Accepi ⌊Marienburg[i]⌋ 1541-05-10⌊X-a huius1541-05-10⌋ in ⌊comitiis nostris⌋ Magnificentiae Vestrae ⌊⌋ ⌊Viennae⌋ Austriae 1541-03-22⌊XX[II] mensis Martii proximi1541-03-22⌋ datas, ex quibus dolenter intellex[i], quod meas, quas ⌊⌋ et ad dominu[m] ⌊Cornelium Scepperum⌋ ⌊⌋, non habuerit. Quod cu[m] evenerit, ⌊magnificus dominus castellanus Biecensis⌋ et dominus ⌊Iostus Lu[do]vicus Decius⌋, ut reor, significarunt Magnificentiae Vestrae. Miseram m[ag]num litterarum fasciculum ⌊Thoroniam⌋, quem inibi civis quidam Cracoviensis ⌊Ioannes Morstein⌋, ut ⌊Cracoviam⌋ perferret[1], accepi[t]. In eo ad ⌊dominum Cornelium⌋ et ad Magnificentiam Vestram atque ad p[le]rosque alios bonos dominos et amicos in aula caesarea plurim[ae] meae litterae[2] inerant. Is porro ⌊Morstein⌋ non solum meas, verum etiam et domini ⌊Iosti⌋ ac aliorum, quas secum abstulera[t], inter eundum se amisisse asseverat[3]. Quod ut credam, hucusque induci nequeo, miris namque modis hoc nostro tempore, quid quisque scribat ex aula nostra[4], inquiritur et in ea magni viri ex penetralibus et mensis suis non semel iam litteras amiserunt. Utcumque res habet, quod si etiam aulae litterae nostrae sint redditae, nihil me afficit, quandoquidem id, quod scribo, fateri me non pudet. Nihil moror eos, qui
cf. BRUNI cap. 17, p. 108
Itaque multa legendo et discendo undique carpere accumulareque oportet, cunctaque omnifariam scrutari atque rimari, unde nobis ad studia nostra aliqua sit proventura utilitas ⌊scrutari et rimari student omniacf. BRUNI cap. 17, p. 108
Itaque multa legendo et discendo undique carpere accumulareque oportet, cunctaque omnifariam scrutari atque rimari, unde nobis ad studia nostra aliqua sit proventura utilitas ⌋, quoniam non semper grata inveniunt. cf. Vulg. Is 21.2 ⌊Qui incredulus est, ut Isaias inquit, infideliter agitcf. Vulg. Is 21.2 ⌋. Et cum hac tempestate[5] nulla de <re> magis loquantur et scribant homines, quam de fide, nihil illa minus habent. Dabit igitur Magnificentia Vestra veniam hocque, quod mihi, vel hominum iniquitat[i] vel infelici casui imputabit[6].
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 ⌊Achatio a Czeme castellano Gedanensi⌋, qui summopere amicitiam et familiaritatem praeclara Magnificentiae Vestrae fama illectus contrahere cum Magnificentia Vestra ambiebat. Is vero missus ab ⌊harum terrarum consiliariis⌋ ad ⌊serenissimam maiestate[m] regiam⌋, cum ⌊Vilnae⌋ applicuisset, unde Magnificentia Vestra paulo ante abierat, litteras mihi retulit. Has iam tertio dedi et proprio nuntio ad manus ⌊domini Iosti⌋ misi, fore sp[e]rans eas tandem redditas iri, quod prius non credam, quam cum responsum a Magnificentia Vestra videro[8].
⌊⌋, cum nuntio, quem vicinus meus ⌊illustrissimus dominus dux⌋ eo allegavit, repetiique singula, quae prius exaraveram, infaustumque cum prioribus litteris successum ⌊illi⌋ declaravi[9]. Et cum minime, pro suo candore, sit suspicax, non est, quod aliam quam amicam opinionem de Magnificentia Vestra conceperit.
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. ⌊Regem Sueciae⌋ novas turbas moliri, armatam habere non contemnendam classem, quorsum illam impellere intendat, certo non sciri[10]. ⌊Dania⌋, cum qua hoc mense ⌊Burgundiae⌋ expirarunt indutiae[11], vicissim est in armis. ⌊Vicinus meus⌋, ne quid ii motus sibi incommodent, advigilat. Veretur, ne quod stratagemma inter ⌊Suecos⌋ et ⌊Livones⌋[12] delitescat, quod praeter spem periculum aliquod adferret. Ex ⌊Gallia⌋, ⌊Anglia⌋ et ⌊Scotia⌋ maritimae navigationi parata omnia sperantur[13]. Nos hic a Domino Deo pacem et religionis concordiam precamur, quae iam tandem summa est necessaria, apud ⌊nostrates⌋ enim, maxime autem in maioribus civitatibus[14], confusa fere et perplexa sunt omnia igne[15]; ad veram pietatem pertinens nemo vel vix unus aut alter est, qui quaerat,
cf. Vulg. Phil 2.21 Omnes enim sua quaerunt non quae sunt Christi Iesu ⌊omnes, quae sua sunt, quaerunt et non quae Iesu Christicf. Vulg. Phil 2.21 Omnes enim sua quaerunt non quae sunt Christi Iesu ⌋, qui iam tum demum ut nostri misereatur, cf. Apul. Met. 3.19 praesta quod summis votis expostulo ⌊summis votiscf. Apul. Met. 3.19 praesta quod summis votis expostulo ⌋ esset orandum, quod quidem a capite ortum habere deberet[16]. Ceterum intestinis, ut Magnificentia Vestra scripsit, bellis implicatum nullam eius rei de se praebet significationem. cf. Vulg. Ps (G) 35. 7 Iudicia tua abyssus multa ⌊Iudicia Dei abyssus multacf. Vulg. Ps (G) 35. 7 Iudicia tua abyssus multa ⌋ etc.
Quod Magnificentia Vestra ⌊⌋, 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 ⌊divi Maximiliani⌋ aula summopere amavi et amare desiturus sum numquam, ut diutissime sospitet prosperetque in omnibus, ex corde oro.
[1 ] In ⌊Cracow⌋, ⌊Morstein⌋ was to give a fascicule of letters to ⌊Georg Hegel⌋, the ⌊Fuggers⌋’ factor in ⌊Cracow⌋ (see ⌊⌋: 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 (⌊⌋: BCz, 247 p. 361-364). Cf. footnote 15, 23
[4 ] A reference to the court of ⌊Sigismund I⌋ and ⌊Bona Sforza⌋, who resided in ⌊Vilnius⌋ from May 1540 to May 1542 (⌊⌋, 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, ⌊⌋: BCz, 245, p. 233, the left margin).
[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 (⌊⌋), had been lost with the entire fascicule of letters of the same date (see ⌊⌋). 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 (⌊⌋). 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. ⌊⌋, 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 ⌊⌋, p. 100-102, 125-126, 130)
[14 ] Most likely a reference to the major towns of ⌊Royal Prussia⌋: ⌊Gdańsk (Danzig)⌋, ⌊Thorn (Toruń)⌋ and ⌊Elbing (Elbląg)⌋
[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⌋ (⌊⌋, p. 329-337; ⌊⌋, f. D4r-D4v, cf. ⌊⌋, No. 11, p. 8, No. 14, p.10; ⌊⌋, p. 236-238; ⌊⌋, 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 ⌊⌋ 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. ⌊⌋, p. 43-45; cf. ⌊⌋). Undoubtedly, he was also looking forward to hear about the results of Stanisław Maciejowski mission (cf. ⌊⌋, No. 1927-1928, p. 67-76, No. 1989-1990, p. 119-120, No. 2001, p. 126-128, No. 2035, p. 142-144)
