Re: The Popess

#52
In "The Theatre of Brains," http://www.letarot.it/The-Theatre-of-Br ... 3_eng.aspx, Andrea Vitali has this to say
It is very interesting the valuation of the Popess from which results an unequivocal relation with Popess Joanne. Aretino actually writes that she “is there for the shrewdness of those who defraud our being with falsehoods that fake us”. Even if nowadays we give to the Popess card the meaning of Christian faith, referring to the Mystical Staircase that connote the whole 22 triumphs, it is evident that how much present was the myth of Popess Joanne in the collective imaginary of the Renaissance men.
Here is the sentence of Aretino's "The Talking Cards" that Vitali is referring to:
CAR: The Popess means the shrewdness of those who defraud our being with falsehoods that fake us.
Vitali also gives us the whole dialogue, in English. (I presume that the Italian is in the Italian version of his essay.) In other words, the association between the Popess and "Pope Joan" was common in the early 16th century. He also goes on to say that the preacher in the Steele Sermon seems to be referring to the same person.

Vitali does not say here how old the interpretation of the Popess as "Christian faith" is, except that it is the interpretation we give to it "nowadays."

I have been looking for documentation of how old the idea is that the Pope is married to the Church. In this regard, I notice that Marcello Simonetta, in his entertaining book The Montefeltro Conspiracy, says (126f):
Another poem, attributed to Luigi Pulci and addressed to Giuliano's pious mother Lucrezia Tornabuoni, attacked the Roman Church as underworld god Pluto's "new wife," as a poisonous Babylon, and as a "schismatic synagogue." There was no need to spell out Sixtus IV's name.
Only the first half of this sentence is in Google Books. By "Giuliano," Simonetta means the assassinated Giuliano di' Medici. The context of the poem is the Florentine reaction to his assassination and the simultaneous attempt on Lorenzo, in the "Pazzi Conspiracy," i.e. May of 1478 (the assassination was on April 26).

I still have not found any visual representations of the Church as the Pope's wife until the Council of Trent. But if Pulci can refer to the Church as the god Pluto's "new wife," implying that the Pope was the god of the underworld, now wedding the Church, it would seem that there must have been a tradition that the Pope's wife was the Church. Also, the idea that this wife was "poisonous Babylon" is clearly earlier than the Protestant Reformation. So Marcos, I guess I agree with your interpretation--as one among at least three at that time, with more to follow.

Luigi Pulci, author of the poem, was the brother of Bernardo Pulci, who with his wife Antonia wrote plays for religious confraternities. Antonia wrote an apparently popular play called "Saint Guglielma," which you can actually read on the web (Florentine Drama for Convent and Festival, chapter III in Google Books[/i]. So stories of the saint's exploits (considerably sanitized) were very much current in the 15th century, not only in Lombardy but also Florence and elsewhere. Her cult existed in Ferrara, perhaps established after Matteo Visconti fled there (discussed by Ross and Huck at http://www.tarotforum.net/showthread.php?t=100361#top). Manfredi is not mentioned in the play or later cult. But at least in MIlan, people would have known about Manfreda, because she was a Visconti. And who would the two followers of Guglielma be in the fresco, except her two successors, spiritual and earthly (Manfreda being the earthly)? Since Bianca Maria probably commissioned the fresco, the information would likely have spread from her to friends in Ferrara, Florence, and elsewhere. I conclude that the "Sister Manfreda"--or some other Guglielmite--association would not have been restricted to Lombardy and its ruling families, but have been known more widely. Of course I am not saying that Sister Manfreda is the only possibility, just that it likely would have been one understood, at least in the ruling circles, outside of Lombardy.

Mary Greer (https://marygreer.wordpress.com/category/major-arcana/) criticizes Barbara Newman for not mentioning that Concorezzo, with 1500 Cathars in 1299, was very near to Biassano, the 13th century Guglielmite cult center, near Brumante. Greer's sloppiness here annoys me, and I have to vent. One reason Newman might not have mentioned this detail is that it is not true. If you look at Greer's reference, David Abulafia's New Cambridge Medieval History, you will see, on p. 176, the statement that in 1250 a Cathar-turned-Inquisitor named Ranier Sacioni estimated that "1500 belonged to the moderate dualist church of Concorezzo near Milan." The Cathars did not have churches in the sense of buildings, which would have been easy targets for their enemies. Concorezzo was the center of a "moderate dualist" diocese, with a Cathar bishop. 1500 was for the whole region. Even this number is dubious. Many scholars (e.g. Lambert, The Cathars) consider it to be inflated by Sacioni, so as to justify his services.

Also, the date is important. At that time, 1250, the Cathars and other heretics were protected from the Inquisition by the local nobility (e.g. Matteo Visconti). Even then their protection, after Peter of Verona's efforts there, were limited. After Charles of Anjou's defeat of Manfred in 1266, and of Uberto Pallavicini in 1268 Lombardy (Abulafia again), these lords had to give way even more to the Inquisition. Cathars were then burned by the wagonload (28 of them at one time in Piacenza, as Lea reports in his History of the Inquisition, Vol II p. 235, in Google Books)--unless they converted, or fled to safer precincts: the alpine valleys of Piedmont,the islands of Corsica and Sicily, the wilds of Bosnia. Undoubtedly a few remained by 1299 in a kind of deep underground, but they wouldn't have made themselves known to someone as openly heretical as Sister Manfreda (who might name names under torture).

Albulafia (p. 177) says that the church at Concorezzo survived until 1289. He does not give his source. Typically, confessions by former believers about the survival of a heresy were made considerably after the fact. Under questioning, people named names to the Inquisition of heretics long dead (as described by Lea p. 240, 243). That seemed to satisfy the Inquisitors, who duly dug up the corpses and burned them.

So while Manfreda may well have known Cathars as a child (I don't know how old she was in 1299), these connections would have been broken long before her arrest. The Cathar beliefs were so different from hers that she wouldn't have been interested, given the risks. Whether there the Visconti had any relationship to the Cathars--independently of protecting all heretics, and especially the Guiglielmites--is worth more stidy. Since Newman didn't find any relationship, she left the Cathars out.

These 1500 (or fewer) Cathars would have been Italians, not Occitan refugees. If they had been foreigners, the former Cathar would have said so. Furthermore, Concorezzo was the center of the "moderate dualist" wing of the Cathars, and the Occitan refugees were mostly of the "radical dualist" persuasion. They would have gone further east, to the "radical dualist" diocese centered at Descenzano, near Brescia, if not further still to Bosnia. In fact when 200 Cathars were apprehended at Sirmione in 1276, where they had been protected by the della Scalas for decades, some were even from northern France.

Could there be any connection between the Cathar heresy and the tarot Popess? Well, the Cathars did have female priests, or perfectae, who in good times even ran Cathar convents (I am thinking of Esclarmonde de Foix, sister of the Count of Foix). But there never were female Cathar bishops, and there were no Cathar popes of either gender.

Hence I would have thought no association was likely, except for the odd portrayal of a woman in a painting by Bosch,The Stone Operation, of which the relevant details are below.

Image


I think we already know that the one doing the operation could be a Bateleur (viewtopic.php?f=23&t=384&start=10#p6394 and following posts).He could also be, satirically, a Cathar perfectus, helping a believer to find the spark of divinity within. (Usually, they simply laid on hands.) The one being operated on is obviously a Fool, of one stripe or another. I ignore the man in the black robe, a fool of a priest, Catholic-type; I see no hidden meaning. But what about the lady and her odd headpiece? Admittedly, she might merely be trying to improve her posture. However the Cathars, when they initiated someone as a perfectus or perfecta, had the candidate place their sacred book (the Gospel of John, at least) on their head (Lambert, The Cathars p. 134, at http://books.google.com/books?id=LIqmT6 ... ad&f=false). Such an odd custom might still have been remembered in Bosch's Flanders, even though the Inquisition hadn't found any Cathars there for centuries. If so, it would make a suitable object of satire for Bosch. And similarly, although the Cathars didn't actually have female Cathar bishops or higher.people might not have known that. They might have surmised that since women could be priests, they could be Pope as well. And since we have the first two tarot trumps in the painting, the mystique of the lady with the book on her head includes the third trump as well.

Re: The Popess

#53
mikeh wrote: I have been looking for documentation of how old the idea is that the Pope is married to the Church.
It probably developed in the course of the 12th century, under the influence of the Investiture Controversy, and the publication of the Decretals. The metaphor of sponsus (husband) of the Church was surprisingly less theologically motivated than temporally necessary to protect the property of the Church from secular claimants.

"Jurist, Huguccio of Pisa (d. 1210), argued that if the Church is Christ’s Bride (Ephesians 5 :21-33), ‘then the Church is husbanded by Christ’s representatives, the Pope ("vir ecclesiae”), the bishops, and priest.’ The analogy provided guidelines for the election of bishops, protected church property as a bridal dowry, and led to obligatory celibacy for priests. The bishop was given an Episcopal ring at his ordination by which he became the Sponsus of his church. See E.H. Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Medieval Political Theology (Princeton, 1957), pp. 212."

(From Carolyn Marino Malone, Façade as Spectacle: Ritual and Ideology at Wells Cathedral, p. 47 n. 13)

So the bishop is "married" to his church - the physical, temporal property itself. As the universal bishop, the Pope is "married" to the whole of the temporal Church - the "Church Militant".
I still have not found any visual representations of the Church as the Pope's wife until the Council of Trent.
I think that is a personification of the Papacy or the Church itself rather than a personfication of the Church as the Pope's wife. But, depictions of a woman with the triple tiara are rare in the 15th century - they only occur in portrayals of Pope Joan and in the Tarot.
Image

Re: The Popess

#54
mikeh wrote: Also, the date is important. At that time, 1250, the Cathars and other heretics were protected from the Inquisition by the local nobility (e.g. Matteo Visconti).
Hm ... is there another Matteo Visconti ? The usual Matteo Visconti died 1322 and wasn't born in 1250.

Heretic activities in Milan 1251 (murder of Peter of Verona-Milan)
http://books.google.com/books?id=ykUtnL ... rs&f=false
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_of_Verona

The church activities against Cathars in Lombardy should be seen in the context, that the excommunicated emperor Fredrick II. had died in 1250 and the church got a chance to extend its influence in Lombardy
Even then their protection, after Peter of Verona's efforts there, were limited. After Charles of Anjou's defeat of Manfred in 1266, and of Uberto Pallavicini in 1268 Lombardy (Abulafia again), these lords had to give way even more to the Inquisition. Cathars were then burned by the wagonload (28 of them at one time in Piacenza, as Lea reports in his History of the Inquisition, Vol II p. 235, in Google Books) ...
... :-) ... it would help, if you could give the direct link instead a description, I simply needed my 10minutes to find volume II
--unless they converted, or fled to safer precincts: the alpine valleys of Piedmont,the islands of Corsica and Sicily, the wilds of Bosnia. Undoubtedly a few remained by 1299 in a kind of deep underground, but they wouldn't have made themselves known to someone as openly heretical as Sister Manfreda (who might name names under torture).

Albulafia (p. 177) says that the church at Concorezzo survived until 1289.
"Albulafia Concorezzo" has no results. I searched "Albulafia" with the search engine of tarothistory.com and noted ...

search.php?keywords=albulafia&terms=all ... mit=Search

...
He does not give his source.


... :-) ... indeed
Typically, confessions by former believers about the survival of a heresy were made considerably after the fact. Under questioning, people named names to the Inquisition of heretics long dead (as described by Lea p. 240, 243). That seemed to satisfy the Inquisitors, who duly dug up the corpses and burned them.

So while Manfreda may well have known Cathars as a child (I don't know how old she was in 1299), these connections would have been broken long before her arrest. The Cathar beliefs were so different from hers that she wouldn't have been interested, given the risks. Whether there the Visconti had any relationship to the Cathars--independently of protecting all heretics, and especially the Guiglielmites--is worth more stidy. Since Newman didn't find any relationship, she left the Cathars out.
I see the early Guglielma cult inside an expansion of the Bohemian kingdom influence under Ottokar II (reigned 1253 - 1278). Ottokar II had good chances to become Roman king in 1272/73, but after the political confusion, which followed the death of Fredrick II, from 1250 - 1272/73 finally a Habsburger was chosen.

Guglielma is considered to have been an aunt of Ottokar II ... so naturally the growing importance of Ottokar II increased also the political meaning and importance of Guglielma in Italy - as long as he lived. "Having a saint in the family" (or better some) was a typical and repeating motif in contemporary political propaganda. But Ottokar died in a battle against the Roman Habsburger king and after this event the chances of Guglielma to become a "saint" had a considerable disruption.

About Constance, Guglielma's mother
"Constance was the daughter of Bela III, king of Hungary. The family had many saintly connections. Constance’s brother, Andrew II, married Gertrude, a sister of St. Hedwig, duchess of Silesia; Andrew and Gertrude were the parents of St. Elizabeth. Constance herself was the mother of Agnes of Prague, a follower and supporter of Clare of Assisi.
Constance was the second wife of Premysl Otakar, king of Bohemia, whose first marriage with Adela/Adleta of Meissen was dissolved on the grounds of consanguinity, which she contested until her death. Constance and Otakar, married in 1199, had 9 children, including Wenceslas I, Otakar's successor, Premysl, marquis of Moravia, Anna, who married Henry II of Silesia (son of St. Hedwig), Blazena, known as Guglielma Boema, who settled in Milan and became famous for healing in a religious cult, and the youngest, Agnes of Prague, who founded a Franciscan house for women in Bohemia and corresponded with Clare of Assisi whose struggles with the papacy she supported."
http://epistolae.ccnmtl.columbia.edu/woman/85.html

About Ottokar II between 1473-78
A new election for the Imperial German throne took place in 1273. But Ottokar was again not the successful candidate. He refused to recognize his victorious rival, Rudolph of Habsburg, and urged the Pope to adopt a similar policy. At a convention of the Reichstag at Frankfurt in 1274, Rudolph decreed that all imperial lands that had changed hands since the death of Emperor Frederick II must be returned to the crown. This would have deprived Ottokar of Styria, Austria, and Carinthia.

In 1276 Rudolph placed Ottokar under the ban of the empire and besieged Vienna. This compelled Otakar in November 1276 to sign a new treaty by which he gave up all claims to Austria and the neighbouring duchies, retaining for himself only Bohemia and Moravia. Ottokar's son Wenceslaus was also betrothed to Rudolph's daughter Judith. It was an uneasy peace. Two years later, the Bohemian king tried to recover his lost lands by force. Ottokar found allies and collected a large army, but he was defeated by Hungarian assistance and killed at the Battle of Dürnkrut and Jedenspeigen on the March on 26 August 1278.
After 1278 Bohemia fell in a period of chaos. The following king was still too young. From the papal side the interest was given to control the development and to increase the influence of Western Europe in Bohemia and Hungary ... which really happened in the longer run. The Anjou (already well established in Italy) expanded to Hungary (1308), and the house of Luxembourg (also under French influence) got Bohemia (1310). In the period of the heavy papal attack at the Guglielmites in Milan (1296-1302) Bonifacio VIII (pope from 1294 - 1303) ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Boniface_VIII

... had been an engaged and radical global player for "more papal influence", though not in favor of France, but for Anjou. But the personal show-down between Pope and French king (Philip the fair) had the result, that Philip ordered the death of popes and the pope took residence in Avignon instead of Rome ...

From Wiki:
Having got into a violent conflict with the King of France, Philip the Fair, who assigned himself the right to tax the French clergy, Boniface VIII emanated the famous Bull Unam Sanctam of 1302, which arrogated to the Pope's absolute supremacy over earthly power, against the king. The dispute became so harsh that Philip the Fair organized an expedition to arrest the Pope, with the purpose of removing Boniface from his office by the help of a general council.

On 7 September 1303, the king's advisor Guillaume de Nogaret led a band of two thousand mercenaries on horse and foot. They joined locals in an attack on the palaces of the pope and his nephew at the papal residence at Anagni, the notorious 'Outrage of Anagni'. The Pope's attendants and his beloved nephew Francesco all soon fled; only the Spaniard Pedro Rodríguez, Cardinal of Santa Sabina, remained at his side to the end.

The Pope was captured in his palace at Anagni in September 1303, by the French and Italian soldiers led by Guglielmo di Nogaret and Sciarra Colonna. The palace was plundered and Boniface was nearly killed (Nogaret prevented his troops from murdering the pope). Still, Boniface was subjected to harassment and held prisoner for three days during which no one brought him food or drink. Eventually the townsfolk expelled the marauders and Boniface pardoned those who were captured. He returned to Rome on 13 September 1303.

According to a legend, in such circumstances the Pope was slapped by Sciarra Colonna: the episode was therefore remembered in Italian History as the Schiaffo di Anagni ("Anagni's Slap"). The outrageous imprisonment of the Pope inspired Dante Alighieri in a famous passage of his Divine Comedy (Purgatory, XX, vv. 85-93), the new Pilate has imprisoned the Vicar of Christ. The people of Anagni rose against the invaders and released Boniface.

Despite his stoicism, Boniface was clearly shaken by the incident. The old pontiff, already suffering, developed a violent fever and died in Rome on 11 October 1303.
The Avignon Papacy was the period from 1309 to 1378 during which seven Popes resided in Avignon (modern-day France). This arose from the conflict between the Papacy and the French crown.
Following the strife between Boniface VIII and Philip IV of France, and the death after only eight months of his successor, a deadlocked conclave finally elected Clement V, a Frenchman, as pope in 1305. Clement declined to move to Rome, remaining in France, and in 1309 moved his court to the papal enclave at Avignon, where it remained for the next 68 years.
Philip would have loved it to have Bonifacio VIII posthumously abdicated, but the process was stopped in 1311, and the details of Bonifacio's many intrigues went down under the carpet. The French king had won the fight anyway, the new alliance between French king and papal interests demanded a clean surface.

That's the point of sister Manfreda ... the documents about her case disappeared and reappeared much later, so there's considerable doubt, if the information were known during 15th century. The (or a) Guglielma cult developed in 15th century (the Ferrarese document of c. 1420, Bianca Maria's engagement after 1450 and Antonia Pulci's poetical version around 1480), not a Manfreda cult.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guglielmit ... uraro1_0-0
Im Jahr 1296 unterzeichnete Papst Bonifaz VIII. eine Bulle (Sepe Sanctam Ecclesiam, auch als Nuper Ad Audientiam bekannt), in der eine ketzerische Sekte verurteilt wird. Er schreibt, das einige Personen, darunter auch Frauen, die Theorie aufstellten, sie besäßen die Macht zu binden und zu lösen (die Macht des Apostels Petrus und seiner Nachfolger), sie würden die Beichte hören, sprächen von Sünden los, würden sich anmaßen zu predigen und würden die Tonsur (Zeremonie des Haarschnitts bei Klerikern) übernehmen. Sie würden sich bei Tag und Nacht versammeln, sie würden behaupten, nackt gehaltene Predigten seien wirkungsvoller, sie würden ihre Frauen untereinander austauschen usw. Der erste Teil der Bulle enthält Angaben, die durchaus auf die Gugliemiten zutreffen. 1296 ermittelte die Inquisition erneut, verhörte aber nur ein Mitglied. Dadurch in Alarmbereitschaft versetzt, verließ Schwester Mayfreda mit anderen Ordensschwestern das Kloster Biassono und zog in das Haus von Guglielmo Codega.

Am Ostertag, den 10. April 1300 zelebrierte Schwester Mayfreda die Osterliturgie. Am 19. April wurde sie zum Verhör zur Inquisition bestellt. Am 20. Juli wurde ein neuer Prozess gegen die Guglielmiten eröffnet, der Prozess richtete sich diesmal auch gegen die verstorbene Guglielma. Im September wurden die drei wichtigsten Mitglieder zusammen mit dem Leichnam der Guglielma verbrannt.

1302 erfolgte im Nachtrag noch ein Verhör eines Mitglieds, hier wird erstmals nebenbei erwähnt, dass Guglielma einen Sohn hat. Ein Verhörter behauptete, dass die Mönche von Chiaravalle die heilige Guglielma dem Mond und den Sternen vergleichen, und er kommentiert, dass sie schlecht daran tun.
This gives two critical dates, one in 1296, when Bonifacio started (or threatened) to act against the Milanese group and 1300, when these activities really became dangerous between April and September, ending with the burning of 3 of the members together with the bones of Guglielma.
Observing, how this specific papal interest corresponds with that, what makes "Eastern European politic", we see following points:

* Before Bonifacio became pope: Bonifacio was born in Anangni ... this has 70 km distance to Rome and about 170 km distance to Naples. So - naturally - Bonifacio had an association to the throne of Naples, which was in the time, when became pope, in the possession of Anjou.

* 1285 - 1290 (before Bonifacio became pope): The relative young Hungarian king stranded in anarchy, somehow mirroring the not stable conditions in Bohemia since 1278 (after Ottokar's death).

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladislaus_IV_of_Hungary
In February, 1285 troops of the Golden Horde, led by Nogai Khan, invaded and sacked the Eastern part of the country, but they retreated soon. The king's popularity was by now so low that many of his opponents claimed he had invited them. These rumors seemed to be justified when Ladislas employed some of the Mongol captives as members of his personal guards.
In September, 1286 Ladislas IV arrested his wife and began to live together with his Cuman mistress, Édua. One year later he broke into the Convent of the Blessed Virgin on the Nyulak szigete ('Rabbits' Island'), where his sister Elisabeth had been living as a nun, and married her to a Czech magnate, Zaviś z Rozenberka. Having informed on these events, Archbishop Lodomer of Esztergom excommunicated the king and asked the pope to proclaim a crusade against him.
Afterwards, the anarchy became total in the kingdom, whose parts were practically governed by the great oligarchs, the members of the Babonić (Babonics), Kőszegi, Aba, Kán and Csák families, while Duke Albert I of Germany occupied several Western counties. In June 1289, Ladislas IV reconciled temporarily with the Archdiocese of Esztergom and his wife, but he did not have enough power to rule over the barons, so he joined his Cuman followers again.
In the beginnings of 1290 he appointed Mizse, a Muslim converted to Christianity, to Palatine. He was shortly slain in his camp at Körösszeg by Cuman assassins.

He died heirless. His successor, Andrew III of Hungary, issued from another branch of the Árpád dynasty.
* Andrew III., the follower, had a rather weak position. He was descended of a posthumous son of a Hungarian king in his very late years, born out of a an Italian love affair + quick marriage + quick death after in 1234/35, a love affair with a d'Este princess. The d'Este princess and her son became fugitives, sponsored under poor conditions by political Venetian interests. There are similarities between this Beatrice d'Este (died 1245) and her son to Guglielma (died 1281), who also is said to have had a son.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_III_of_Hungary
He was born in Venice, the grandson of Andrew II of Hungary (reigned 1205-35), being the only son of Andrew II's youngest and posthumous son (possibly illegitimate), Stephen, Duke of Slavonia who was born of the old king's third marriage with Beatrice d'Este. His mother was Tomasina Morosini, descendant of a Venetian patrician family. After the death of his father (1272), he was educated with his Venetian relatives.

In 1278, Ivan Kőszegi, an aristocrat who held several strongholds in the Western part of the kingdom of Hungary, invited him. Having arrived to the kingdom, Andrew claimed the government of the duchy of Slavonia, but king Ladislaus IV of Hungary refused him. After this failure, Andrew returned to Venice.
In the beginning of 1290 Ivan Kőszegi and Archbishop Lodomer of Esztergom, who had excommunicated king Ladislaus IV of Hungary, invited Andrew to Hungary and offered him the crown. Andrew accepted the offer, but he was arrested by a Hungarian noble, Arnold de genere Hahót who handed him over to Duke Albert I of Austria.

On 10 July 1290 king Ladislaus IV of Hungary was assassinated by his own Cuman followers; thus the main branch of the Árpád dynasty became extinct. Andrew, having been informed on the king's death, escaped from Vienna and went to Esztergom, where Archbishop Lodomer crowned him with the Holy Crown on 23 July 1290. After his coronation an assembly of the 'prelates, barons and nobles' of the kingdom of Hungary in Óbuda authorized the new king to re-examine his predecessor's donations. Andrew was hastily married to a Polish princess, Fennena of Kujavia.
* In this quick-developing situation the Anjou in Naples discovered, that they would have ALSO some claims on the throne of similar distance as Andrew. So a political line was developed, how to manage this approach. Well, they were not alone with this interest ...
The legitimacy of Andrew's rule was soon questioned, since his father had been declared bastard by his brothers; therefore the new king had to face several pretenders during his reign. On 31 August 1290 King Rudolph I of Germany, who considered that Hungary belonged to the Holy Roman Empire, invested his son, Duke Albert I of Austria, with the kingdom. This claim had no practical validity. An adventurer from Poland also claimed the kingdom, pretending to be Prince Andrew of Slavonia, the younger brother of king Ladislaus IV of Hungary, but his troops were defeated by Andrew's followers. In April 1291, Queen Mary of Naples, the assassinated king's sister, also announced her claim to the kingdom. She later transferred her claim to her son, Charles Martel of Anjou, and after his death (1295) to her grandson Charles Robert.

In early 1291 Andrew III visited the Eastern part of his kingdom, where the assemblies of the local nobility held in Oradea (Nagyvárad) and Alba Iulia (Gyulafehérvár) accepted his rule. Afterwards he led his armies against Austria and defeated the Austrian troops. Duke Albert I of Austria, in the peace concluded on 26 August 1291 in Hainburg, renounced his claim to Hungary. In compensation Andrew III promised to demolish several smaller fortresses, held by the Kőszegi clan, on the border of the two countries; thereupon Miklós Kőszegi rebelled against Andrew, in alliance with the Babonić (Babonics) and Frankopan (Frangepán) families, followers of the queen of Naples. The king tried to pacify the rebellion, but he was captured by Miklós Kőszegi and had to pay ransom to regain his freedom.

In 1293 Andrew III invited his mother to Hungary. She successfully negotiated with several rebellious barons (Henrik Kőszegi, Stefan Dragutin), who accepted her son's rule. During 1294 and 1295 Andrew III and his mother lead several campaigns against the followers of Charles Martel of Anjou.


* Now in 1294 we've the Anjou-friendly Pope Bonifacio VIIi getting momentum, and naturally being interested to help his friends in Naples.
In Bohemia meanwhile the young king Wenceslaus had found some stability and gained some influence in Poland (1296). In 1300 he became ALSO King of Poland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenceslaus ... of_Bohemia
In 1291, Przemysł II, High Duke of Poland, ceded the sovereign Duchy of Kraków to Wenceslaus. Kraków was associated with the overlordship of Poland, but Przemysł held the other duchies and in 1295 was crowned King of Poland. After Przemysł's death in 1296, Wenceslaus became overlord of Poland and in 1300, he was crowned King of Poland.


* The stability in Bohemia and in Poland wasn't in the political interest of Anjou and Naples. A stable Bohemia would protect also a the weak king of Hungary. So we have Bonifacio taking some distance to "Bohemia in Italy", which he sees in the relative harmless Guglielmites around Milan ... a target of attack, usable for the case, that it becomes necessary for higher political aims (well, we don't see, what else Bonifacio arranged to give the King of Bohemia some pressure to make the "right decisions" in near future).

* In 1300, the same year, when it becomes concrete against the Guglielmites in Milan, the larger action to win the throne of Hungary for the Anjou takes place. One shouldn't overlook, that Bonifacio invented the Jubilee year in 1300, a useful propaganda instrument to stir up Rome-tourism, more money and enthusiasm for religious matters and naturally a good time to press some "other changes", which might be at other times not very popular.
The weakening of royal authority under Stephen V of Hungary allowed the House of Šubić to regain their former role in Dalmatia. Soon Ladislaus IV of Hungary, recognizing the balance of power in Dalmatia, named Croatian magnate Paul I Šubić of Bribir as Ban of Croatia and Dalmatia. Ladislaus IV died in 1290 leaving no sons, and a civil war between rival candidates pro-Hungarian Andrew III of Hungary, and pro-Croatian Charles Martel of Anjou started. Charles Martel's father Charles II of Naples, awarded all Croatia from Gvozd Mountain (Croatian: Petrova Gora) to the river Neretva mouth hereditary to Paul I Šubić.

In the beginning of 1300, Paul I Šubić accepted Charles' title to the kingdom and invited him to Hungary. His grandfather accepted the invitation and granted Charles a smaller amount of money and sent him to Hungary to enforce his claim against King Andrew III. Charles disembarked in Split in August 1300 and he went to Zagreb where he was accepted as King of Hungary by Ugrin Csák, another influential magnate of the kingdom.

When King Andrew III died on 14 January 1301, Charles' partisans took him to Esztergom where the Archbishop Gregory Bicskei crowned him with an occasional crown because the Holy Crown of Hungary was guarded by his opponents. The majority of the magnates of the kingdom, however, did not accept his rule and proclaimed Wenceslaus, the son of Wenceslaus II of Bohemia king. The young Wenceslaus accepted the election and engaged the daughter of King Andrew III and he was crowned with the Holy Crown of Hungary in Székesfehérvár by Archbishop John of Kalocsa.

After his opponent's coronation, Charles withdrew to Slavonia where his partisans strengthened his rule. In September 1302, he laid siege to Buda, but he could not occupy the capital of the kingdom and had to withdraw to Slavonia again. Pope Boniface VIII confirmed Charles' claim to Hungary on 31 May 1303 and his maternal uncle, King Albert I of Germany also provided him military assistance. In the summer of 1304, King Wenceslaus II of Bohemia arrived to Hungary in order to help his son to strengthen his rule in the kingdom. However, the King of Bohemia had to realise soon that his son's position in Hungary was unstable; therefore he decided to retreat and his son followed him. On hearing his opponents retreat, Charles made an alliance with Duke Rudolph I of Austria and they attacked Bohemia but they could not occupy Kutná Hora and Charles had to retreat to Hungary.
* Indeed Bonifacio became rather furious, when his delegates came too late to influence the choice of a new Hungarian king, which just became the son of the King of Bohemia and Poland. He wrote a strong letter to Wenceslaus, which hadn't any effect. A war developed, during which Bonifacio, Wenceslaus II and Wencelaus III died 1303,1305 and 1306, finally not hindering, that the Anjou reached their goal in 1308. But ... anyway ... Wenceslaus II became in spite of many difficulties at the begin of his reign a "great king", though he already died with 34 years.
In 1298 the silver mine of Kuttenberg (Kutná Hora) was detected, which recently was mentioned in the alchemy thread.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenceslaus ... of_Bohemia
Vaclav II is considered as one of the most important Czech Kings. He built a great empire stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Danube river. He won for his family three royal crowns (Bohemia, Hungary and Poland). Kingdom of Bohemia was the largest producer of silver in Europe in his time. He created a penny of Prague, which was an important European currency for centuries.

During his reign, there was a large urban development. He planned to built the first university in Central Europe. Power and wealth of the Kingdom of Bohemia gave rise to great respect but to the hostility of European royal families as well. His son, King Wenceslas III, was unfortunately unable to keep a mighty empire, and soon after the untimely death of Wenceslas II, his empire began to crumble. With the death of Wenceslaus II, one glorious era of the Kingdom of Bohemia ended, the time of great political and economic power of the country.
***********
mikeh wrote:These 1500 (or fewer) Cathars would have been Italians, not Occitan refugees. If they had been foreigners, the former Cathar would have said so. Furthermore, Concorezzo was the center of the "moderate dualist" wing of the Cathars, and the Occitan refugees were mostly of the "radical dualist" persuasion. They would have gone further east, to the "radical dualist" diocese centered at Descenzano, near Brescia, if not further still to Bosnia. In fact when 200 Cathars were apprehended at Sirmione in 1276, where they had been protected by the della Scalas for decades, some were even from northern France.
I think, the Cathars were for a good part Bulgarians. I wrote about this question at aeclectic.
http://tarotforum.net/showthread.php?p= ... ost2598580

It's not so well known, that the Bulgarians had an "Empire" with considerable extensions in 13th and 14th century.


The Second Bulgarian Empire (Bulgarian: Второ българско царство, Vtorо Bălgarskо Tsartsvo) was a medieval Bulgarian state which existed between 1185 and 1396 (or 1422). A successor of the First Bulgarian Empire, it reached the peak of its power under Kaloyan and Ivan Asen II before gradually being conquered by the Ottomans in the late 14th-early 15th century. It was succeeded by the Principality and later Kingdom of Bulgaria in 1878.

Up until 1256, the Second Bulgarian Empire was the dominant power in the Balkans. The Byzantines were defeated in several major battles, and in 1205 the newly-established Latin Empire was crushed in the battle of Adrianople by Emperor Kaloyan. His nephew, Ivan Asen II (1218–1241), defeated the Despotate of Epiros and made Bulgaria a regional power once again. However, in the late 13th century the Empire declined under the constant invasions of Tatars, Byzantines, Hungarians, Serbs, and internal instability and revolts.

Despite the strong Byzantine influence, the Bulgarian artists and architects managed to create their own distinct style. Literature and art flourished in the 14th century and a large part of the Bulgarian population was literate.
The Cathars in Southern France were also addressed as "Bulgars", which makes it plausible, that they to a great part were just expanding Bulgarian merchants. In the description of the Cathars it appears, that they had enough money ... so the assumption, that they lived from trade (using similar income as the later great trading nations Venice and Genova), seems logical.
As many aspects of the Cathar movement history are hampered by ...

a. irrational romanticism (similar to Tarot history)
b. results of earlier persecutions, so missing of earlier documentation

... it isn't easy to free the more simpler "logical history" from all this rubbish.

It's rather obvious, that the Albigensian wars (since 1209) have a logical context to ..

a. 1204 crusader attack on Constantinople
b. 1204 building of Latin Empire
c. 1205 battle of Adrianople between Constantinople-Crusaders against Bulgarian Empire ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_ ... %281205%29
... which saw a loss at the side of the crusaders: The new Latin emperor was captured and killed and 300 noble well-trained knights with him and also a few thousand other soldiers.

Adrianople is nowadays Edirne in Turkey, c. 250 km West of the center of Istanbul, very near to the Greek and Bulgarian border.
The defeat was naturally not good for international trade and was bad especially for Bulgarian traders, who had settled somewhere else than Bulgaria at key points at the West European continent. That's a logical explanation for the Albigensian wars.
For Concorezzo it has to be observed, that it was near to some trading route from Lombardy towards the regions North of the Alps, so likely good for interests in trade.
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: The Popess

#55
Thanks, Ross, for your quotes about the Pope as married to the whole church. Also, yes, the triple-crowned woman after the Council of Trent is the Papacy or Church, not necessarily the Pope's wife, thanks for the correction.

I am still reading Huck's comments, meaty as usual.

Re: The Popess

#56
Huck wrote
Hm ... is there another Matteo Visconti ? The usual Matteo Visconti died 1322 and wasn't born in 1250.
Yes, forget about my "e.g." I had a momentary lapse about time periods. They were protected by the local nobility. Matteo Visconti continued that tradition, but in relation to the Gugliemites rather than the Cathars.

Huck wrote,
"Albulafia Concorezzo" has no results.
The link is given in Greer's blog. I guess I shouldn't assume that people will go to Greer. Here it is. Sorry for being so difficult. http://books.google.com/books?id=bclfdU ... rs&f=false.
And actually, the author is Bernard Hamilton. Abulafia is only the editor. Hamilton has written a lot on the Cathars.

I assume you eventually found the right page in Lea. I will try to get a link if you didn't.I apologize again. I was writing in a hurry, unfortunately--it was taking me longer than I had time to give--and I couldn't figure out how to reference the particular page I wanted. I should have at least given you a link to what I had. I didn't realize it would be that time-consuming. I get right to it, but then I've read it before.

Huck wrote
The (or a) Guglielma cult developed in 15th century (the Ferrarese document of c. 1420, Bianca Maria's engagement after 1450 and Antonia Pulci's poetical version around 1480), not a Manfreda cult.
That's why I mentioned the fresco with Guglielma and two admirers (you posted it on Aeclectic). Newman makes a case that there were two major successors, Manfreda being one of them, logical candidates for the two in the c. 1450 fresco.

Huck wrote
The Cathars in Southern France were also addressed as "Bulgars", which makes it plausible, that they to a great part were just expanding Bulgarian merchants. In the description of the Cathars it appears, that they had enough money ... so the assumption, that they lived from trade (using similar income as the later great trading nations Venice and Genova), seems logical.
As many aspects of the Cathar movement history are hampered by ...

a. irrational romanticism (similar to Tarot history)
b. results of earlier persecutions, so missing of earlier documentation
I know there's a lot of nonsense written about the Cathars, but Bernard Hamilton and Malcolm Lambert are very reputable, no-nonsense scholars. Yes, Catharism very much appeared along trade routes. No one knows whether any foreign missionaries were there early on. Possibly so. But traders from the Rhineland, the Low Countries, Toulouse, etc. also went to Constantinople on trade missions and stayed a while. At some point there was an institutinoalized Bogomil "Church of the Latins" there, where Latin-speakers could receive instruction and initiation. Then they came home. A few might have been Crusaders to the East, I don't know if the dates correspond or not.

On the "Church of the Latins," see http://books.google.com/books?id=uH-8AA ... ch&f=false.

A generally good account of the origins of Catharism in the West is Malcclm Lambert's Chapter Two, starting at http://books.google.com/books?id=33gh_Y ... &q&f=false

Occasionally Bogomisl bishop would make an appearance in the West, spreading their sectarian disputes (moderate vs. radical dualism) to their disciples in the West. Here is a map, from Lambert's earlier book Medieval Heresies (I can't seem to find it on-line).

Image


Yes, there were plenty of Greeks in Western Europe at the time. They were overwhelmingly Orthodox, not Cathars. As for Catharism being spread by Bulgarian traders, not even the Bulgarian writer on the Cathars Yuri Stoyanov says that.

Even the Bulgarians were not primarily Cathar. Catharism was an underground movement then, everywhere. The parent church, the Bogomils, did come from greater Bulgaria, as the map shows. But "Bulgar" applied to Western Cathars was just a Catholic term of abuse, to imply that Catharism was a foreign religion.

The Cathars had extremely good local roots in the Toulouse/Foix area. St. Dominic found that out when he tried debating them (not in Bulgarian, I assume, or even Greek). Hence the need for further measures, he felt. The Cathars lived a life of voluntary poverty, going from place to place entirely dependent on the local population for food and shelter, except for what little they could earn by their own labor. (A few, to be sure, were wealthy nobles. And people also made bequests to them--useful for bribes, I imagine.) But taking up such a life-style oneself, as Dominic's order did, didn't work. Even crusades didn't work: it took the regular French army, with Crusaders as a minor adjunct, to turn the tide, in 1243, followed by a full-blown Inquisition.

In Languedoc, the majority of the Cathars' supporters were in the countryside, people usually suspicious of strangers. We know that if only from the "scorched earth" policy that Simon de Montfort had to use in order to defeat them, killing their livestock, cutting down their fruit trees, etc,--like the US army in Georgia (against the Confederacy), Arizona (against the Navajo) and in Vietnam. There are also the Inquisition records to document the demographics.

In northern Italy Cathars tended to be town-dwellers. Here is part of another map, c. 1250, from Lambert's The Cathars, but I don't know what page.(I already have it in my scanned images.)

Image


If you look at the Cathar documents from Italy, especially the "Book of the Two Principles," you will see that a style that is reminiscent of the University of Paris, presented in the format of Aristotelian logic.

http://books.google.com/books?id=BiPyb3 ... 22&f=false

You have to skip through a few pages to get to the text itself. Then skim the introduction and look at the style of the arguments about angels, etc. No Bulgarian trader could possibly have written it, nor could it be a translation of a Bogomil tract from the Balkans. The documents from Languedoc (in impeccable Occitan) are simpler, written in a mythic style more appropriate to a largely illiterate people, more similar to the Bogomil documents from which they spring.

Re: The Popess

#57
mikeh wrote: That's why I mentioned the fresco with Guglielma and two admirers (you posted it on Aeclectic). Newman makes a case that there were two major successors, Manfreda being one of them, logical candidates for the two in the c. 1450 fresco.
Ross (somewhere, I don't remember) made it plausible, that the two additional persons didn't show Manfreda.
I know there's a lot of nonsense written about the Cathars, but Bernard Hamilton and Malcolm Lambert are very reputable, no-nonsense scholars. Yes, Catharism very much appeared along trade routes. No one knows whether any foreign missionaries were there early on. Possibly so. But traders from the Rhineland, the Low Countries, Toulouse, etc. also went to Constantinople on trade missions and stayed a while.
There's a church in Cologne, St. Pantaleon, which was sponsored by empress Theophanu in late 10th century, and around this a Greek colony developed. I reported this in Mammut-thread about the Cathars.
http://tarotforum.net/showthread.php?p= ... ost2599328
Possibly this answers the question, why later c. 1140 Cathars are first mentioned (and killed) near Cologne. The Dominicans, which developed as an antithesis against the Cathars, became then very strong in Cologne (Albertus Magnus was here), a development, which endured till 16th century, getting a break with the upcoming reformation.
It would also explain some Cathar influence in the Netherlands, as there were always close connections between Cologne-Netherlands cause of local nearness.

This was first only a suspicion, but it becomes better:

Checking the early appearances of the Cathars there are very early appearances in Arras and Chalons (near Reims), close to Teophanu in Cologne. But she traveled much ... variously to Reims. Arras ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arras

... was a centrum for money and troubadours, which fits with the theory, that Cathars were connected to trade:

http://www.notbored.org/resistance-29.html
Around 1018, an important group that was well implanted in the working-class [populaire] mileux of Aquitane rejected the cross, baptism, marriage and the consumption of animal flesh. Around 1022, the population of Toulouse showed itself receptive to their influence -- from whence came the reputation as an old nest of heretics that Petrus Valium attributed to it: Tolosa tota dolosa.

In 1022, the Orleans affair exploded. The nobles and priests of the Church of the Holy Cross, including a familiar of King Robert and the confessor of Queen Constance, professed Bogomile opinions, perhaps influenced by an Italian missionary. They held that matter was impure; they rejected marriage and the pleasures of love, baptism, communion, confession, prayer, the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the material existence of the Christ ("We were not there and we can not judge if it is true," they said in their vows). Through the laying-on of hands, they purified the believer of his or her sins. The Holy Spirit then descended on him or her; from then on, his or her soul was raised up and delivered from suffering.

Denounced to King Robert, this group was placed on the pyre on 28 December 1022, following the penalty reserved by customary right for sorcerers. The chroniclers of the time assured their readers that the condemned went to their deaths laughing.

In 1025, in the dioceses of Chalons and Arras, an Italian named Gandulf incited the enthusiasm of the disinherited and the weaver-workers by preaching a doctrine in which various social themes, Bogomilism and the reforms announced by Henri du Mans and Pierre de Bruys were mixed.[4]

In Italy, from whence came certain agitators, Bogomilism stocked up and engendered specific doctrines. In 1028, a community of some 30 people belonging to the nobility, and centered around the Countess of Ortes, met at the chateau of Monteforte. They formed an ascetic group whose aspirations to an evangelical Christianity assimilated the teachings of Bogomile and announced Catharism.

When the Archbishop of Milan, Aribert, arranged to pursue these people, they offered no resistance, confessed their faith and, obliged to choose between the adoration of the cross and the pyre, they willingly threw themselves into the flames, assured of another world that would liberate them from the miserable imperfections of terrestrial existence.

Other adepts of similar beliefs showed up near Verona, Ravenna and Venice. Gerard of Csanad (1037-1046) remarked that they had many brothers in faith in Greece. They scorned the Church, the priests and their rites, and mocked the resurrection of the flesh.

Between 1043 and 1048, the agitation spread to the region of Chalons, not far from Vertus, where Leuthard had previously sowed trouble. At the time of the Council of Rheims (1049), there were mysterious assemblies of peasants who refused marriage and the pleasures of love. They practiced the laying-on of hands and refused to kill animals.

In 1051, in Goslar, the emperor condemned to the gallows those Lorrain peasants who refused to kill the chickens that the bishop of the town had presented to them as a test of their beliefs.

For almost a century, no document attested to the perpetuation of Bogomilism, which was subjected to local interpretations in its propagation in Western Europe.
Well, what explains this appearance of the early form of Catharism, dubious and dark it may be in its details? A simple look, what happened to 1st Bulgarian Empire, it stopped to exist just in 1018, when the Western problem started - 1018 in Aquitaine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Bulgarian_Empire

Possibly there were many - perhaps too much - religious fugitives? Or Western kingdoms decided to operate against them, cause it seemed, that the Bulgarian Empire had lost its power and the "visitors" with that their protection?

Why did the persecution stop? Possibly cause the Orthodox church decided after 33 years to use more tolerance against the Bogomil believe and the fugitives returned back?
Huck
http://trionfi.com

Re: The Popess

#58
With all that persecution of Cathars/people of Bogomil faith (the word "Cathar" comes from its enemies, I'd have to look up just when) 1018 and after, you'd think someone would say something about foreigners, if any were around. But I suppose they could hide out in the Greek community. Anyway, the Bogomils that were persecuted in Western Europe weren't Bulgarians, that's clear from the passages you posted.

Did you give documentation that the persecution of the Bogomils stopped at some point (in Bulgaria, I assume you meant? I saw your underlining of the first part of the sentence
For almost a century, no document attested to the perpetuation of Bogomilism, which was subjected to local interpretations in its propagation in Western Europe.
. But that's not about lack of persecution, it's about the lack of documents that would unify and perpetuate Bogomilism, as opposed to oral teaching with much variation.

Wikipedia on the Bogomils says only, referring to tzar Samuil
There are no sources of Bogomil persecution during his reign (976 - 1014)
But that's an earlier time than you have in mind.

On a different point:

In another thread, I commented on a passage I recently re-read about how the church was personified in 15th century. Since it may relate to the Popess, I will repeat it here. Seznec discusses a manuscript known as the "Copenhagen Commentary," a manuscript of the later 15th century. He observes
As Jeannette van't Sant has discerningly remarked (footnote: Le Commentaire de Copenhague de l'Ovide morlise, p. 12), it sometimes happens that the aurhor of the Commentaire strays from moral interpretation into the realm of social criticism. In fact, the mythological divinities by no means always symbolize for him vice in general, but suggest the views of his own time, and above all the vices of the great--of clergy and princes. Pluto, for example, incarnates the evil prelate; Mars and Neptune, earthly tyrants. In contrast, Saturn, Jupiter, and Apollo upon occasion represent the virtuous ecclesiastic. As for Juno, she remains the incarnation of the Church. (Survival of the Pagan Gods, p. 93f).
So it seems that if the Popess is the Church, she also rather easily gets the name Juno, if Church = Juno. And as for Pulci, the Pope is Pluto--but at least here, the poor Church is not Babylon.

Re: The Popess

#59
PopesseJoan.jpg
PopesseJoan.jpg (20.06 KiB) Viewed 9092 times
Laduersaire par truffe parle de calfurnie et de dame iehanne la papesse...
(The adversary talks through his nose (?) about Calpurnia and Lady Jean the Popesse ...)

la papesse Jeanne


Title : [Illustrations de La Champion des dames] / [Non identifié] ; Martin France, aut. du texte
Author : France,, Martin. Auteur du texte
Publisher : Jean du Pré (Lyon)
Date of publication : 1488
Type : image fixe
Language : Middle French
Format : 61 est. : gravures sur bois : Noir et blanc
Format : image/jpeg
Copyright : domaine public
Identifier : ark:/12148/btv1b2200014c
Source : Bibliothèque nationale de France
Relation : http://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb38498246t
Provenance : bnf.fr

The verses (490 - 502) in English translation, p. 130
Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different.
T. S. Eliot

Re: The Popess

#60
flamen9.gif
flamen9.gif (4.42 KiB) Viewed 8236 times
flamen10.gif
flamen10.gif (10.84 KiB) Viewed 8236 times
isispriestess_flavian Flaminicae.jpg
isispriestess_flavian Flaminicae.jpg (59.27 KiB) Viewed 8236 times
sarcophagos_alcestis Magnae Matris.jpg
sarcophagos_alcestis Magnae Matris.jpg (169.56 KiB) Viewed 8236 times
640px-Pompeii_-_Officina_di_Verecundus_-_Venus_2.jpg
(113.65 KiB) Downloaded 348 times
The thread about Andrea Alciati Sequence- He used the term Flaminicam as the Priest's (sacerdos) wife.
I thought that unusual as we think of the priest as the Pope not a Flamen.
The duties of the wife of a Flamen were to keep the Flame of the Deity (like Venus or Hesta) alight, make Holy bread and distribute it, attend public performances etc.The Flamen belonged to the college of Pontiffs the ancient Roman priesthood. Like the Emperor of Rome the Priesthood was a State organisation- not in the sense we see the Papacy as a religion apart from the State.
~Lorredan
The Universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.
Eden Phillpotts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron