| 1 |
For the contents of this Register see Cal. Lett. VII, p. 24 note. There are in the Vatican Archives several later copies of it, which evidently served as Formularia, e.g. Arm. XXXI. tom. 46, of about the middle of the sixteenth century. For a detailed study of the Vatican Registers of Eugenius IV see the article by Ottenthal, referred to in Cal. Lett., loc. cit. |
| 2 |
In the register, not only the present letter, but also several similar letters have the incomplete date 'Datum Rome etc' or 'Datum Rome ut supra,' which might refer back to the first letter of the series, which occurs on f. 67d. and ends 'Datum Rome etc. xiii (rectius xiiii, as in the Barberini and Chigi MSS., infra) Kal.Martii anno secundo' rather than to the general letters Ad sacram Petri sedem' of 16 Kal. March anno 2 on f. 65d, mentioned in the following note The date adopted above. 14 Kal. March, 1433, is taken from the Vatican Library, Barberini MSS. Lat., No. 2001, f 149d. In that MS., not only the letter to the archbishop of Armagh. but several similar letters, have the date 'Datum Romœ xiiiiKal. Martii anno secundo'. This is also the date in MS. D. vii. 101 of the Chigi Library, Rome, f. 58r. = p. 115. |
| 3 |
i.e. the general letters [Ad fut. rei mem.] Ad sacram Petri sedem … Datum Rome etc. Sextodecimo Kal. Martii anno secundo [on ff. 65d–67d of the present Register, printed thence and from the 'MS. Alex. VII. p. 112' (i.e. the above Chigi MS.) and from other MSS., in Raynaldi Annales, an. 1433, § 5], setting forth the pope's reasons for abandoning his transfer of the Council from Basel to Bologna, and ordering all patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, abbots etc. and all who are bound to attend General Councils to appear in the Council of Basel within three months from the date of his present letters |
| 4 |
i.e. the date of the pope's promotion to the see of Worcester of Thomas [Brouns,—not Bourchier. as in Eubel, Hierarchia. vol. II, ad. verb. Wigornien.] On the news of the voidance of Worcester by the death on Aug. 23, 1433, of bishop Polton at Basel, the pope, without consulting the king, made provision to Brouns, who was also at Basel. The king refused to accept Brouns, and insisted on his own candidate Thomas Bourchier. The death at Basel on Sept. 30, 1434, of John Langdon, bishop of Rochester, enabled the pope to end the conflict, in the way suggested by the king (undated letter in Brit. Mus., Cott. Cleop. E. iii. f. 67d.) namely, by compensating Brouns with provision on Feb. 21, 1435, of the see of Rochester, and complying, on the following March 9, with the king's demand in regard to Bourchier and provision of the see of Worcester. See Eubel, op. cit., ad verb. Roffen., and Le Neve—Hardy Fasti, II, p. 567 and III, pp. 60, 61. where the dates are misleading, but the confusion between Brouns and Bourchier less than in Eubel. See also below, ff. 81 sqq. and 88 sqq. |
| 5 |
On Aug. 3, 1429, Le Neve—Hardy, I, p. 246. |
| 6 |
According to Eubel, Hierarchia, vol. II, ad verb. 'Seguntin.', Peter, bishop of Osma, was on April 12, 1434 translated to Siguenza, on its voidance by the death of Alfonsus Carillo, cardinal deacon of St. Eustace's, who had been made administrator of the see by Martin V on Sept. 17, 1422 (ibid. vol. I.). The translation did not, however, take effect, and Alfonsus Carillo or Garillo, as above), a papal protonotary, was appointed administrator of the see on July 6, 1435. as being still void by the death of cardinal Alfonsus. Five years later, on May 9, 1440, he was appointed bishop, having presumably reached the lawful age |
| 7 |
tertio. Raynaldi has wrongly printed 'certo.' |
| 8 |
i.e. Thomas Bourchier. See above. f. 82 sqq., and below, f. 88 sqq. |
| 9 |
… Henricus … institit … ut promoueretur ad ecclesiam cathedralem, neque id obtinuit, nisi ('usque' wrongly in Raynaldus) ad presens, cum ei non deessent nisi tres anni, quamuis etiam sit doctor excellens. Itaque cum uideas nos … |
| 10 |
i.e. Alfonsus, cardinal of St. Eustace's. See the note above. |
| 11 |
(Decreuerat ….. Martino pape V … tribuere plenam beneficiorum conferendi libertatem.) |
| 12 |
The Barberini text has Eugenius etc. Datum etc.' |
| 13 |
Concernent in Reg. CCCLIX and Chigi. The Barberini text has concernunt. |
| 14 |
i.e. the date of his provision to Worcester. See above, f. 80d., note. |
| 15 |
i.e. the date of the appointment of Cardinal Albergati to represent the pope at the congress of Arras, in Raynaldus, an. 1435, § 3, and below, Reg. Vat. CCCLXXIII, f. 189. |
| 16 |
i.e. the date of Peter de Monte's appointment as collector, below, Reg. CCCLXXIII, ff. 177d. sqq. |
| 17 |
Immediately after the above letter to king Henry and before the above letter to the king's council, there occurs in the Barberini MS., ff. 203d.–204r., a similar letter to James, king of Scotland (Scotie), recommending the above Master Peter de Monte, I.U.D., apostolic notary. whom the pope has appointed collector of the papal camera in the realm of Scotland—'Propter plurimarum virtutum dotes …. reuerentiam etc., usque in finem ut in precedenti. Datum ut supra' [i.e circ. April 21, 1435, the date of his appointment as collector in Scotland, below. Reg. CCCLXXIII, f 180d] Chigi, f. 76d. = p. 152, contains the same letter to king James as the Barberini, but it there ends slightly differently, viz, '… reuerentiam etc. usque in finem ut in prescripta. Datum Florentie ut supra.' This letter to king James does not occur in Reg. CCCLIX. |
| 18 |
The letter to cardinal Beaufort is immediately followed in Barb. on f. 205r. by a short 'Similiter dilecto filio nobili viro Hunfrido duci Cloucestric,' and in Chigi, f. 76d, p. 152, by a like 'Similiter dilecto filio nobili viro Hunffrido duci Gloucestrie.' Reg CCCLIX omits this reference to the pope's letter to duke Humphrey. |
| 19 |
i.e. approximately the same date as the letters to king Henry and the royal council, etc., above f. 91d. sqq. |
| 20 |
The limits of Eugenius IV's stay at Ferrara. The date of the pope's letter is probably nearer the latter of the above two dates. It was at the pope's intervention that on April 29 (and again on July 11), 1437, the king conditionally agreed to allow the duke of Orleans to go to Normandy in order to help to bring about peace (Fadera, orig. ed., X. p. 663). The duke did not fulfil the conditions, but the king nevertheless, on July 17, 1438 (ibid, p 707). consented. on condition of a prescribed sum being paid by the duke before Oct. 1, to have him led to the English coast before Feb. 15, 1439, thence to make his way to Normandy for the purpose of treating for peace. The money not having been raised by Oct. 1, the arrangement fell through for the time and it was not till May 8, 1439 that the duke's keeper. Sir John Stourton, removed him from his place of confinement, in order to take him to the coast and so to Calais (Stevenson, Wars of the English in France, I, 432.) The pope's letter may thus be placed between Oct. 1, 1438 and Jan. 19, 1439. |
| 21 |
The king's letter to the pope (to which the above is the pope's reply), complaining of the appointments which the pope is rumoured to have made very recently (nuperrime) to Seéz and St. Sever, occurs in Williams, Bekynton Correspondence, I., pp. 65–67, and is dated May 10. 1439. The king's reply to the pope's explanation occurs ibid., I. pp. 23–26. The king's letter is there undated, but in another copy (ibid., I., p. 65) it is dated Feb. 6, 1439[–40.]. The date of the pope's letter lies therefore between May 10, 1439. and Feb. 6, 1440. And as the pope says that he has received the king's letter of complaint 'his diebus', the missing date is May 10, 1439. plus the time of the transit of the king's letter, plus
'these days'. |
| 22 |
'Vacanti iam pluribus annis ecclesie Sagien.' See the notes in Eubel Hierarchta, vol. II., under Sagien., Lucionen. and Carnoten. |
| 23 |
John de Pérusse d' Escars, in 1438. See ibid., under Sagien. |
| 24 |
Lewis de Luxembourg, translated from Térouane (Morinen.). Oct. 24, 1436.See ibid., ad. loc. |
| 25 |
Richard de Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, appointed lieutenant-general and governor of the realm of France, July 16, 1437 (Fœdera, orig. ed. X, p. 674), died April 30, 1439. |
| 26 |
By the death of abbot John de Calnario, Oct. 27 (or Nov. 26), 1438, as in Gallia Christiana, I, col. 1179, which states that 'Petrus de Berau al. Veran' obtained possession of the abbey as perpetual administrator by papal authority ' circa annum
1440,' the monks having been unable in a whole year 'toto anno' to agree on the election of a successor to abbot John. The Gallia implies that Peter retained the commenda until 'circiter 1454,' which conflicts with the condition laid down in the pope's letter of Dec. 14, 1446, below, Reg. CCCLXIX, f. 52d. |
| 27 |
See Bekynton Correspondence, I. p. 66. |
| 28 |
The letter belongs to the period of Eugenius IV's second stay at Florence, Jan. 19, 1439—March 7, 1443 (Eubel, Hierarchia, II, p. 7, note). The pope's reference to the election of the anti-pope Felix V places it after Nov. 5, 1439
(Raynaldi, an 1439, § 33). It is also later than the despatch of the anti-pope's encyclicals and envoys, and seems, in fact, to be the pope's reply to the letter of king Henry, of May 28, 1440, denouncing the schismatical action of the Council of Basel (Bekynton Correspondence, II, pp. 91–94). |
| 29 |
On Sept. 9, 1439, Eugenius IV appointed Lewis Coutinicho (Coutinho) to the see of Viseu, void by the deprivation of Lewis de Amaral, condemned as a partisan of the Council of Basel, 'declaratione Ferrariæ et Florentiæ successive contra eum facta' (Eubel, Hierarchia, Vol. II, ad verb, 'Visen.'). The present letters complains that the pope's nominee has been despoiled by the king's court after having held possession for two months in virtue of the pope's provision. Its date cannot therefore be earlier than about the beginning of 1440, and is of course prior to July 1, 1440, the date of the next following letter, below. f. 125. |
| 30 |
i.e. the above deprivation and promotion. |
| 31 |
Jan 24, 1438 (Creighton, Papacy, II, 1899 impression, p. 319). |
| 32 |
June 25, 1439 (ibid., III, 1900 impression p. 17). |
| 33 |
Felix V, elected Nov. 5, 1439, ibid., III. p.22), crowned July 24, 1440 ibid., III, p. 24). |
| 34 |
On ff. 127d–128d of Reg. CCCLIX (Barberini, ff. 314r–315d, Chigi, ff. 128r–129r = pp. 255–257), the pope writes to king Alfonso that he has already sufficiently replied to the king's repeated letters on behalf of the above deprived bishop. But in case the king has not received the pope's letters, the pope will reply briefly to the king's last letters of 7 Kal. April [1441]. The pope protests against the king's continuing to give to Lewis [de Amaral], sometime bishop of Viseu, a deprived schismatic and heretic, the title of 'bishop of Viseu,' in contempt of the authority of the pope and the apostolic see, and again sets forth his misdeeds at Basel, etc. The pope requests the king to desist from writing any more such letters. The pope will never absolve the said Lewis unless he sees him contrite, and unless Lewis Cotinho, bishop of Viseu, first gets possession of his church. The pope has made provision to the church of Silves (Siluien.) of another person acceptable to the king. (The date of this letter 'Satis jam respondimus … tue serenitati innotescet. Datum Florentie etc.' [which is partially printed in Raynaldi Annales, an. 1441, § 8, from ' cod. MS.Alex. VII (i.e. the Chigi MS.) pag. 255, and therefore with the incomplete Datum Florentiæ etc.] is posterior to May 22. 1441. the date of the provision of Rodericus Didaci to the see of Silves. See Eubel, Hierarchia. under 'Silven.') On f. 129 is a letter evidently of the same date, 'Scripsit nobis sepius regia serenitas … prout videre poteris per litteras nostras. Datum Florentie etc.', to the Infante Peter, duke of Coimbra, regent of the realms of Portugal and Algarve, in which the pope complains of the king's repeated letters in favour of the above deprived bishop, and of the regent's name appearing in such letters, and adds that he is replying to the king, as the regent will see. |
| 35 |
i.e., the date of the translations of Lewis de Luxembourg from Térouane to Rouen, and John le Jeune from Amiens to Térouane (Eubel, Hierarchia. II. ad 'Rothomagen.' and Morinen.') The pope had entered Bologna on the previous April 22 (Eubel, ibid., p. 7). |
| 36 |
The address 'Duci Eboracen.' is added in the margin both in Reg. CCCLIX and in the Barberini and Chigi MSS. The duke of York was, in fact, regent of France from April, 1436, to April, 1437 (Stubbs, III, p. 123, from the Ordinances of the Privy Council). |
| 37 |
The pope's nomination proved by no means pleasing to the duke of Burgundy. For the consequent dispute see Plancher, Histoire de Bourgogne, ad. loc. Reg. CCCLIX records other conflicts in which Eugenius IV became involved on account of his provisions, e.g. with Wladislav, king of Poland (f. 140), and Charles, king of France (f. 143). |
| 38 |
i.e. the date on which Eugenius IV. entered Bologna, having left Florence on April 18. He remained at Bologna till Jan. 14, 1438, when he went to Ferrara. [Eubel, Hierarchia, vol. II. p. 7, note.] |
| 39 |
6 Non. (rectius Id.) July, anno 6 i.e. 1436, being the date of the appointment of Anthony, bishop of Urbino, as nuncio to Scotland. See below, Reg. CCCLXXIV, f. 102d, sqq. |
| 40 |
So spelt also in the Barberini and Chigi MSS. |
| 41 |
For this date, see below, f. 325d. |
| 42 |
Bishop Philip Morgan died Oct. 25, 1435 (Le Neve—Hardy, Fasti, I, p. 338.) |
| 43 |
The letter belongs to the period of Eugenius IV's second residence at Florence, Jan. 19, 1439—March 7, 1443 (Eubel, Hierarchia, II p. 7, note), and its date is probably nearer to the earlier limit. For the king's letters in behalf of Obizis, of safe-conduct, dated July 5, 1438, and of credence, addressed to the pope and dated June 5, 1438 (Bekynton Correspondence, I, p. 60), apparently refer to his intention, as mentioned in the pope's letter, to send envoys to the Council of Ferrara—Florence. Before October 1 of the same year he left the Roman court in order to return to England (see below, Reg. CCCLXVII, ff. 42, 119.) Allowing time enough for Obizis to get sufficiently far on his return journey to fall into the hands of the duke, for the news to reach the pope, and for the pope to complain and the duke to reply, it may be concluded that the date of the letter is not long after the pope arrived at Florence, viz. Jan. 19, 1439. |
| 44 |
Sic both in Reg. CCCLIX and the Barberini MS. |
| 45 |
For this part II, viz. ff. 221–335, of Reg. CCCLIX, see the note in Cal. Lett. VII, p. 24. There is nothing corresponding to it in the Barberini and Chigi MSS. |
| 46 |
For this date see above, f. 91d, note. |
| 47 |
A blank space in the Register: 'dilecto filio familiari tuo. According to Gallia Christiana, vol. XI, col. 119. Aegidius Deschamps, nephew of the bishop of Coutances, was elected dean of Rouen on March 9, obtained possession on March 30, 1435, and died Oct. 31, 1438. |
| 48 |
Probably of Colwich. See Le Neve-Hardy, Fasti, I, p. 592. |
| 49 |
Lewis de Luxembourg was made cardinal of SS. Quatuor Coronati, Dec. 18. 1439 (Eubel Hierarchia, II, p. 7). |
| 50 |
The letter is evidently later than 1437. Feb. 20, the date of the murder of James I, the news of which the pope says he has received (see above, f. 156d) It is also earlier than 1438. Jan. 14. when the pope left Bologna. The two letters which immediately precede that on f. 325d in Reg. CCCLIX are dated, 'Die v mensis Maii anno septimo.' If Datum Bononie. etc.' be interpreted to mean 'Datum Bononie ut supra,' May 5, 1437 would be the missing date. |