Search

The frescos that adorn the residences of the eighteenth century Palermitan aristrocacy are among the most interesting artistic testimonies of that age, not only because they celarly express the evolution of the taste from baroque to rococo and neoclassic style, but also and above all because they allow us to reconstruct peculiar traits and aspirations of the nobility. Princes and barons, always committed in claiming their political role e their status, hired the artists in vogue in the city to convey self celebrating messa-ges in glories, triumphs, mythological and literary scenes.

In the Autumn of 1681, towards the close of the worst plague epidemic to hit early modern Lower Styria, a dispute between the Žalec market-town councillor Johann Christoph Pilpach and Ferdinand Baron Miglio from the nearby Plumberk manor erupted into violence. With the help of soldiers whom Pilpach acquired from the Counts of Strassoldo from Krško in Carniola, he raided Miglio's manor during his absence, threatening to serve him lead 'cherries' (bullets), for which the nobleman avenged himself by ransacking the market-burgher's house in Žalec. This paper analyses the rather unusual, active enmity between two socially unequal adversaries through traditional practices of conducting and settling disputes, which also enables a look at other social relations among this conflict's main actors. Due to very fragmentary sources, it is unknown what set it off, although Pilpach's ransacking of the manor suggests that it might have been due to Miglio's debts to the affluent market-burgher. Perhaps their dispute was connected to the one between the baron and the Fraziolis, the former administrators of his manor, or to a dispute the Fraziolis or Pilpachs might have had with the Žalec market-burgher family Galič (Galitsch), the new administrators of Plumberk. The ensuing violence is better documented. Pilpach's raid on Plumberk manor was co-organised by his son-in-law, Gregor Rozman, who sought help from the Strassoldos. While the exact nature of their relationship with the counts is obscure, it had to be close for an important noble family to lend its soldiers to two market-burghers. Maybe the Strassoldos' help was also related to disputes they themselves might have had with Miglio. Pilpach's social capital was quite possibly further predicated on the marriage of a lesser line of the Valvasor noble family to the Pilpachs from Žalec in early 1680. These connections most likely levelled the field once the market-burgher's dispute with the baron broke out into violence. Miglio's response in September 1681 essentially mirrored Pilpach's actions: ransacking his home under arms, threats with violence and death, stealing his horses, killing his poultry, etc. Maybe the equal response was completely by chance, but, conceivably, the expected reciprocity of violence in enmities also played a role. In the end, Miglio had to justify his actions in court as a measured response to an affront. The violence was exacerbated when Pilpach opted for a recourse to law, after failing to obtain satisfaction (restitution of honour and damages) from Miglio for the attack. Pilpach's attempt to serve a writ to the baron ended with Miglio almost cudgelling the messenger to death, rejecting the attempt as insolence. Despite going to court, the settlement of their dispute or at least the violence seems to have been extra-curial, as was common in enmities among the elite. Likewise, the only intervention by princely authorities seems to have been a demand that Miglio accept the writ, even though violent enmities or feuds broke the provincial (and Imperial) peace and, which was even more critical, attacks on the socially superior upset the social order. There were certainly no grave consequences for Pilpach, who is attested as the Žalec market-town judge in 1684. All of this suggests that the social differences between him and Miglio were formal rather than factual, underpinned by Pilpach's close connections to influential noble families and, probably, also by the fact that the Miglios' rise to nobility was rather recent. His 'equality' with the baron in their enmity probably also helped Pilpach to improve his social standing. Although it is unknown when exactly peace between the baron and Pilpach was made, the plague that decimated Žalec in 1683 seems as a plausible mitigating factor. In any case, in early 1684, Pilpach's wife Ursula Elisabeth and his former enemy Jakob Galič, Miglio's administrator of Plumberk, became godparents to a child of one of their market-town neighbours. This indicates that their enmity was over, most likely following or as part of the peace made between Pilpach and Miglio, since settlement generally included 'all the people' of the conflicting parties. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

L’articolo intende affrontare quanto ruota attorno alla coppia oppositiva distinzione/incondizionata adesione per quanto concerne gli alberghi della città ligure, sia che derivino da un unico ceppo familiare, sia che risultino dall’aggregazione di diversi nuclei familiari, e proporre un primo censimento. L’arco cronologico preso in considerazione è il secolo XIV, poco esplorato per quanto riguarda la vicenda cittadina, mentre le fonti analizzate sono per lo più ancora prodotte e conservate dalle istituzioni religiose. Epigrafi sepolcrali, marcatori di famiglia sugli edifici, pianete e arredi per altari e infine una causa per l’uso di un banco destinato alle donne nella cattedrale contribuiscono a delineare un quadro molto mosso in cui c’è spazio sia per declinazioni personali delle scelte sia per identificazioni incondizionate.

Copyright of Reti Medievali is the property of Firenze University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Tiempos Modernos is the property of Tiempos Modernos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article compares the position of nobility in Slovenia, Croatia and Slavonia before and after the Great War. The focus is on the transition to the Yugoslav state. The new regime treated the nobility as adversaries in political, social and national respect; noble titles were abolished and landed estates diminished by the land reform. Even though it cherished personal and family ties, the aforementioned nobility did not organise itself in associations, like their counterparts in Austria. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article shows how the Counter-Reformation decrees were enforced in practice, and it presents a document dealing with the specific situation in Carniola. The general imperial mandate issued on June 20th, 1631, was part of the second wave of Ferdinand II’s Counter-Reformation, which began with the 1627 establishment of a new Counter-Reformation committee and reached its apex with the adoption of the 1628 patent on the conversion or expulsion of Protestant nobility in Inner Austria. The mandate provides historiography with good insight into the (non-)implementation of the decrees adopted three years prior to that. In it, the emperor observes that some Protestants converted to Catholicism and others moved abroad. Nonetheless, some non-Catholics remained in Carniola, there were many “lax Catholics” among the converts, and some of those that had moved away returned home without the required permission. The Counter-Reformation committee that supervised the religious situation in the country imposed specific deadlines for the conversion or expulsion of Protestants. The key two external proofs of conversion included performing confession, which the convert demonstrated with written proof, and receiving communion. The Protestants that did not convert to Catholicism had to sell their land, pay a tenth of what it was worth (except for the members of the estates), and leave all Ferdinand’s lands. The slow implementation of the decrees shows that the emperor’s threats and sanctions did not have a significant intimidating effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]