Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T15:42:47.673Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Episcopal Election of 1430 in Trier and Nicholas of Cusa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

Morimichi Watanabe
Morimichi Watanabe
Affiliation:
Mr. Watanabe is associate professor of history and political science in C. W. Post College, Long Island University, Brookville, New York. He wishes to thank the American Council of Learned Societies for a grant which enabled him to complete this research
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Gregor Heimburg, the bitter critic of the papacy and of Nicholas of Cusa, is said to have taunted Cusanus, saying that because Cusanus was defeated in a lawsuit in Mainz, he turned from the practice of law to theology.1 Heimburg, a utriusque iuris doctor who rendered his legal services to both secular and ecclesiastical princes, was certainly versed in the legal literature of his time. But, as we shall see below, history does not seem to bear out his insinuation that disappointment and failure in the field of law led Cusanus to take up theology as his career. It is probably of little importance to ask whether Cusanus would have continued to work as a lawyer had he won the case in Mainz. We must note, however, that Cusanus is so well known as a theologian, cardinal, philosopher, and even as a scientist that we are apt to forget his early career as a canon lawyer in the service of the archdiocese of Trier. It is only recently that due attention began to be paid to the legal activities of Cusanus.2 The purpose of this paper is to throw light not only on his education and activities as a canon lawyer, but also on the role which he played in the disputed episcopal election of 1430 in the archdiocese of Trier.

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 39 , Issue 3 , September 1970 , pp. 299 - 316
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Düx, Johann M., Der deutsche Cardinal Nicolaus von Cusa und die Kirche seiner Zeit, I (Regensburg, 1847), 105Google Scholar; Vansteenberghe, Edmond, Le cardinal Nicolas de Cues, L'action - le pensée (Paris, 1920), p. 4Google Scholar. Heimburg's criticism of Cusanus is found in Invectiva Gregorii Heimburg Vtrivsque ivris doctoris, in reverendissimum Patrem, Dominum Nicolaum de Cusa, Sanctae Romanae Eoclesiae Tituli S. Petri ad Vincula Presbyterum Cardinalem, et Episcopum Brixinensem in Freher, Marquard, Rerum germanicarum scriptores, II (Strasbourg, 1717), 255–265Google Scholar. On Gregor Heimburg in general, see Brockhaus, Clemens, Gregor von Heimburg: Ein Beitrag zur deutschen Geschichte des 15. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1861)Google Scholar; Joachimsohn, Paul, Gregor Heimburg (Bamberg, 1891).Google Scholar

2. In this connection Erich Meuthen's numerous writings are of great importance. The author's indebtedness to his studies will be noted below. See also Sigmund, Paul E., Nicholas of Cusa and Medieval Political Thought (Cambridge, Mass., 1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Watanabe, Morimichi, The Political Ideas of Nicholas of Cusa, with Special Reference to His De concordantia catholica (Geneva, 1963).Google Scholar

3. Toepke, Gustav, Die Matrikel der Universität Heidelberg, I (Heidelberg, 1884), 128Google Scholar. The record on Cusanus is as follows: Nycolaus Cancer de Coesze cler(icus) Treuer(ensis) dyoc(esis) … d(edi)t.

4. Michel, Fritz, “Jurisperiti und Advokaten zu Trier und Koblenz,” in his Zur Geschichte der geistlichen Gerichtsbarkeit und Verwaltung der Trierer Erøbischöfe im Mittelalter (Trier, 1953), pp. 128–138Google Scholar. On Bologna especially, see Knod, Gustav C., Deutsche Studenten in Bologna (1289–1568) (Berlin, 1899).Google Scholar

5. On the via antiqua vs. via moderna controversy, see Ritter, Gerhard “Via antiqua und via moderna auf den deutschen Universitäten des XV. Jahrhunderts,” Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosopisch-historische Klasse (Heidelberg, 1922), pp. 39–144Google Scholar; Haubst, Rudolf, “Nikolaus von Kues auf Spuren des Thomas von Aquin,” Mitteilungen und Forschungsbeiträge der Cusanus-Gesellschaft [Hereafter cited as MFCG], V (Mainz, 1965), 17–19Google Scholar. Although there is no record to show that Cusanus received the bachelor's degree, we can probably assume that he did. See Meuthen, Erich, Nikolaus von Kues 1401–1464: Skizze einer Biographie (Münster, 1964), p. 13.Google Scholar

6. Gill, Joseph, “Cardinal Giuliano Cesarini (†1444),“ in his Personalities of the Council of Florence (Oxford, 1964), pp. 95–103Google Scholar. See also Fechner, Heinrich, Giuliano Cesarini (1398–1444) bis zu seiner Ankunft in Basel am 9. September 1431 (Marburg, 1907).Google Scholar

7. Krchnak, Alois, “Die kanonistisehen Aufzeichnungen des Nikolaus von Kues in Cod. Cus. 220 als Mitschrift einer Vorlesung seines Paduaner Lehrers Prosdocimus de Comitibus,” MFCG, II (Mainz, 1962), 67–84Google Scholar. On Prosdocimus de Comitibus, see Papadopoli, Nicolas C., Historia Gymnasii Patavini, I (Venice, 1726), 216Google Scholar; Krchnak, loc. cit., 80–84.

8. Ullmann, Walter, The Origins of the Great Schism (London, 1948), p. 193.Google Scholar

9. Papadopoli, , Historia, I, iii, 216Google Scholar: “BARTHOLOMAEUS ZABARELLA, Fraiicisci Cardinalis ex Andrea fratre nepos jus Pontificium Patavi magna cum laude publice docuit sub annum MCDXXXI floruitque deinceps.…” See also Facciolati, Jacopo, Fasti gymnasii Patavini, I (Patavii, 1757), 30Google Scholar; Zonta, Gasparo and Brotto, Giovanni, Acta gradvvm academicorum Gymnasii Patavini (Patavii, 1922), pp. 125, 180Google Scholar; Meuthen, Erich, Das Trierer Schisma von 1430 auf dem Basler Konzil: Zur Lebensgeschichte Jet Nikρlaus von Kues (Münster, 1964), p. 91.Google Scholar

10. Marx, Jacob, Verzeichnis der Handschriften-Sammlung des Hospitals zu Cues bei Bernkastel a./Mosel (Trier, 1905), p. 203Google Scholar. In Codex Cusanus 212 Cusanus wrote in his own hand: “Nota. 1425 die mercurii que fuit ultima dies Januarii habui graciam domini episcopi treverensis secundum quod ipse mlhi deberet dare annuatim 40 florenos unum plaustrum vini 4 maldra siliginis et ecclesiam in altreya.”

11. Nider, Johannes, Formicarius, Lib. II, cap. 2 (Augsburg, c. 1484)Google Scholar. On Otto of Ziegenhain, see Brower, Christopher and Masen, Jacob, Antiquitatum et annalium Trevirensium, II (Leodii, 1670), 267–273Google Scholar; Wyttenbach, J. H. and Müller, M. F. J., Gesta Trevirorum, II (Trier, 1836), 311–317Google Scholar; Lager, J. Christian, “Aus dem Leben des Trierer Erzbischofs Otto von Ziegenhain (1418–1430),” Pastor Bonus, 2 (Trier, 1890), 203–211, 253–265, 348–362.Google Scholar

12. Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 311–312Google Scholar: “… dominus Otto, comes de Tzegenhayn, praepositus et canonicus ecclesiae Trevirensis, per capitulum concorditer fuit electus. … Qui civitatem cum magno gaudio et solemnitate introductus fuit, cum multitudine prin. cipum, comitum, baronum, nobilium et aliorum proborum virorum.” The decrees of the provincial synod of 1423 are printed in von Hontheim, Johann Nikolaus, Historia trevirensis diplomatica et pragmatica, II (Augsburg and Würzburg, 1750), 367–371Google Scholar; Schannat, Johann F. and Hartzheim, Joseph, Concilia Germaniae, V (Cologne, 1763), 222–227.Google Scholar

13. The terms of the 35-point election capitulation are printed in Günther, Wilhelm, Codex diplomaticus rheno-mosellanus, IV (Coblenz, 1825), 199–205Google Scholar as “Walileapitulation des Erzbisehofs Otto von Trier 1419.” The text given in Günther is a slightly changed version of the election capitulation of 1418 which Otto solemnly published in 1419 after his election. See Kremer, Johannes, Studien zur Geschichte der Trierer Wahlkapitulationen (Trier, 1909), p. 12.Google Scholar

14. Keussen, Hermann, Die Matrikel der Universität Köln 1389 bis 1559, 2nd ed., I (Bonn, 1928), 213Google Scholar. The entry on Cusanus is as follows: Nyc(olaus) de Cusa, d(octo)r (in) iur(e) can(onieo), Trev(erensis) d(yocesis); n(on) dedit ob rev(erentiam) pers(onae), sed i(uravit) e(ompleta).

15. Marx, , Verzeichnis, pp. 81–90Google Scholar, especially Cod. Cus. 83. According to Colomer, Cusanus had 39 works of Raymond Lull. This is the largest number of works by any author in whom Cusanus was interested. See Colomer, Eusebio, S.J., Nikolaus von Kues und Raimund Llull (Berlin, 1961), p. 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On Heimericus de Campo, see Haubst, Rudolf, “Zum Fortleben Alberts des Grossen bei Heymerich von Kamp und Nikolaus von Kues,” in Ostlender, Heinrich (ed.), Studia Albertina (Münster, 1952), pp. 420–447.Google Scholar

16. Marx, , Verzeichnis, p. 95.Google Scholar

17. This tradition has been accepted in many books on Cusanus or his times. See, for example, Hyma, Albert, The Christian Renaissance: A History of the Devotio Moderna, 2nd ed. (Hamden, Conn., 1965), pp. 102, 262–264, 421Google Scholar. But, as has been pointed out by Marx and Meuthen, there is no conclusive evidence for this tradition. Marx, Jacob, Nikolaus von Cues und seine Stiftungen eu Cues und Deventer (Trier, 1906), p. 140Google Scholar; Marx, Jacob, Geschichte des Armen-Hospitals zum h. Nikolaus su Cues (Trier, 1907), pp. 11–13Google Scholar; Meuthen, Erich, “Nikolaus von Kues und der Laie in der Kirche,” Historisches Jahrbuch, 81 (1962), 107Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Nikolaus von Kues: Skizze, pp. 10–12Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, p. 76Google Scholar. Vansteenberghe, , Le cardinal, p. 6Google Scholar n. 3, says that the question is still open.

18. Marx, , Geschichte, pp. 12, 58–59.Google Scholar

19. Kallen, Gerhard (ed.), De conoordantia catholica [Hereafter cited as DCC], III (Hamburg, 1959), cap. iii, paragraph 316Google Scholar: “Ego enim Coloniae in maiori ecelesia volumen ingens omnium missivarum Hadriani I. ad Carolum et ipsius Caroli responsiones et insuper copias omnium bullarum vidi.…” On Guarino's letter as well as Poggio's interest in Cusanus, see Meister, Aloys, “Die humanistischen Anfänge des Nikolaus von Cues,” Annalen des historischen Vereins für den Niederrhein, 63 (1896), 1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Vansteenberghe, , Le cardinal, pp. 17–22Google Scholar: Löffler, Klemens, Kölnische Bibliotheksgeschichte im Umriss (Köln, 1923), p. 16Google Scholar. Cf. Schmidt, Aloys, “Nikolaus von Kues Sekretär des Kardinals Giordano Orsini?,” in Engel, Josef and Klinkenberg, Hans M. (eds.), Aus Mittelalter und Neuzeit (Bonn, 1957), pp. 137–143Google Scholar. Codex Carolinus, which is now Cod. Vindob. 449 of the Austrian National Library, was in Cologne till 1554. See Löffler, , Kolnisehe Bibliotheksgeschichte, p. 18.Google Scholar

20. DCC, III, cap. xxiv, paragraph 521.

21. Keussen, Hermann, Die alte Universität Köln: Grundsüge ihrer Verfassung und Geschihte (Köln, 1934), p. 452Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, p. 79.Google Scholar

22. Keussen, Hermann, “Die Kölner Juristenfakultät im Mittelalter,” in XXI. Deutsoher Juristentag Köln, 1891: Festschrift (Köln, n.d.), pp. 143–156Google Scholar; Muther, Theodor, “Kölner Rechtsgutaehten über die Brüder and Schwestern von gemeinschaftlichen Leben aus dem Jahre 1398,” Zeitschrift für Rechtsgeschiehte, 5 (1865), 469–472Google Scholar; Muther, Theodor, Zur Geschichte der Rechtswissenschaft und der Universitäten in Deutschland (Jena, 1876), pp. 245–251Google Scholar; Bohne, Gotthold, “Die juristische Fakultät der alten Universität Köln in den beiden ersten Jahrhunderten ihres Bestehens,” in Festschrift zur Erinnerung an die Gründung der alten Universität Köln im Jahre 1388 (Köln, 1938), pp. 109–236.Google Scholar

23. On Winand of Steeg, see Toepke, , Die Matrikel, p. 57Google Scholar; Weiss, Josef, “Winand (Ort) von Steeg,” Historisches Jahrbuch, 26 (1906), 470–471Google Scholar; Schmidt, Aloys, “Zur Geschichte der äiteren Universität Würzburg,” Würzburger Diözesangeschichtsblätter, 11/12 (1949/1950), 91–96Google Scholar; Schmidt, “Nikolaus von Kues Sekretär.… ?” Schmidt believes that Cardinal Orsini's secretary in 1426 was not Cusanus but Winand of Steeg.

24. The document is MS. No. 12 of the Geheimes Hausarchiv in Munich. On Cusanus' role in the Baeharach case, see my article, “Nikolaus von Knes - Richard Fleming - Thomas Livingston,” MFCG, VI (Mainz, 1967), 167–177.Google Scholar

25. Meuthen, Erich, “Die Pfründen des Cusanus,” MFCG, II (Mainz, 1962), 17Google Scholar; Meuthen, , “Nikolaus von Kues und der Laie,” 109 n. 42.Google Scholar

26. The 22-point reform document of April 9, 1426 is printed in Richter, Paul, Die Kurtrierische Kanzlei im späteren Mittelater (Mitteilungen der K. Preussischen Archivverwaltung, Heft 17.) (Leipzig, 1911), pp. 112–114Google Scholar. On Johannes Rode, see Hontheim, , Historia, II, 331Google Scholar; Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 315Google Scholar; Volk, P., “Abt Johannes Rode von St. Matthias-Trier mid die Anfänge der Bursfelder Kongregation,” in his Fünfhundert Jahre Bursfelder Kongregation (Münster, 1950), pp. 19–22Google Scholar. For a better understanding of Rode's relationship to Cusanus I am indebted to P. Petrus Becker, O.S.B. of St. Matthew Abbey, Trier.

27. Meuthen, , “Die Pfründen,” 21–22Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, p. 79.Google Scholar

28. Meuthen, , “Die Pfründen,” 19, 24.Google Scholar

29. DCC, II (Hamburg, 1963)Google Scholar, cap. xxxiii, paragraph 245: “Unde tanta pluralitas parvorum beneficiorum et subsequenter multorum sacerdotum ignarorum multum decolorat ecciesiam et facit laicos clericis infestos esse, dum tot sacerdotes conspiciunt, quos vident otio et vitiis vacare. Sanctum etiam sacerdotale officium valde vilescit cx hoc.…”

30. See, for example, Jacob, E. F., Essays in the Conciliar Epoch, 2d ed. (Manchester, 1953), pp. 18–23Google Scholar; Oberman, Heiko A., Forerunners of the Reformation: The Shape of Late Medieval Thought (New York, 1967), pp. 4–9.Google Scholar

31. Cusanus' father, Henne Krebs or Johann Cryfftz, was a fairly well-to-do winegrower and boatowner. Although not of aristocratic origin, he was closely related to the nobility of the Rhineland. See Meuthen, Erich, “Obödienz- und Absolutionslisten aus dem Trierer Bistumsstreit (1430–1435),” Quellen und Forschungen aus italienisohen Archiven und Bibliotheken, 40 (1960), 58Google Scholar; Meuthen, , “Nikolaus von Knes und der Laie,” 117Google Scholar. See also Chambers, D. W., “The Economic Predicament of Renaissance Cardinals,” in Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History, III (Lincoln, 1966), 289–313.Google Scholar

32. Koblenz, Staatsarchiv, Abt. 186, Nr. 319. Cf. Meuthen, , “Nikolaus von Kues und der Laie,” 116Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, p. 80.Google Scholar

33. Keussen, , Die Matrikel, I, 171Google Scholar. He became rector of the University of Cologne in 1421. Michel, , Zur Gesohichte, p. 38Google Scholar n. 258, seems to think that Friedrich of Dudeldorf was the same person as Friedrich of Kröv.

34. Reussens, E., “Documents relatife à l'histoire de l'Université de Louvain (1425–1797),” in Analeotes pour à l'histoire ecclésiastique de la Belgique, 30 (1903), 136Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, p. 79Google Scholar; Meuthen, Erich, “Neue Schlaglichter auf das Leben des Nikolaus von Kues,” MFCG, IV (Mainz, 1964), 39.Google Scholar

35. Struck, W. H., Quellen zur Geschichte der Klöster und Stifte im Gebiete der mittleren Lahn bis zum Ausgang des Mittelalters, I (Wiesbaden, 1956), 408 Nr. 952Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, p. 80.Google Scholar

36. Trier, Stadtbibliothek, MS. 1694/328, pp. 107–112. Cf. Meuthen, , “Nikolaus von Kues und der Laie,” 116.Google Scholar

37. Keussen, , Die Matrikel, I, lvii, 204, 206, 218, 566Google Scholar; Keussen, , Die alte Universität, pp. 388, 451Google Scholar; Michel, , Zur Geschichte, pp. 135, 137.Google Scholar

38. Kisky, Wilhelm, Die Domkapitel der geistlichen Kurfürsten in ihrer persönhichen Zusammensetzung im vierzehnten und fünfzehnten Jahrhundert (Bonn, 1906), pp. 4, 8Google Scholar. See also von Below, Georg, “Die Entstehung des ausschliesslichen Wahlrecht der Domkapitel mit besonder Rücksicht auf Deutschland,” Historisohe Studien, XI (1883)Google Scholar; Feine, Hans E., Kirohliche Rechtsgeschichte, 4th ed. (Köln. 1964), pp. 380–383.Google Scholar

39. For further discussion on the election of 1430, see Lager, J. Christian, “Raban von Helmstadt und Uhich von Manderscheid. ihr Kampf um das Erzbistum Trier,” Historisches Jahebuch, 15 (1894), 721–770Google Scholar; Laufner, Richard, “Die Manderscheidsche Fehde: Elne Wende in der Gescbichte Triers,” Trierisches Jahrbuch (1953), 48–60Google Scholar; Laufner, Richard, “Politische Korrespondenz zur Trierer Doppeiwahl 1430,” Trierisehes Jahrbuoh (1954), 52–59Google Scholar; and especially Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, pp. 55–103Google Scholar. See also Müller, M. F. J., “Graf Ulrich von Manderscheid: Ein Aktenstück zur trierischen Geachichte des Mittelalters,” Trierische Kronik, 9 (1824), 31–41, 49–59, 97–104.Google Scholar

40. Brower, and Masen, , Antiquitatum, II, 273Google Scholar; Hontheim, , Historia, II, 375 n. (a)Google Scholar; Wyttentenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 318.Google Scholar

41. Brower, and Masen, , Antiquitatum, II, 273–274Google Scholar; Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 319Google Scholar: “Dominus autern papa, nullum illorum confirmans, dedit, neseio qua de causa, tertium quendam, scilicet dominum Rabanum de Helmstet, episcopum Spirensem, virum prudentem, sed senem et canum. Qui nisi inductus maxime ducis Bavariae instinctu, ipsum coram summo pontifice promoventis, onus tantum nunquam sublisse creditur.”

42. On the whole question of the episcopal election and of disputed elections, see, for example, Eubel, C., “Zum päpstlichen Reservations- und Provisionswesen,” Römische Quartalsehrift, 8 (1894), 169–185Google Scholar; Barraclough, Geoffrey, “The Making of A Bishop in the Middle Ages: The Part of the Pope in Law and Fact,” Catholic Historical Review, 19 (1933), 275–319Google Scholar; Feine, , Kirchliche Rechtsgeschichte, pp. 380–383.Google Scholar

43. Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 320Google Scholar: “Quapropter comes praedictus de Vyrnenburch, et ceteri nobiles indignati, de facto sedi apostolicae se opposuerunt”; Laufner, “Politische Korrespondenz,” 55. On the Virneburg family in this period, see Kiapperich, Karl, Die Geschichte des Grafengeschlechtes der Virneburger (Bonn, 1921).Google Scholar

44. Goerz, Adam, Regesten der Erzbischöfe zu Trier von Hetti bis Johann II 814–1503 (Trier, 1861), p. 180Google Scholar; Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 320.Google Scholar

45. Hailer, Johaunes, Conciliusm Basiliense: Studien und Quellen zur Geschichte des Concils von Basel, II (Basel, 1897), 44–45.Google Scholar

46. On Panormitanus, see Papadopoli, , Historia, II, 14Google Scholar; Fleury, Jean, “Le conciliarisme des canonistes au concile de Bale d'aprés le Panormitain,” in Mélanges Roger Secretán (Montreux, 1964), pp. 47–65Google Scholar; Nörr, Kant W., Kirche und Konzil bei Nicolaus de Tudeschis (Panormitanus) (Köln, 1964).Google Scholar

47. Fromherz, Uta, Johannes von Segovia als Geschichtsschreiber des Konsils Basel (Basel, 1960).Google Scholar

48. Bressler, Hermann, Die Stellung der deutschen Universitäten sum Baseler Konzil und ihr Anteil an der Reformbewegung in Deutschtand während des fünfzehnten Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1885)Google Scholar; Hailer, , Concilium, I–IVGoogle Scholar; Stutt, Heinrich, Die nordwestdeutschen Diözesen und das Baseler Konzil in den Jahren 1431–1441 (Hildesheim, 1928)Google Scholar. For a detailed study of Scottish churchmen at the Council of Basel, see Burns, J. H.,Scottish Churchmen and the Council of Basle (Glasgow, 1962).Google Scholar

49. Hontheim, , Historia, II, 380–381Google Scholar; Laufner, , “Die Manderscheidsche Fehde,” 51–52Google Scholar; Laufner, Richard, “Der Handelsbereich des Trierer Marktes im Spätmittelalter,” Rheinische Vierteljahrblätter, 22 (1957), 194.Google Scholar

50. Hontheim, , Historia, II, 386Google Scholar; Lager, , “Raban von Helmstadt,” 745Google Scholar; Haller, , Concilium, III, 98–99.Google Scholar

51. On the composition of the DCC, see Kallen, Gerhard, “Die handschriftliche Überlieferung der Concordantia catholica des Nikolaus von Kues,” Sitrungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissensohaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse (Heidelberg, 1963).Google Scholar

52. Lager, , “Raban von Hehnstadt,” 755.Google Scholar

53. Only six of nine members signed the agreement, which was not too favorable to Ulrich. Cusanus and two other supporters of Ulrieh did not accept it. See Lager, , “Raban von Helmstadt,” 758–760Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, p. 250.Google Scholar

54. Ulrich died near Zürich. Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 324–325Google Scholar: “Tandem Udairiens de Manderscheit rerum suarum diffisus, dum Romam denno profieisci niteretur, in itinere apud Thuregum morbo interlit”; Lager, , “Raban von Helmstadt,” 726Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Tnerer Schisma, pp. 255–256.Google Scholar

55. Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, pp. 83, 89.Google Scholar

56. See Hontheim, , Historia, II, 332–333Google Scholar (Cancellarii Aulae Archiepiscopalis Trev.). Richter, , Die kurtrierische Kanzlei, gives on pp. 114–115Google Scholar “Kanzleigebräuche des 14. und 15. Jahrhunderts” (Circa ordinacionem et observacionem cancellarie Treverensis, prout priscis temporibus, tempore Cunonis, Werheri et Ottonis felicis memorie in litteris expediendis tentum et observatum est). Cf. Buchner, Maximilian, “Die Entetehung des trierischen Erzkanzleramtes in Theorie und Wirkliclikeit,” Historisches Jahrbuch, 32 (1911), 1–48.Google Scholar

57. The text is Bibliotheca Vaticana, Codex Ottobonianus latinus 2745, f. 218v-219v. See also Goerz, , Regeaten, p. 160Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, pp. 11, 76, 81–85Google Scholar. On Wittlich as an episcopal residence, see Kentenich, G., “Das alte kurtrierische Amt Wittlich,” Trierisohe Chronik, 10 (1914), 183–184Google Scholar; Bruckmann, K., “Wittlich als kurfürstliche Residenz,” Trersche Chronik, 15 (1919), 43–53.Google Scholar

58. Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, p. 83Google Scholar. Cf. Vansteenberghe, , Le cardinal, p. 53.Google Scholar

59. Kallen, , Die handschrftliche Überiieferung, p. 2Google Scholar: “Jedenfalls hat er sich das ganz Jahr 1432 und auch noch den grössten Teil von 1433 damit beschäftigt. Vor der Ankunft Sigismunds in Basel (11. Okt. 1433) lag die Concordantia catholica sicherlich nieht vor.”

60. Codex Ottob. lat. 2745, f. 218r: “numquam enim sedes apostolica a clero et popolo electum pro archiepiscopo praefate sedis repulit, sed semper prefecit et confirmavit equitate suadente.” The appeal is not entirely correct because the first papal provision took place in Trier with the elevation of Diether of Nassau (1300–1307) to the office of the archbishop. See Bastgen, Hubert, Die Geschichte des Trierer Domkapitels im Mittelalter (Paderborn, 1910), p. 275.Google Scholar

61. See especially DCC, II, cap. XXXII. Cf. Watanabe, , The Political Ideas, pp. 145–174.Google Scholar

62. Codex Ottob. lat. 2745, f. 218v: “ erui non poterant nisi per unum nobilem et inibi potentem, qul de illa dyocesi vel saltim de provincia Treverensi natalexn duxisset originem et.…”

63. Kisky, Die Domkapitel. On the nobility in the German church and especially in Trier, see Schulte, Aloys, Der Adel und die deutsche Kirche im Mittelalter, 3rd ed. (Darmstadt, 1958)Google Scholar; Bastgen, , Die Geschichte, pp. 26–33Google Scholar; Resch, Aloys, “Die Edelfreien des Erzbisturns Trier im linksrheinischen deutschen Sprachgebiet,” Trierisches Archiv, 17/18 (1911), 3–8Google Scholar. See also Dohna, Sophie-Mathilde, Die ständischen Verhältnisse am Domkapitel von Trier vom 16. bis zum 18. Jahrhundert (Trier, 1960), especially pp. 11–21.Google Scholar

64. Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 312–313.Google Scholar

65. Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Geata, II, 318.Google Scholar

66. Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 317Google Scholar: “Unde abundantia texnporalium, quam reliquit, facta est occasio dissensionis pro successoris electione.”

67. Codex Ottob. lat. 2745, f. 218v. See also Brower, and Masen, , Antiquitatum, II, 273Google Scholar; Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, pp. 56–57, 82–84.Google Scholar

68. “Ecciesia Treverensis ab antiquo ex tribus statibus constituitur, quorum nuns vocatur clerus Treverensis, alius milicia Treverensis, tercius incole sen populares Treverenses.” Quoted in Meuthen, , Das Trierer Schisma, pp. 56–57.Google Scholar

69. Brower, and Masen, , Antiquitatum, II, 275Google Scholar; Hontheim, , Historia, II, 380–381Google Scholar; Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 320–321Google Scholar; Laufner, , “Die Manderscheidsche Fehde,” 49.Google Scholar

70. Louis III, who was a supporter of Pope Eugenius IV, was against the Council of Basel. See Lossen, Richard, Staat und Kirche in der Pfalz im Ausgang des Mittelters (Münster i. W., 1907).Google Scholar

71. Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 320Google Scholar: “Nam totius patriae comites, barones, militares, omnesque ecclesiae subjecti Trevirensi Udairico adhaesere, summi pontificis mandata apostolica, supposito etiam ecelesiastico interdicto, floccipendentes; cuneta adversa tolerare parati.…”

72. See Graves, E. B., “The Legal Significance of the Statue of Praemunire of 1353,” in Taylor, Charles H. (ed.), Anniversoiry Essays in Medieval History by Students of Charles H. Hasicins (Boston, 1929), pp. 57–80Google Scholar; Waugh, W. T., “The Great Statute of Praemunire,” English Historical Review, 38 (1922), 173–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

73. On the so-called Instrwinentuin acceptationis which is a somewhat mild German version of the Pragmatic Sanction, see Werminghoff, Albert, Nationalkirchliche Bestrebungen im deutschen Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1910), pp. 33–85Google Scholar; Hürten, Heinz, “Die Mainzer Akzeptation von 1439,” Archiv für mittelrheinische Kirahengeschichte, 2 (1959), 42–75.Google Scholar

74. Zeumer, Karl, Quellensammlung zur Geschichte der deutschen Reichsverfassung im Mittelatter und Neuzeit, I (Tübingen, 1913), 181.Google Scholar

75. Barraclough, Geoffrey, The Origins of Modern Germany, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1947), p. 321.Google Scholar

76. Gebhardt, Bruno, Die Gravamina der deutschen Nation gegen den römischen Hof. 2nd ed. (Breslau, 1895)Google Scholar; Störmann, Anton, Die städtischen Gravannina gegen den Klerus am Ausgange des Mittelalters und in der Reformationszeit (Münster, 1916).Google Scholar

77. It is to be noted that Caspar Olevianus (1536–1587), a Cahrinist, made an attempt to reform the Trier church in 1559. See Marx, Jakob, Caspar Olevian oder der Calvinismus in Trier im Jahre 1559 (Mainz, 1846)Google Scholar; Ney, Julius, Die Reformation in Trier 1559 und ihre Unterdrückung (Halle, 1906)Google Scholar; Engelbert, Günther, “Neue Arbeiten zum Trierer Reformationsversuch 1559,” Jahrbuch für Geschichte und Kultur, 12/13. Jhrg. 1960/1961 (1962), 150–151.Google Scholar

78. Sigmund, , Nicholas of Cusa, pp. 158–187Google Scholar; Watanabe, , The Political Ideas, pp. 79–97.Google Scholar

79. Wyttenbach, and Müller, , Gesta, II, 320Google Scholar: “licet dominus Ulricus prius, cum esset decanus Coloniae, erat pins, benignus, et quasi omnibus dileetus; hic tamen factus est consilio suorum complicum severus tyrannus.”

80. Watanabe, , The Political Ideas, pp. 16, 97–98, 113–114.Google Scholar

81. Barraclough, , “The Making of a Bishop,” 283Google Scholar: “The law could not do everything, and the law did not do everything: influence and money played their part”; 311.

82. For a recent treatment of this conflict, see Tilliughast, Pardon E., “Nicholas of Cusa vs. Sigmund of Habsburg: An Attempt at Post-Conciliar Church Reform,” Church History, 36 (1967), 371–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar