Search

Search Results

• The PAPAL RECOGNITION OF THE THE FOUNDING OF THE UNIVERSITY OF NAGYSZOMBAT (TRNAVA) IN 1635

  89-125

  Péter Tusor

  Views:

  131

  It is a cornerstone of Hungarian historiography that the foundation of the University of Nagyszombat in 1635 was merely approved by the Emperor. Pope Urban VIII refused to confirm it because of the lack of a medical and legal faculty. The present study establishes that, from the side of the Apostolic See and thus also from the side of canon law, recognition was granted by prior authorization to the foundation of the University of Nagyszombat (Trnava) by Archbishop Peter Pázmány in 1635. It turns out that the failure to obtain immediate papal confirmation of the foundation of the university on 12 May 1635 was due to the objections of the leadership of the Jesuit order.  It proves that the Roman Curia's failure to solemnly confirm the founding of the Pázmány was not in fact due to the two-faculty nature of the institution, but rather to its Jesuit character. The reasons for this can be found in the more effective lobbying of the medieval universities and the mendicant orders, and the gradual decline of the Society of Jesus. Despite the subsequent confirmation by the Holy See, and the failure to grant university privileges in the form of a bull, the foundation of the university in 1635 may have been carried out with papal approval because Pázmány received a - preliminary - authorisation to found a university from Orban VIII in May 1632, during his imperial embassy to Rome.

• „AD PINGUIOREM FORTUNAM” POOR HUNGARIAN STUDENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA UNTIL 1450

  65-87

  Péter Haraszti Szabó

  Views:

  109

  A significant part of the Hungarian scholars at the University of Vienna between 1365/1377–1450 considered as poor students. From the nearly 3200 students almost 800 didn’t pay anything or could promise to be pay, however further 560 young people paid less than the prescribed taxes. In total 42,5% of them can be placed in different stages of poverty, but there were significant differences among them. This poverty although does not indicate their actual financial situation, only their financial condition in the time they were enrolled. The noteworthy political, military, or natural conflicts and phenomenon not necessarily affected them in their peregrination, only those which had influence on their financial situation. They can be divided into three groups. In the first can be found the non-paying students (pauper, nihil dedit). The second contains students with a little advantageous situation, namely who promised to pay the taxes (promisit, tenetur), or only asked a delay for fulfilling their obligation or an exemption from the regulated cloth-wearing. The third group concluded those who paid reduced taxes. Knowing their financial situation, the first two can be considered as pauperes, and the last is non bene habentes. Most of them came from the largest cities and towns (53%), however considerable the number of those who had a rural background (18%). Though their geographical origins do not shape a specific pattern, but their social background does.