Analecta Gelliana

1993 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 292-297
Author(s):  
Leofranc Holford-strevens
Keyword(s):  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Latin Translation ◽  
The Right

Not only was Gellius' preface received in the fifteenth century at the end of his work instead of the beginning, but it arrived almost or wholly without the Greek, which had to be patched up by guesswork; between siluarum and quidam early editors read ‘ille κηρ⋯ον, alius κ⋯ρας ⋯μαλӨε⋯ας’, the first two names in the similar passage, Plin. N.H. pr. 24. Salmasius, in the preface to his Plinianae exercitationes, printed a text ‘ex vestigiis antiquae scripturae optimi exemplaris [sc. MS P = Paris, BN lat. 5765] partim etiam coniecturis nostris correctiorem’; following κ⋯ρας he gave, in the right place but with the wrong accent, ‘alius Κ⋯ρια’. But when eleven years later he came to annotate Simplicius' commentary on Epictetus' Ἐγχειρ⋯διον, alerted by Simplicius' statement (taken from Arrian's own epistle dedicatory) συν⋯ταξεν ⋯ Ἀρριαν⋯ς, τ⋯ καιριὼτατα κα⋯ ⋯ναγκαι⋯τατα ⋯ν øιλοσοø⋯ᾳ κα⋯ κινητικώτατα τ⋯ν ψυχ⋯ν ⋯πιλεξ⋯μενος ⋯κ τ⋯ν Ἐπικτ⋯του λ⋯γων, he remarked: ‘Quidam et inscripsere libros suos olim τ⋯ κα⋯ρια, quod maxime ad rem quam tractabant pertinentia eo opere persequebantur’, citing Gellius with ‘alius κα⋯ρια and commenting ‘Ita enim ex veteri codice ibi scribendum est, non ut vulgo editur, κ⋯ριον [sic]'. Nevertheless, editors preferred his first thoughts to his second; Hertz, in his separate edition of Gellius' preface (Progr. Breslau, summer 1877) and in his editio maior (Berlin, 1883–5), gives three parallels:Plin. N.H. pr. 24, ‘Κηρ⋯ον inscripsere quod uolebant intellegi fauom’, where the Latin translation guarantees the reading;Clem. Alex. 6.1.2.1 (pp. 422–3 Stählin-Früchtel-Treu) ⋯ν μ⋯ν οὖν τῷ λειμ⋯νι τ⋯ ἄνӨη ποικ⋯λως ⋯νӨοȗντα κ⋯ν τ⋯ παραδε⋯σ⋯ [‘orchard’] ⋯ τ⋯ν ⋯κροδρ⋯ων øυτε⋯α οὐ κατ⋯ εἶδος ἕκαστον κεχώρισται τ⋯ν ⋯λλογεν⋯ν (ᾗ κα⋯ Λειμ⋯ν⋯ς τινες κα⋯ Ἑλικ⋯νας κα⋯ Κηρ⋯α κα⋯ Π⋯πλους συναγωγ⋯ς øιλομαӨεȋς ποικ⋯λως ⋯ξανӨισ⋯μενοι συνεγρ⋯ψαντο), where again the sense requires the honeycomb;Philost. VS 565 ⋯πιστολα⋯ δ⋯ πλεȋσται Ἡρώδου κα⋯ διαλ⋯ξει κα⋯ ⋯øημερ⋯δες ⋯γχειρ⋯δι⋯ τε κα⋯ καίρια τ⋯ν ⋯ρχα⋯αν πολυμ⋯Өειαν ⋯ν βραχεȋ ⋯πηνӨισμ⋯να, where hertz emends κα⋯ρια to κηρ⋯α.

scholarly journals The Czech Nobility's Use of the Right of Patronage on Behalf of the Hussite Reform Movement

Slavic Review ◽  
1975 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 341-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
John M. Klassen
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Fourteenth Century ◽  
European History ◽  
Reform Movement ◽  
Reform Movements ◽  
Power Structures ◽  
Southern France ◽  
The Right ◽  
Instrumental Role

Throughout European history the aristocracy has been involved in reform movements which undermined either ecclesiastical or monarchical power structures. Thus the nobles of southern France in the twelfth century granted protection to the Cathars, and in fourteenth-century England lords and knights offered aid to the Lollards. The support of German princes and knights for Lutheranism is well known, as is the instrumental role played by the French aristocracy in initiating the constitutional reforms which gave birth to that nation's eighteenth-century revolution. The fifteenth-century Hussite reform movement in Bohemia similarly received aid from the noble class. Here, when the Hussites were under attack in 1417 from the authorities, especially the archbishop, sympathetic lords protected Hussite priests on their domains.

The Consolidation of Ava

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Aung-Thwin
Keyword(s):  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Classical Tradition ◽  
Founding Fathers ◽  
The Right

The two founding fathers of Ava, Thadominbya and Minkyiswa Sawkai were succeeded by four equally strong kings who continued their predecessors’ work and consolidated what the former had begun. In doing so, Mingaung the First and three of his most important successors (Hsinphyushin Thihathu, Mo Nyin Min, and Hsinphyushin Minye Kyawswa Gyi) set the stage for Ava’s efflorescence that reached fruition during the second half of the fabulous fifteenth-century. Fortunately for the Burmese speakers and their culture (and ultimately the modern Union of Myanmar), able leaders emerged at the right time to continue the “classical” tradition, which was carried for several more centuries.

Fifteenth-Century Texts on the Ceremonial of the Papal ‘Legatus a latere’

Traditio ◽  
1958 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 295-358 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franz Wasner
Keyword(s):  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Canon Law ◽  
Theoretical Basis ◽  
Code Of Canon Law ◽  
Imperial Court ◽  
John Xxii ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

From the earliest times the Roman pontiffs exercised the right of sending envoys - by dispatching their legates to synods and councils, by maintaning from the time of Leo the Great their apocrisiarii at the imperial court of Constantinople and later still in the kingdom of the Franks, by appointing bishops and metropolitans as vicars apostolic, and by entrusting at times even to secular princes a kind of legatine power. While the theoretical basis of their claim to this right may be said to have received its final formulation at the hands of John XXII in the year 1316, it was nonetheless more penetratingly analyzed and expounded by Pius VI and Leo XIII. It is upon the pronoun cements of these popes that the definition of this claim in the Code of Canon Law is based:ius … a civili potestate independens, in. quamlibet mundi partem legatos cum vel sine ecclesiastica iurisdictione mittendi.

Seeking Sanctuary

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon McSheffrey
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Political Elite ◽  
The Political ◽  
Politics And Religion ◽  
English Law ◽  
Late Fifteenth ◽  
Early Modern Era ◽  
The Right ◽  
Modern Era

Seeking Sanctuary explores a curious aspect of premodern English law: the right of felons to shelter in a church or ecclesiastical precinct, remaining safe from arrest and trial in the king’s courts. This is the first book in more than a century to examine sanctuary in England in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Looking anew at this subject challenges the prevailing assumptions in the scholarship that this ‘medieval’ practice had become outmoded and little used by the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Although for decades after 1400 sanctuary-seeking was indeed fairly rare, the evidence in the legal records shows the numbers of felons seeking refuge in churches began to climb again in the late fifteenth century and reached its peak in the period between 1525 and 1535. Sanctuary was not so much a medieval dinosaur accidentally surviving into the early modern era, as it was an organism that had continued to evolve and adapt to new environments and indeed flourished in its adapted state. Sanctuary suited the early Tudor regime: it intersected with rapidly developing ideas about jurisdiction and provided a means of mitigating the harsh capital penalties of the English law of felony that was useful not only to felons but also to the crown and the political elite. Sanctuary’s resurgence after 1480 means we need to rethink how sanctuary worked, and to reconsider more broadly the intersections of culture, law, politics, and religion in the century and a half between 1400 and 1550.

Jurisdiction

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Camper
Keyword(s):  
Roman Empire ◽  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Textual Interpretation ◽  
Extended Analysis ◽  
The Right ◽  
Do So

Chapter 7 investigates the multiple ways arguers can question the legitimacy of an interpretation, thereby entering the stasis of jurisdiction. There are two main points of contention in this stasis: whether the person issuing the interpretation has the right to do so, and whether the interpreted text has any authority on the issue at hand. Other concerns involve the place, time, style, and delivery of an interpretation, as well as the hermeneutic method behind an interpretation. This chapter’s extended analysis examines the lines of argument fifteenth-century Italian humanist Lorenzo Valla employed to discredit the forged Donation of Constantine, an imperial decree allegedly written by Constantine the Great that ceded power over the Western Roman Empire to the pope. Studying the types of arguments people use in the stasis of jurisdiction reveals the specific ways that communities manage, control, and coordinate acts of textual interpretation in alignment with their values.

Better Muslim or Jew? The Controversy Around Conversion across Minorities in Fifteenth-Century Castile

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (1-3) ◽  
pp. 62-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Echevarría
Keyword(s):  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Death Penalty ◽  
Minority Groups ◽  
Muslim Woman ◽  
Rich Source ◽  
Living Together ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Right ◽  
The University ◽  
Christian Society

Abstract This article presents the Responsio in quaestione de muliere sarracena transeunte ad statum et ritum iudaicum (1451) by Alonso Fernández de Madrigal, “El Tostado” (1410–55), as a rich source for the study of conversion across minority groups. A trial conducted before the archbishop of Toledo concerning a Muslim woman turned Jew by her lover in Talavera de la Reina (Spain) caused a scandal in Christian society. As one of the most outstanding legal scholars at the University of Salamanca, Madrigal established the right of the archbishop of Toledo to judge an issue involving the two minorities and decided in favor of the woman returning to her faith of origin, instead of imposing the death penalty. While conversion superseded issues of illicit sexual relations, gender acted as a mitigating circumstance. This article will also consider how the three communities contributed to the survival of “cohabitation,” defined by Madrigal as social peace, and the preservation of the status of the different religions living together in Castile.

Wyclif and the Independence of the Church in England

1923 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 131-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Alva Gifford
Keyword(s):  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Religious Movement ◽  
Henry Viii ◽  
English Society ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Right ◽  
John Wyclif ◽  
The Church ◽  
Better Than

I was moved to investigate the subject of this study by an admiration of long standing for John Wyclif, and by the feeling that James Gairdner, the latest historian of Lollardy, had done scant justice to the religious movement that began with Wyclif, and that survived through a century and a half to lend powerful aid to Henry VIII, when the hour struck for the rejection of the Roman jurisdiction. When the work was finished, I found myself at a goal not far removed from that of Dr. Gairdner, although I had reached it with less reluctant feet. Dr. Gairdner had the spirit of the true archivist.1 He had no aversion to dust; he could endure even dirt; but disorder, never. And Lollardy, in English society in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, was a source of disorder. I do not revolt at disorder when great changes are necessary. Unlike Dr. Gairdner, I can find great uses for the man who “refused to recant or bow to the opinion of trained judges,” even though they “presumably understood such questions better than himself.” I cannot view the literature of Lollardy, admittedly crude, as “poisonous.” And I respectfully dissent from the view that an admission of the right of sects to exist is “fatal to the essence of Christianity itself.” But I have found ever increasing reason to concur in the conclusion to which Dr. Gairdner's unrivalled knowledge led him, viz., that Lollardy survived through the troubled days of the fifteenth century to “help Henry VIII put down the Pope,” that Henry's reformation of the Church was “precisely on Lollard lines,” and that “Lollardy affected the Church more and more after his death.”

scholarly journals The Veto Power of the State Governor

1917 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
John A. Fairlie
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Fifteenth Century ◽  
Veto Power ◽  
Ancient Rome ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Negative Power ◽  
The Commons ◽  
Norman French ◽  
The Right ◽  
To Receive

The term “veto” has been traced from the power of the tribune of the plebs in ancient Rome to annul or suspend the acts of other public authorities. From the establishment of the Roman tribune, that official had the right of intercession (intercessio), to cancel any command of a consul which infringed the liberties of a citizen; and this was gradually extended to other administrative acts and even to decrees of the senate. The word veto (I forbid) was at least occasionally used by the tribune in such cases.But historically what is called the veto power of American executives is derived from the legislative power of the British Crown. Until the fifteenth century statutes in England were enacted by the king on his own initiative or in response to petitions. From that time parliament presented bills in place of petitions; and statutes were enacted by the king “by and with the advice and consent of the lords …. and the commons …. and by the authority of the same.” The king's assent was still necessary; and without this assent a bill was not law. For two hundred years the Crown continued to exercise the negative power of declining to accept bills, not by any formal act of disapproval, but by the polite response in old Norman French, “le roy s'avisera.” Since the beginning of the eighteenth century no bill which has passed parliament has failed to receive the royal assent; but the old form of enacting laws is still in use.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document