by the king of Denmark, Christian III, and Mary of Hungary, the regent of the Netherlands. One of the consequences was that the king of Denmark assumed the role of mediator in Gustav I’s dispute with Lübeck (Roberts, p. 101-102, 125-126)
[12 ] A reference to the Order of the Brothers of the Sword in Livonia (see ID 434), which as a faithful ally of the Habsburgs was supposed to act against Denmark and its ally Ducal Prussia. Trying to gain allies in case of an attack from Christian III, Gustav I Vasa sent George Norman as an envoy to the grand master of the Livonian Knights (Roberts, p. 127)
[13 ] The fleets were on alert due to the tension between Sweden and Denmark and between Sweden and Lübeck. England was taking Lübeck’s side, while France was inclined to support Christian III, entering into an alliance with him two months after the treaty of Brömsebro (see Roberts, p. 100-102, 125-126, 130)
[14 ] Most likely a reference to the major towns of Royal Prussia:
[15 ] Dantiscus uses the metaphor of fire – conflagration – to describe the Reformation
[16 ] Dantiscus probably means pope Paul III
[17 ] A reference to the negotiations on Hungarian matters which Herberstein was involved in from the end of February 1541, and which culminated in the mission to Isabella Zápolya in August and in September to Esztergom (Gran), to the camp of Suleiman I (Herberstein 1855, p. 329-337; Herberstein 1560, f. D4r-D4v, cf. Elementa, XLIII, No. 11, p. 8, No. 14, p.10; Hammer-Purgstall, III, p. 236-238; Dziubiński, p. 143; cf. IDL 2551, IDL 2442)
[18 ] Dantiscus offered a similar reflection in his letter from May 1543 (see IDL 2647).
[19 ] Dantiscus was especially interested in the result of the religious debates conducted at the Reich diet in Regensburg (see letter No. 32, footnote 17) which, as a continuation of the debate in Hagenau (see IDL 2341), were to lead to the pacification of religious and political relations in the Reich. In his letter to Cornelis De Schepper of January 10, 1541 (IDL 2268, (re-sent on March 4 of that year), Dantiscus wrote: Utinam in iis comitiis, quae diebus istis Ratisbonae coire dicuntur, tandem solide aliquid, quo religionis negotium concorditer transigeretur, statui possit (cf. Lexutt, p. 43-45; cf. IDL 2442). Undoubtedly, he was also looking forward to hear about the results of Stanisław Maciejowski mission (cf. Elementa, LVII, No. 1927-1928, p. 67-76, No. 1989-1990, p. 119-120, No. 2001, p.126-128, No. 2035, p. 142-144)