LEGATE IN HUNGARY AT THE SAME TIME ?

The present paper gives a short summary about the course of life of Egidius, a papal chaplain and subdeacon, who spent ca. three years in the Medieval Kingdom of Hungary in the late 1220’s as a judge delegate. The investigation focuses not on the litigations handled by the papal chaplain, but on one particular task of his, the establishment of the bishopric of Syrmia (Srem) and in connection with that on one main question: what kind of authority Egidius received from Pope Gregory IX for the planned measure. While analysing certain historical situations it is of great importance to establish whether a papal envoy was entrusted as a legate with full power or if he had to fulfil his obligation as a nuncio, with limited authorization. In the Hungarian historiography Egidius is handled traditionally as a legate, but his entire mission in Hungary seems to be of a more complex nature, therefore the question itself requires a new analysis.

gidius, a papal chaplain and subdeacon (subdiaconus) 1 appeared in 1228 in the sources concerning the Hungarian Kingdom 2 and he stayed in Hungary until 1231.The majority of the known charters give information about his activity as a judge delegate, but in 1229 he was appointed by Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241) for another task: he had to examine the possibilities concerning the new bishopric in Syrmia (Srem), which had earlier been proposed by Archbishop Ugrin of Kalocsa. 3 The papal chaplain as a judge delegate 4 probably travelled through the whole Medieval realm, from Pannonhalma to Transylvania. 5Despite his diversified activity in the Hungarian Kingdom not much is known about Egidius.His date and place of birth are obscure; it is unknown when he entered the papal chapel, why he was sent to Hungary, and where exactly he went after it. 6Furthermore, the investigation is hindered by the fact that the prosopographical research of the Apostolic chapel is not finished yet. 7Besides the known Hungarian cases, there are not many traces of Egidius' activity in the papal charters.The interpretation of the data 8 is determined by the fact that in connection with Egidius' name, only his title as a papal chaplain and subdeacon can be found.Based on the sources we can assume that he did not become a bishop after his career at the Curia, contrary to his predecessor John of Casamari at the outset of the century, 9 nor was he elevated to the college of cardinals. 10His final departure from the kingdom in 1231 meant that he did not receive any Hungarian benefices either. 11n this study we intend to present the course of life of Egidius, concerning his actions both at the papal court and in Hungary.The geographical and chronological framework of his Hungarian mission will also be illustrated with the help of the known cases.The first information about Egidius is found in a charter of Honorius III from February 1224, which informs us about the chaplain's role in the sealing of a certain sum of money given by the bishop of Modena to the Cistercian abbey of Lucedo. 12Another papal charter from June 1226 states that Egidius was earlier entrusted as a judge delegate and reached a decision in the litigation between the Cistercian abbot and convent of Casanova and the praeceptorium of the Templars of Bormio. 13The carrying into effect of the judgement was probably problematic, since the pope ordered another chaplain of his, Robert, to take care of the implementation.Based on these data, it can be assumed that Egidius entered the papal chapel under Honorius III.
The beginning of his stay in Hungary is hard to determine, the terminus ante quem of his arrival is given in a charter of Pope Gregory IX issued on 29 April 1228. 14Egidius was ordered as a judge delegate in the lawsuit between the Benedictine abbey of Pannonhalma and the cathedral-chapter of Veszprém in a case which he handled actively before his departure from Hungary.Three of his five known charters issued in the Hungarian kingdom are related to this litigation. 15According to the papal mandate, the chaplain was already present in Hungary in April.Due to the lack of further information it can only be presumed, based on other legations, 16 that he arrived after a boat-ride through Dalmatia in the heart of the Hungarian Kingdom (the so-called medium regni, the northern part of Transdanubia, the core territory of the realm around the settlements of Esztergom, Székesfehérvár and Veszprém 17 ), where he began his duty as a judge delegate in several cases of the Benedictine abbey of Pannonhalma.In July 1228 he received the duty of the protection of the Benedictine monastery of Güssing, 18 a task he gave to subdelegates (the abbots of Tata and Zobor and Canon John of Győr) in April 1230. 19ccording to Egidius' first charter issued in Hungary on July 6 1229 20 he was the fellow judge of magister Manasses 21 in the litigation between the abbey of Pannonhalma and the provostry of Székesfehérvár and helped the parties to come to an agreement. 22Based on the date of the document one can assume that it was the third case handled by Egidius in Hungary, more specifically in Northern Transdanubia.A change probably came after receiving Pope Gregory IX's letter of March 1229. 23He was entrusted with the task regarding the new bishopric in Syrmia (Srem) -perhaps that is why he was urged to end the litigation between the abbey and the collegial-chapter in June with a settlement.The new duty likely called the papal chaplain to another part of the kingdom, so he was probably obliged to leave the medium regni, although his journey to Syrmia is only hypothetical, based on the papal mandate, but it cannot be supported with any further solid evidence.
The possible geographical spread of Egidius' pursuit is reflected in his role in the procedure against the bishop of Oradea (Várad).Although it is not known when exactly the chaplain received this task, a papal charter 24 sent to the next judges (an abbot and a prior of the Cistercian monastery of Igriş (Egres)) in January 1230 reports only his former role. 25gidius' charter, as mentioned, was issued in July 1229, so we can assume his papal mandate was given to him parallel with the authorization concerning the bishopric of Syrmia.His role in the litigation between the bishop of Transylvania and the abbot of Cluj (Kolozsmonostor) can probably also be linked to this period. 26It is hard to determine if the reputation of the chaplain foreran him in the eastern part of the kingdom or if his first papal mandate caused a series of further tasks demanded by the local parties.One should probably assume a combination of both possibilities, even if it is uncertain whether Egidius indeed travelled to the Eastern part of the realm or if the procurators of the litigants reached out to him in Western Hungary.
Egidius found himself in Transdanubia again for sure in 1230, as his mentioned subdelegation 27 and his charters issued in July 28 indicate.Based on the surviving sources, he was probably absent in the second half of 1229 and the spring of 1230.After that, Pope Gregory IX entrusted him with further cases: with the litigation of Pannonhalma and the Thomas Becket-chapter of Esztergom 29 and with the problem of papal subdeacon Primogenitus 30 around his benefice in the cathedral-chapter of Győr. 31It is known only thanks to later data that Egidius also received a papal mandate concerning the lawsuit between the abbeys of Pannonhalma and Pilisszentkereszt. 32t cannot be stated with certainty how long the papal chaplain stayed in the Hungarian Kingdom, but in April 1231 he was still there for sure.Egidius issued his last charter by this time, again concerning the litigation of Pannonhalma and Veszprém. 33We can assume that he left Hungary right after this occasion, or at least the mentioned charter of Gregory IX (11  November, 1231)  34 about the law-case of Pannonhalma and Pilisszentkereszt states that he was no longer present in the realm. 35A further papal letter sent to cardinal-legate Jacob of Pecorara in October 1232 confirms this statement. 36rom a further charter of Gregory IX issued in 1234 37 and addressed to the abbot and convent of Monte Cassino, one can learn about the confirmation of the donations given to the abbey earlier by a certain papal chaplain, Egidius and his brother, Bishop Pandulf of Norwich. 38Yet this data probably refers to another member of the papal chapel, Egidius (Egidio) da Verracclo. 39Therefore, the record cannot be taken into consideration regarding the chaplain's life after his mission in Hungary.In a charter of 1236 40 a certain papal scribe occurs with the name Egidius, who cannot be identified as our chaplain without a doubt although the employees of the papal chancellery were frequently members of the chapel as well. 41The papal registers or the cardinal's last wills of the era do not offer further -even disputable -details regarding Egidius' life. 42The possibility of hidden sources cannot be ruled out, but undoubtedly his Hungarian mission was the most documented period of his whole life.It is hard to imagine that it was pure coincidence, 43 although most of the known sources came to us thanks to the archive of Pannonhalma.Despite the relatively well-known and also obscure episodes of Egidius' life, his Hungarian activity can have different interpretations.It is hard to decide if he is to be handled as a legate, a nuncio or a judge delegate. 44First, an answer has to be found for the question what his main reason to come the Hungarian Kingdom was.The lack of adequate sources complicates the conclusion, especially because neither the papal mandates nor the charters of the chaplain give information about the primary goal of his journey to Hungary.It might well be, however, that Gregory IX intended to fulfil the significantly increasing need for the papal delegated jurisdiction 45 at the outset of the 13 th century.The members of the papal chapel were often found in the role of judges and similarly they were authorized as legates and nuncios, while they functioned as connecting instruments between the centre of the church and its regions. 46At a first sight, the version of the papal initiative is supported by the fact that in the papal mandates there is no sign of any local petition concerning the activity of Egidius.In the selection process of the judges delegate the quarrelling parties could express, however, their wishes concerning the required persons, 47 but this was not evident in the texts of the papal mandates.Therefore, in the end it cannot be stated without a doubt why the papal chaplain was sent to the Hungarian Kingdom in the first place.
Egidius, as previously presented, first appeared in the sources clearly as a judge delegate. 48The apparent uncertainty is caused by the papal mandate of March 1229 given to him. 49The chaplain -unlike earlier -in 1229 did not get an authorization as a judge, but he was ordered to handle an affair of ecclesiastical government, the case of the new bishopric in Syrmia.Archbishop Ugrin of Kalocsa turned to the papacy and applied for authorization to create a new diocese, perhaps to favour the conversion of the heretics of Bosnia.Gregory IX approved the establishment of the new diocese after the investigation of the bishops of Transylvania and Csanád in January 1229. 50The pope also mandated his chaplain, who was already present in Hungary, whose task can be specified in the setup of the new bishopric and in the subjection of Greek churches of the area to Rome's obedience. 51The actual deeds of Egidius -if there were any at all -are unknown, yet, the traditional view concerning the pontifical representative connects his status as a legate to this authorization, perhaps because of the importance of the affair. 52Presumably, this consideration led Lucien Auvray, the editor of Gregory IX's register to the conclusion that Egidius was a legate in Bosnia. 53f one intends to dig deeper and analyse Egidius' authorization based on the legaltypological background of papal representations, a relatively complex picture reveals itself.At a first sight, the lack of the common attributes of a full or casual office of legation 54 is obvious.The apostolic authority 55 given to the chaplain is quite unusual for a legate's authorization, 56 the charter resembles rather the mandates for judges delegate. 57The obvious importance of the case and the art of the expression of the papal authority (auctoritate nostra suffultus) in the text, however, render it essential to search for another explanation.
It seems to be contradictive that Egidius never referred to himself as a legate in his remaining charters, but it was not common in legatine documents anyway, 58 whereas the chaplain issued all of those charters as a judge delegate. 59It is worth taking a look at a record of Jacob of Pecorara, Pecorara, a cardinal-legate, 60 who arrived in Hungary a year after Egidius' leave.The cardinal mentioned him as "the chaplain and subdeacon of the pope, who was in Hungary because of the affairs of the Church", without stating that Egidius was a legate. 61It is hard to imagine that Jacob was not familiar with the practice of papal representation and did not know the distinction between legates, nuncios and judges delegate.A royal charter of 1229 complicates the picture even further, since the chaplain appears as a papal legate in the text. 62Given the circumstance that it was issued regarding the litigation of the abbey of Pannonhalma and the provostry of Székesfehérvár (in which the chaplain himself issued a document in June 1229 too), it can be assumed that the papal command which Egidius probably had previously received concerning the bishopric of Syrmia, made an impact on the phrasing of Andrew II's charter.
The available data could lead to the conclusion that, on the basis of the theoretical classification of the medieval canon law, Egidius can be identified at most as a simple legate (legatus missus), but not as a cardinal-legate (legatus a latere). 63The lack of the expression of legatine authority in the papal mandate makes it even more plausible to think of Egidius as a nuncio, 64 especially because he handled a task of ecclesiastical government as the instrument of the papal will, not in his own jurisdiction. 65ecause of the contradicting information and the absence of a concrete denomination, 66 the further analysis of the known sources would not bring us any closer to the solution.The interpretation of his task and various analogies could help us, though.First, the question should be answered what exactly the status of a nuncio meant in the 13 th century and to what extent it differed from the legatine authorization.It is by no means an easy differentiation because the legati missi and the nuncios bore several similar features, but the legatine office itself is a basic characteristic only of the previous class. 67he distinction itself is necessary, however, not only from a formal-legal point of view, since proper terminology can be crucial in the analysis of certain cases, especially if administrative and diplomatic actions of the Apostolic See 68 are investigated, when the authorization of a legatus a latere was of special meaning, given the fact that a papal representative of this type had ordinary jurisdiction over a whole province, while a legatus missus, or even a nuncio possessed delegated jurisdiction only for a single affair.These last two classes of the papal representation, 69 as already stated, are often hard, sometimes even impossible to distinguish from each other because of the mixed use of titles 70 and the lack of sources.Yet the former practice of the Hungarian historiography which handled almost every single person mandated by the popes as a legate has to be reconsidered, because it can be misleading in some cases.
One main element of the distinction between legates and nuncios is the circumstance that a nuncio was authorized to act only in the case trusted upon him, 71 while the legatine status meant an office with certain licences for one or more provinces.Furthermore, a nuncio was ordered for certain cases with special authorization 72 and the framework of their missions was not geographical, but legal. 73The legates acted as part of the ecclesiastical government, they could convoke councils, conducted visitations ex officio, whereas the nuncios could perform such actions only in case of concrete mandates. 74raditionally, the nuncios are considered to be simple message bearers, who transferred the information trusted upon them, they were not in the position to make decisions in upcoming questions. 75This statement is by far not false, however, the practice was more complex: there were several classes of the nuncios present, similarly to the legates. 76The Canadian historian Clifford Ian Kyer differentiated in his dissertation the following classes of the nuncios from the second half of the 13 th century: message bearers, collectors and solemn nuncios. 77The basic distinction lies in the form of authorization.The simple nuncios received mandates, while the solemn ones received letters of procuration. 78onsequently, a relevant part of the nuncios could receive important assignments beyond the sole purpose of communication and they could represent the papal will during negotiations. 79The formation of this state basically happened in the second half of the 13 th century, but the case of Egidius could easily fit into the trend which was under way during the pontificate of Innocent IV (1243-1254), even if we take into consideration that his mission happened prior to that.The task concerning the bishopric of Syrmia was by no mean a simple message bearing, Egidius rather had to carry out a well-formulated mission. 80rom the late 13 th century, beside cardinals, bishops and abbots, the familiars of the popes can also be found among the solemn nuncios. 81Egidius, as a member of the papal chapel, fits into this last category, so this circumstance, although indirect, could vouch for his nuncio-status.There is another known trend, however, namely that the nuncios were often sent out from the Curia in pairs, but this was the case mostly with the cardinals. 82It should also be remembered that Egidius was already present in Hungary as a judge delegate by the time of his papal authorization concerning the new bishopric.
The number of mandates given to nuncios increased in the second half of the 13 th century.One of the causes behind this tendency was the differentiation and growth of the duties, which had to be arranged by papal legates and the cardinals' college was in no position to satisfy those needs entirely.In that situation the popes turned to their chapel and started to mandate its members. 83This led to their revaluation in the eyes of the pontifices, moreover the chaplains were bound to the popes in their persons, who had a direct control over them, which did not exist in the case of the cardinals.The lower rank of the chaplains made them more flexible for various tasks, while they were less bound by ceremonial regulations. 84he entourages of papal envoys could also contribute to the differentiation between legates and nuncios, since the higher prestige materialized itself in its composition as well. 85n the case of Egidius there is, however, no detailed information in the sources to find about the circle of his colleagues -although it seems rather unlikely that he had travelled alone from Rome to Hungary. 86The financial background of Egidius' stay in Hungary -like other segments of it -is also obscure.Based on the knowledge of the papal representation in the 13 th century, 87 it can be assumed that the expenses of his stay as a judge delegate were covered basically by the quarrelling parties. 88here is one another important circumstance, which cannot be forgotten while analysing Egidius' mission: the establishment of a new bishopric.It generally requiredbeside a papal approval -the assistance of a legate with full powers (plena potestas). 89evertheless, the role of the Archbishop of Kalocsa could explain the authorization of the papal chaplain.Gregory IX could have thought the authorization of the already present Egidius to be a satisfying solution, whose task did not offend the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the ambitions of Archbishop Ugrin, but did not give too much importance to the business either. 90The fact itself that Egidius was a member of the papal chapel did not automatically mean that he was authorized as a nuncio. 91The case of the papal chaplain Huguitio gives a good example from the 13 th century: as a legate, he was entrusted with the absolution of the inhabitants of Ferentino from ecclesiastical censures under the pontificate of Gregory IX and later became the rector and legate of Massa Trabiata. 92an one in the end come to the conclusion that the affair of the bishopric of Syrmia was not important enough for Pope Gregory IX given the fact that he did not authorize one of his cardinals, but an already present chaplain? 93In our opinion the pontifex came to the most logical and practical conclusion: after all, Egidius was already in the Hungarian Kingdom, so he was the fastest and also the cheapest solution, while on the other hand, he already must have possessed the necessary local know-how, which probably could give him higher chances to fulfil his task successfully. 94It is worth taking a look at the events of 1232, when Gregory IX had to send one of his cardinals, Jacob of Pecorara to Hungary to settle the conflict between Archbishop Robert of Esztergom and King Andrew II. 95The two situations were not similar, but their differences are reflected in the decisions made by the pope and -probably the college of cardinals 96 -concerning the authorization of papal envoys of different nature.The time issue could have been one of the important factors by the case of Egidius, and in connection with it, the possible economic benefits of his presence had to be considered too. 97It has to be noted furthermore that the popes did not decide to send out a legate in every case, even if they were explicitly asked for it. 98On the other hand, it was customary in the first half of the 13 th century to send a legate when it was about a negotiation with a ruler, like in the case of Jacob of Pecorara in 1232 concerning the controversial behaviour of King Andrew II. 99hile analysing papal authorizations, besides the papal "policy" the relevance of the receiving party must be taken into consideration too. 100 In the case of Egidius the importance of Archbishop Ugrin of Kalocsa is to be emphasized, although the remaining sources 101 do not reveal if the prelate asked for the authorization of a papal representative (legate or nuncio) at all.Given his ambitions, presumably it seems plausible that he intended to preserve the leading role for himself, and for this scenario a papal envoy of a lower rank would have been more suitable. 102In our opinion, it is more likely that the pope himself chose to authorize his already present chaplain concerning the diocese of Syrmia.
While investigating the circumstances of Egidius' mission, it is worth taking a look at those cases when the rulers were not very fond of the idea of receiving papal legates in their realms because of the possible intervention and they tried to prevent it from the beginning.By the authorization of nuncios this kind of resistance appeared less frequently, because they did not possess any jurisdiction outside their concrete tasks,103 so they were less dangerous for the rulers.By the authorization of Egidius one also could count with such considerations from the papal side. 104It is worth mentioning that in 1232 King Andrew II requested himself a legatus a latere from Gregory IX, but that was a completely different situation because of the ruler's quarrel with the Archbishop of Esztergom. 105The king's behaviour changed, however, drastically after the arrival of Jacob of Pecorara and he avoided the meeting with the legate who represented a threat for him. 106he investigation of the partially well-known Hungarian activity of the papal chaplain and subdeacon Egidius (which previously was not analysed in detail) and the attached sources allows us no definitive statements.It cannot be questioned that he acted many times as judge delegate in various law-cases in the Medieval Kingdom of Hungary, but the nature of his mandate from 1229 concerning the new bishopric in Syrmia is even more questionable because of the lack of new sources.The available data and various analogies from the circle of the papal representation's theory and practice point, in our opinion, to that direction that Egidius was authorized as a nuncio, although it cannot be ruled out completely that he was in fact a papal legate (legatus missus).The traditional interpretation, however, is no more tenable that almost every single person sent by the popes to Hungary is considered to be a legate despite the nature of the authorizations or their actual deeds.Као судија-делегат овај папски капелан је вероватно путовао кроз цело средњевековно краљевство, од Панонхалме до Трансилваније.Иако је био укључен у различите активности у Мађарском краљевству, о Егидиусу се не зна много.Његови датум и место рођења су непознати; не зна се када је постао члан папске капеле, зашто је послат у Мађарску, ни где је тачно отишао после тога.Ипак, много битније питање јесте коју је врсту папског овлашћења добио да би извршио своје задатке.Његове активности у извесним мађарским судским случајевима није нарочито тешко оценити, али оснивање бискупије у Срему компликује тумачење.Традиционални поглед на папског представника повезује статус Егидиуса као легата са овим случајем, можда због његовог значаја.Претпостављамо да је зато Лисјен Овре, уредник регистра Гргура IX, дошао до закључка да је Егидиус био легат у Босни.