The career of the papal tax collector Raimundus de Bonofato in the light of unedited documents in the Vatican Apostolic Archives
p. 219-226
Note de l’auteur
The paper was supported by the János Bolyai Research Scholarship is awarded by the Hungarian Academy of Sciences.Texte intégral
1In 1332, a couple of days before Christmas, Csanád Telegdi, archbishop of Esztergom (1331-1349)1 sent a letter to Jacobus Berengarii, the papal tax collector working in Hungary at that time. The subject of the message was not the tax collection itself, but the decease of the colleague of Jacobus, Raimundus de Bonofato. Telegdi made sure that the late collector’s belongings were gathered and sent to Jacobus Berengarii under the archbishop’s seal2.
2Raimundus de Bonofato was a papal delegate—perhaps of Italian origin—with a remarkable lifepath. Holder of various benefices in France, his person is noteworthy not only for Hungarian, but for French historiography as well. Bonofato’s commission as a tax collector in the Hungarian Kingdom has been known to historical research since the end of the xixth century,3 as the account books of the tax collection were preserved in the Vatican Apostolic Archives4. However, the above-mentioned letter has escaped the attention of historians. To show how exactly this unedited document can contribute to our knowledge, first I would like to briefly review the circumstances which led to Bonofato’s commission to the Hungarian Kingdom, and also his ecclesiastical career.
3Papal tax collections became consistent in the xivth-century Hungarian Kingdom during the pontificate of John XXII (1316-1334). Although there were attempts earlier to collect papal revenues,5 the absence of data makes it mostly difficult to estimate how successful these were. Boniface VIII (1294-1303), for instance, appointed in 1301 one of his chaplains, Bonaiutus de Casentino to collect the tenth which had been levied for the liberation of the Holy Land at the Second Council of Lyon in 1275. However, the papal court’s conflict with Philip IV of France, and the pope’s decease in 1303 delayed the collection. Boniface VIII’s successor, Benedict XI (1303-1304) confirmed Bonaiutus’ commission, and his work seemed to be accomplished to a certain degree, as different sums of money were gathered and delivered to the Apostolic Camera6. Yet, it is doubtful that any of these taxes came from Hungary, given the inner political situation of the kingdom7. Clement V (1305-1314) also imposed the tenth for six years at the Council of Vienne (1311-1312), but no collectors were dispatched before the end of the pope’s pontificate. Shortly after his election in 1316, John XXII tried to overcome the papacy’s crisis caused by the two-years long sede vacante and the empty treasury,8 so he ordered the collection of one-year income of the vacant benefices9. The collector commissioned to Hungary, Rufinus de Civinio, archdeacon of Tolna10 had an additional task as well: to claim the legatine procuration of cardinal Gentilis11 which the Hungarian clergy had been owing to the Holy See since 131112. Rufinus’ work brought moderate success; according to his own calculation the sum which he could transfer to the Apostolic Camera only slightly exceeded 1 200 gold florins13.
4As the example of Hungary shows, the collection of the papal taxes—especially in the countries situated close to, or on the periphery of the Christianity—was cumbersome and in a lot of cases unproductive in the beginning of the xivth century. However, several signs indicate that the papal court made a continuous effort to improve the efficiency of the tax collections by creating a professionalized framework. First of all, the selection criteria of the collectors seemed to have changed over the time. While earlier popes had charged prelates of the local clergy (e. g. archbishops, bishops) with the organization of the collection, it became more and more frequent in the Avignon period that “outsiders”, i. e. members of the extended papal Curia were sent to certain territories. In addition to factors which had previously been decisive – such as the collector’s knowledge of the local environment and its social network, or his entitlement to a benefice in the collectoria14 etc. – qualification and experience with finances gradually gained importance15. The changes were also reflected in by the usage of the delegates’ designation in the papal sources. The tax collectors were mainly described as collector apostolicus, collector et receptor or nuntius et collector16. In the latter one, the nuntius-component often implied that the papal delegate had been charged with tasks of different—and not exclusively of financial—nature17. Besides, the examination of the collectoria-system in the xivth-century French Kingdom has demonstrated that the usage of the various titles became consistent only by the pontificate of Clement VI (1342-1352) with the main difference being the fact that the collector was appointed to handle one single type of tax, while the collector et nuntius collected several kinds in one collectoria18. By considering the case of Hungary we can also point out further improvements, namely that the collectors were delegated in pairs after the commission of Rufinus de Civinio in 1317 (one collector for each archdiocese), and they were authorized to recruit an augmented number of administrative personnel19. The examination of the preserved account books also indicates that the registration of the collected sums became more and more precise in the second half of the xivth century20.
5The commission of Jacobus Berengarii and Raimundus de Bonofato to the Hungarian Kingdom in 1331 also demonstrates some of the improvements in the system of tax collection. These two papal officers were delegated to the Hungarian Kingdom with the title nuntius et collector apostolicus. Accordingly, they were responsible for several tax types: not only for the tenth levied at the Council of Vienne,21 but also for the collection of the one-year income of those benefices under papal reservation which were vacant at the time or would go vacant in the following three-years period22.
6Although it would be difficult to draw general conclusions about the factors which determined the selection of the two collectors, as the lifepath of Jacobus Berengarii is little known, the fact that Raimundus de Bonofato was qualified in law – iurisperitus as stated by the papal letters23 – might have had an influence. However, it is unknown where he studied. Similarly obscure is when and how his service in the papal Curia began. The first papal letter which provides data on his career was issued in 1330; here he is mentioned as the rector of the oratory of the St. Michael church in the diocese of Limoges. This was the office which he held at the time of his delegation to Hungary. The same document gave Raimundus de Bonofato the expectative rights to an unspecified benefice in the diocese of Périgueux24. The sources suggest that Raimundus de Bonofato obtained the rectorship despite lacking the required ordination as a presbyter: he was a subdeacon, and he never moved forward in the clerical orders. The pope granted him dispensation from this defect in 1331 for a three-years long period, and at the same time exempted him from the obligation of residing in his benefice25. However, the collector soon relinquished his benefice in the St. Michael church: he exchanged it for the rectorship of the St. Avit parochial church in the diocese of Lectour26.
7After such preliminaries, Raimundus de Bonofato was appointed tax collector and travelled to the Hungarian Kingdom between March and July 1331. He was accompanied not only by his colleague, but by his familiares as well: one of his relatives (cognatus), Galhardus de Marchia, a servant (servitor) called Petrus de Piemonte and an unnamed notary27.
8Furthermore, a peculiar manuscript demonstrates that Raimundus de Bonofato prepared for his mission in advance which can also be interpreted as another step in the process of professionalisation of papal tax collectors. Bonofato took a small notebook to Hungary containing his notes on the structure of the Hungarian church (the names of the two archdioceses with a list of the suffraganeous bishoprics) and from decretals of contemporary popes published primarily by John XXII28. The tax collector also recorded his travel to Hungary; however, the description was limited to the practical information about his itinerary and the costs of the journey. The notebook is nowadays preserved in the Vatican Apostolic Archives29.
9There are some signs which suggest that Bonofato and Jacobus Berengarii tried to organise the work methodically. They first convoked a council of the clergy of the ecclesiastical province of Esztergom.30 In the absence of data, we can only suppose that later they did the same in the province of Kalocsa. Afterwards, the collectors arranged the work by dividing the country based on the geographical dimensions of the two ecclesiastical provinces: Bonofato was responsible for the taxes of the province of Esztergom,31 and Jacobus Berengarii for those of Kalocsa32. As a receipt of the collected tax issued by Jacobus Berengarii shows, the papal delegates commissioned local clerics as subcollectors for each diocese33.
10The collectors were also charged to manage cases which were only loosely connected to their original tasks. Two of these were predominantly financial: first, the collectors had to inspect the finances of the archbishopric of Esztergom and collect the incomes which were due during its two-years vacancy;34 and secondly, they had to review the financial situation of the parishes in the territory of Szepes county35. On the other hand, the collectors were also commissioned to proceed in a case which was completely independent of the tax collection: they had to examine the election of the provost of Székesfehérvár and confirm the new provost in his office in case they found everything lawful36. Moreover, a document from the beginning of 1332 implies that the papal delegates might have exercised some kind of jurisdictional authority. The charter issued by Jacobus Berengarii and Raimundus de Bonofato describes that a lawsuit had taken place in Buda in which the dean of Szeben37 and certain parish priests were interested. The details of the legal proceeding are unknown. However, the formulation of the document38 and the fact that the other participant(s) of the legal conflict—in other words, the person or people who sued the mentioned clerics or who were sued by them—were omitted makes us believe that the collectors initiated the procedure against the dean and the others, most probably because of the failure to pay the tax39.
11The edition of the tax collectors’ account book revealed that Raimundus de Bonofato never returned to the papal Curia; he died during his commission in the Hungarian Kingdom. The date of his decease was determined by the editor of the account book, László Fejérpataky. He believed that Bonofato died in 1334,40 however, it is unclear on what basis he made this presumption. Although Jacobus Berengarii noted among his expenses at the end of the account book that he had spent 22 marks for the burial of his colleague in the Dominican convent of Esztergom,41 the time of the payment was not specified. What is more, the papal letters prove that Fejérpataky’s dating is not correct: in the beginning of May 1333, the pope had already been informed about Bonofato’s passing, as he conferred his benefice in the church of St. Avit to a new beneficiary,42 and one month later Jacobus de Lengres was appointed as Bonofato’s successor in the tax collection43. What is more, archbishop Telegdi’s letter presented in the beginning of this paper places Bonofato’s death even earlier, at the end of 1332. This means that Bonofato stayed and worked approximately one and a half year in Hungary before he died.
12In conclusion, we can state that archbishop Telegdi’s letter proved to be informative on several levels. On the surface, we have the pieces of information that can be utilized in prosopographic research. It has been revealed that Raimundus de Bonofato died in Hungary remarkably earlier than it was presumed by historians. After having arrived in early summer of 1331, he spent barely one and a half year collecting the taxes for the papal court. On the other hand, a more careful analysis of Telegdi’s letter provides data on the institutional aspects of history: on the tax collection and on the office of papal tax collector. Raimundus de Bonofato was responsible for the taxes of the ecclesiastical province of Esztergom, thus he established his residence in the centre of the archdiocese. He probably stayed in his residence in most of the time, and his subcollectors travelled. As a papal officer, Bonofato had his own entourage—however small in numbers—which consisted of two familiares, one of whom was related to him, and a notary. After Bonofato’s decease, these three people made sure that his personal belongings and official documents were transported first to his colleague, and later to the papal court.
Notes de bas de page
1For Csanád Telegdi’s biography see Szende László, « Telegdi Csanád », in Beke Margit (dir.), Esztergomi érsekek 1001-2003, Budapest, Szent István Társulat, 2003, p. 161-171.
221. December 1332: AAV, Instr. Misc. 5145.
3For the edited version of the collectors’ account books see Fejérpataky László et al. (dir.), Monumenta Vaticana historiam regni Hungariæ illustrantia. Series prima, tomus primus. Vatikáni magyar okirattár. Első sorozat, első kötet. Rationes collectorum pontificiorum in Hungaria. A pápai tizedszedő számadásai 1281– 1375, Budapest, Franklin Nyomda, 1887.
4AAV, Cam. Ap., Collect. 180.
5See e. g. the tenths collected by Gerardus de Mutina, papal scriptor and later bishop of Caiazzo (1283– 1293), and Adam de Polonia: Monumenta Vaticana, op. cit., p. 1-13. For the person of Gerardus de Mutina (Gerardo di Modena) see Eubel Konrad, Hierarchia catholica medii ævi, t. I., Monasterii, Sumptibus et typis librariæ Regensbergianæ, 1898, p. 155; Esposito Laura, Le pergamene dell’archivio vescovile di Caiazzo (1286–1309), Naples, Archivio di Stato di Napoli—Diocesi di Alife – Caiazzo, 2009, p. 5-10.
625 October 1306: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 53, fo 1 vo– 2 ro; 11 July 1307: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 54, fo 150 ro, ep. 25; 26 March 1308: AAV, Instr. Misc. 426; 11 May 1309: AAV, Cam. Ap., Intr. et Ex., vol. 75, fo 2 vo; 1 June 1309: AAV, Cam. Ap., Oblig. et Sol., vol. 2, fo 69 vo– 70 ro; 26 August 1309: AAV, Instr. Misc. 476; 7 December 1317: AAV, Instr. Misc. 477.
7The first decade of the xivth century was characterised by a war of succession in the Hungarian Kingdom. Charles of Anjou (crowned king as Charles I) claimed the throne based on his grandmother’s (Mary of Hungary, daughter of king Stephen V, wife of Charles II of Naples) rights. Wenceslas, the son of Wenceslas II of Bohemia, was also distantly related to the Árpád dynasty and was betrothed to Elizabeth, daughter of Andrew III of Hungary. Although Wenceslas was supported and elected king by the majority of the Hungarian nobles, he gradually lost his positions in Hungary. After the definitive withdrawal of Wenceslas to Bohemia, and a short-lived attempt of Otto of Bavaria to take control of the kingdom (1305– 1307), Charles I remained as the only pretender to the Hungarian throne. However, his fight against the oligarchs, which allowed him to systematically stabilize his rule in Hungary, lasted until the beginning of the 1320s. Engel Pál, The realm of St. Stephen, Londres/New York, I. B. Tauris, 2001, p. 128-132.
8Weakland John E., « Administrative and fiscal centralization under pope John XXII, 1316– 1334 », The Catholic Historical Review no 54, 1968/2, p. 285-310, 285-286.
98 December 1316: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 63, ep. 174 (AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 2, fo 42 vo); Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta Hungariam sacram illustrantia, t. I, Romæ, Typis Vaticanis, 1859, p. 448-449. (no DCLXXXIII).
10The archdeaconate of Tolna was situated in the diocese of Pécs. Kiss Gergely, Főesperességek [Archdeaconates], in Fedeles Tamás, Sarbak Gábor et Sümegi József (dir.), A pécsi egyházmegye története I. A középkor évszázadai (1009– 1543), Pécs, Fény Kft., 2009, p. 247-261.
11Gentilis de Monteflorum, cardinal-presbyter of S. Martinus in montibus was sent to Hungary as a legatus a latere by Clement V. On his legatine activity between 1308 and 1311 see: Kiss Gergely, « Les légats pontificaux en Hongrie au temps des rois Angevins (1298-1311) », in Kordé Zoltán et Petrovics István (dir.), La diplomatie des États Angevins aux xiiie et xive siècles, Rome/Szeged, Accademia d’Ungheria in Roma, 2010, p. 101-116.
12In 1317 the pope demanded 1711 silver marks of Buda, in 1318, 1741, 5 silver marks without the specification of the weight unit. 1 May 1317: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 63, ep. 300 (AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 2, fo 233 ro); Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit., p. 449-450. (no DCLXXXIV); and 17 June 1318: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 67, ep. 85 (AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 10, fo 460 ro); Mollat Guillaume et Lesquen Guy de (dir.), Jean XXII (1316-1334). Lettres communes analysées d’après les registres dit d’Avignon et du Vatican, t. 2, Paris, Fontemoing, 1905, p. 260, no 8209.
13Rufinus’ wage totalled 1162 and 1/3 florins. The final sum left of the collected taxes was 1223 florins. 1320: AAV, Instr. Misc. 5349.
14The term collectoria had a double meaning: it meant both the office of the appointed collector, and the geographical area under the collector’s authority. Often several countries constituted a collectoria. Schuchard Christiane, Die päpstlichen Kollektoren im späten Mittelalter, Tübingen, De Gruyter, 2000, p. 18– 20; Ruess Karl, Die rechtliche Stellung der päpstlichen Legaten bis Bonifaz VIII, Paderborn, Schöningh Verlag, 1912, p. 24; Le Roux Amandine, Servir le pape, le recrutement des collecteurs pontificaux dans le royaume de France et en Provence de la papauté d’Avignon à l’aube de la Renaissance (1316-1521), doctoral thesis, dir. Catherine Vincent, université de Paris Ouest Nanterre La Défense, 2010, p. 36-40.
15Le Roux Amandine, op. cit., p. 161-181.
16Schuchard Christiane, op. cit., p. 105-106.
17Schuchard Christiane, op. cit., p. 18.
18Le Roux Amandine, Servir le pape, op. cit., p. 74-77. In case of Hungary, the first collector who was appointed with the double title of collector et nuntius apostolicus and collected more than one type of tax was Rufinus de Civinio. In the rest of the xivth century, these two features seem to have become general. See the account books in Monumenta Vaticana, op. cit.
19For instance, Raimundus de Bonofato and Jacobus Berengarii were authorized to appoint ten notaries. 30 March 1331: AAV, Instr. Misc. 1174; MNL-OL DF 291661.
20See the account books of the xivth-century collectors in Monumenta Vaticana, op. cit. It also seems that some general guidelines existed, as the collectors followed a unified structure. Mollat Guillaume et Samaran Charles, La fiscalité pontifical en France au xive siècle, Paris, De Boccard, 1968, p. 124-132.
211 March 1331: MNL-OL DF 291661; Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit. p. 536-537, no DCCCXXX.
22The military orders were exempted from paying this tax. 23 March 1331: MNL-OL DF 291661 (fo 84, ep. 389); Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit., p. 540, no DCCCXXXVI. The photo of the register has been made available online by the National Archives of Hungary, [https://archives.hungaricana.hu/hu/charters/view/26969/?pg=10&bbox=-971%2C-3526%2C3580%2C-915].
236 September 1330: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 97, ep. 979. (AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 39, fo 391 vo); Mollat Guillaume éd., Jean XXII (1316-1334). Lettres communes analysées d’après les registres dits d’Avignon et du Vatican, t. 10, Paris, Boccard, 1930, p. 5. no 50816.
246 September 1330: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 97, ep. 979. (AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 39. fo 391 vo).
25The dispensation was valid, if Raimundus de Bonofato continued his studies or stayed in the Roman Curia. 7 April 1331: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 99, ep. 1879; AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 38, fo 303 vo. The dispensation was repeated in the registers one year later. For this document see: 7 April 1332: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 116, fo 199 (228), ep. 1003. However, considering that Bonofato exchanged the rectorship of the St. Micheal church for another benefice in the diocese of Lectour, the second dispensation had to be an administrative mistake.
265 February 1332: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 101, ep. 678, AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 40, fo 378 ro; and also: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 101, ep. 697 vo, AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 40, fo 385 vo.
27Monumenta Vaticana, op. cit., p. 404. The notary’s name is revealed by archbishop Telegdi’s letter: he was called Guillelmus. AAV, Instr. Misc. 5145.
28The notes covered the Clementinæ—the decretals promulgated by Clement V on the Council of Vienne but published in written form only by John XXII—and the decrees of John XXII later called Extravagantes.
29Although the historians who published the account books of the papal tax collectors at the end of the xixth century discovered Bonofato’s notebook, they opted for omitting the notes from canon law, they included in the edition only those parts which described the journey of the tax collectors, the reminders on the structure of the Hungarian church and the collected sums (see Monumenta Vaticana, op. cit., p. 406-409.). This decision can be explained by several factors: the work at that time was focused on the tax collection, what is more, the difficultly legible script and the general condition of the document probably would have delayed the publishing significantly. AAV, Cam. Ap., Collect., vol. 184.
30The council was planned to take place in Buda in August of the same year. The document which announced the council was issued on the 25th of July 1331. MNL-OL DF 200841; Dedek Lajos Crescens (dir.), Monumenta ecclesiæ Strigoniensis, t. III, Strigonii, Buzárovits, 1924, p. 193-195, no 286.
31It also seems highly probable that Bonofato established his residence in Esztergom; as the letter mentioned at the beginning of this paper shows, he was at the time of his decease in Esztergom, and he also had all his personal belongings there.
32Fejérpataky László, « Pápai adószedők Magyarországon a xiii. és xiv. században », [Papal tax collectors in Hungary in the xiiith-xivth century] Századok no 6, 1887/21, p. 512.
331 March 1333: MNL-OL DF 277272.
34After the previous archbishop’s, Boleslaus’ decease in 1328, Miklós [Nicolas] Dörögdi, provost of Pozsony [Bratislava, SK] was elected by the members of the chapter. Dörögdi set off for Avignon to request the pope’s confirmation personally. When he finally arrived at the papal court – after having been robbed and imprisoned in Konstanz –, he was pressured to renounce his claim for the archbishopric in favour of Csanád Telegdi, then bishop of Eger. Historians generally agree that Charles I intervened in the election to secure the most important ecclesiastical office for his close confidant, Telegdi. The papal letters on Dörögdi’s resignation and Telegdi’s appointment were issued on the same day, on the 17th of September 1330. AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 98, ep. 572. (AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 37, fo 367 vo; MNL-OL DF 291546); Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit., p. 527-528, no DCCCXVI; and AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 98, ep. 572; MNL-OL DF 291546, Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit., p. 527-528, no DCCCXVI.
35Spiš, Slovakia. 30 April 1331: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 116, fo 133 vo, ep. 397 (MNL-OL DF 291661); Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit., p. 540-541, no DCCCXXVIII. This papal order reflects the influence of William Druget, count (comes) of Szepes, who tried to increase the independence of the ecclesiastical institutes on his territory at the expense of the local prelates. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that several other papal letters were issued with the same date in which the pope excepted two villages (Antiqua Villa, Stedekercu) from the authority of the provost of Szepes and exempted the churches of two other villages (Podolni, Terubes) from the obligation of the payment of the tenth at the request of count Druget. 30 April 1331: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 116, fo 133 vo-114 vo, ep. 398-399 (MNL-OL DF 291661); Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit., p. 541-542, no DCCCXXXIX-DCCCXL. The Druget family was one of the most important pillars of Charles I’s rule. Two members of the family—John and his above-mentioned son, William—held the palatinate, the most important secular office in the medieval Hungarian Kingdom. Engel Pál, Magyarország világi archontológiája 1301-1457, [Secular archontology of Hungary 1301– 1457] t. 1, MTA Történettudományi Intézet, Budapest, p. 2-3. One of the villages privileged by the papal letters (Podolni, Podolin/Podolínec nowadays in Slovakia) was in the centre of a long lawsuit concerning ecclesiastical authority between the archbishop of Esztergom, the chapter of Szepes and the bishop of Cracow. For a more detailed description of the lawsuit see Maléth Ágnes, A Magyar Királyság és a Szentszék kapcsolata I. Károly korában (1301-1342), [The relations of the Hungarian Kingdom and the Holy See in the time of Charles I, 1301-1342] Pécs, Molnár Nyomda, 2020, p. 108-110. For the Druget family and their « province » see: Zsoldos Attila, A Druget-tartomány története, 1315-1342 [The history of the Druget province], Budapest, Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Bölcsészettudományi Kutatóközpont, Történettudományi Intézet, 2017.
36Nicholas, the bishop of Győr was supposed to help the collectors in this task. 10 June 1331: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 99, ep. 1359, AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 38, fo 70 vo; Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit., p. 543, no DCCCXLII. The cathedral chapter of Székesfehérvár had a privileged status: it was subordinated directly to the pope. Kiss Gergely, « A székesfehérvári prépostság középkori kiváltságai egy XVIII. századi “vitairatban” », [The medieval privileges of the cathedral chapter of Székesfehérvár in an xviiith-century treatise], in Révész Éva et Halmágyi Miklós (dir.), Középkortörténeti tanulmányok 5, Szeged, Szegedi Középkorász Műhely, 2007, p. 55-64. The ad hoc nature of this assignment shows how the popes profited from the opportunities offered by the double title nuntius et collector.
37Sibiu, Romania.
38« cum magistri Nicholaus decanus Cybiniensis […] nuper apud Cybinium in nostra presencia constituti copiam litterarum nobis a sede apostolica directarum et processum inde per nos et dictum collegam nostrum dudum in Budam habitorum et factorum per magistrum Johannem notarum apostolicam scribam nostrum eis fieri postulaverint quam hæc requisiti ». Pour la signature du document, voir la note de bas de page suivante.
39The collectors issued the charter, because the dean of Szeben and the mentioned clerics had requested official copies of the papal letters and the documents of the lawsuit. Although John, a notary employed by the papal nuncios prepared the paperwork, the dean and his colleagues never claimed the duplicates, nor did they remunerate the notary. Thus, the collectors commissioned the provost of Szeben to demand payment, and in case of neglect, to excommunicate the dean and his associates. 25 January 1332: MNL-OL DF 277271. The papal tax collectors were mostly given a limited degree of jurisdiction which was concentrated on sanctioning non-payment. Jacobus Berengarii and Raimundus de Bonofato were also assigned such authority. 1 March 1331: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 116, fo 111 ro-vo, ep. 385, Theiner Augustin, Vetera monumenta, op. cit., p. 538, no DCCCXXII.
40Fejérpataky László, « Pápai adószedők », op. cit., p. 512.
41It is also revealed by the account book’s entries that the companions of the late collector—the above-mentioned Galhardus de Marchia, Petrus de Piemonte and Bonofato’s notary—wished to return to their home, thus Jacobus Berengarii gave them financial support for the journey. Galhardus de Marchia received 20, Petrus de Piemonte 16 and the notary 15 marks from the collector. Jacobus Berengarii instructed the companions of Bonofato to give a report to the camerarius of the Apostolic Camera about the late collectors work in the Hungarian Kingdom. Monumenta Vaticana, op. cit., p. 404.
421 May 1333: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 104, ep. 677, AAV, Reg. Aven., vol. 43, fo 374 vo; Mollat Guillaume (dir.), Jean XXII (1316-1334). Lettres communes analysées d’après les registres dit d’Avignon et du Vatican, t. 12, Paris, Boccard, 1932, p. 142, no 60194.
4313 June 1333: AAV, Reg. Vat., vol. 117, fo 136 vo-137 ro, ep. 643; fo 148 vo, ep. 748; fo 72 vo, ep. 392; fo 148 vo, ep. 748; fo 26 vo, ep. 150.
Auteur
Université de Szeged.
Professeure assistante au Département d’histoire hongroise médiévale et moderne de l’université de Szeged.
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Creative Commons - Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Pas de Modification 4.0 International - CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Un constructeur de la France du xxe siècle
La Société Auxiliaire d'Entreprises (SAE) et la naissance de la grande entreprise française de bâtiment (1924-1974)
Pierre Jambard
2008
Ouvriers bretons
Conflits d'usines, conflits identitaires en Bretagne dans les années 1968
Vincent Porhel
2008
L'intrusion balnéaire
Les populations littorales bretonnes et vendéennes face au tourisme (1800-1945)
Johan Vincent
2008
L'individu dans la famille à Rome au ive siècle
D'après l'œuvre d'Ambroise de Milan
Dominique Lhuillier-Martinetti
2008
L'éveil politique de la Savoie
Conflits ordinaires et rivalités nouvelles (1848-1853)
Sylvain Milbach
2008
L'évangélisation des Indiens du Mexique
Impact et réalité de la conquête spirituelle (xvie siècle)
Éric Roulet
2008
Les miroirs du silence
L'éducation des jeunes sourds dans l'Ouest, 1800-1934
Patrick Bourgalais
2008
Un constructeur de la France du xxe siècle
La Société Auxiliaire d'Entreprises (SAE) et la naissance de la grande entreprise française de bâtiment (1924-1974)
Pierre Jambard
2008
Ouvriers bretons
Conflits d'usines, conflits identitaires en Bretagne dans les années 1968
Vincent Porhel
2008
L'intrusion balnéaire
Les populations littorales bretonnes et vendéennes face au tourisme (1800-1945)
Johan Vincent
2008
L'individu dans la famille à Rome au ive siècle
D'après l'œuvre d'Ambroise de Milan
Dominique Lhuillier-Martinetti
2008
L'éveil politique de la Savoie
Conflits ordinaires et rivalités nouvelles (1848-1853)
Sylvain Milbach
2008
L'évangélisation des Indiens du Mexique
Impact et réalité de la conquête spirituelle (xvie siècle)
Éric Roulet
2008
Les miroirs du silence
L'éducation des jeunes sourds dans l'Ouest, 1800-1934
Patrick Bourgalais
2008
