APA 6th Edition JERKOVIĆ, M. (2013). KANDIDATI ZA PREBENDU ZAGREBAČKOG KAPTOLA U PROVIZIJAMA PAPE BONIFACIJA IX. (1389. – 1404.). Croatica Christiana periodica, 37 (72), 21-49. Preuzeto s https://hrcak.srce.hr/116096
MLA 8th Edition JERKOVIĆ, Marko. "KANDIDATI ZA PREBENDU ZAGREBAČKOG KAPTOLA U PROVIZIJAMA PAPE BONIFACIJA IX. (1389. – 1404.)." Croatica Christiana periodica, vol. 37, br. 72, 2013, str. 21-49. https://hrcak.srce.hr/116096. Citirano 15.11.2019.
Chicago 17th Edition JERKOVIĆ, Marko. "KANDIDATI ZA PREBENDU ZAGREBAČKOG KAPTOLA U PROVIZIJAMA PAPE BONIFACIJA IX. (1389. – 1404.)." Croatica Christiana periodica 37, br. 72 (2013): 21-49. https://hrcak.srce.hr/116096
Harvard JERKOVIĆ, M. (2013). 'KANDIDATI ZA PREBENDU ZAGREBAČKOG KAPTOLA U PROVIZIJAMA PAPE BONIFACIJA IX. (1389. – 1404.)', Croatica Christiana periodica, 37(72), str. 21-49. Preuzeto s: https://hrcak.srce.hr/116096 (Datum pristupa: 15.11.2019.)
Vancouver JERKOVIĆ M. KANDIDATI ZA PREBENDU ZAGREBAČKOG KAPTOLA U PROVIZIJAMA PAPE BONIFACIJA IX. (1389. – 1404.). Croatica Christiana periodica [Internet]. 2013 [pristupljeno 15.11.2019.];37(72):21-49. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/116096
IEEE M. JERKOVIĆ, "KANDIDATI ZA PREBENDU ZAGREBAČKOG KAPTOLA U PROVIZIJAMA PAPE BONIFACIJA IX. (1389. – 1404.)", Croatica Christiana periodica, vol.37, br. 72, str. 21-49, 2013. [Online]. Dostupno na: https://hrcak.srce.hr/116096. [Citirano: 15.11.2019.]
Sažetak During the period of the Great Western Schism (1378-1417) the beneficiary system was profoundly affected by broken unity of the Latin Christendom. Both papal courts, the one in Rome and the other in Avignon (and since 1409 the third one in Pisa), built their own
administrative machineries with the main goal to secure papal authority in the territories which recognized their separate jurisdictions. The most effective way to apply papal canonical power was issuing provisions, bulls which granted ecclesiastical benefices to
candidates. The pontificate of Pope Boniface IX (1389-1404) stands out as one of the key turning points in the process of establishing undisputed papal authority, which rested on the firm administrative pillars. This case study of granting provisions for the Zagreb
chapter prebends is indicative. For the purpose of this study prosopography, a method of creating collective biography, proved to be the most suitable. During the pontificate of Boniface IX thirty one candidates received a bull for the stallum in the Zagreb cathedral.
It is visible that pope’s beneficiary system rested on issuing both, direct provisions which granted vacant prebends, as well as on issuing reservations, bulls which granted non-vacant canonries. Papal absolute dominance in granting Zagreb prebends affected
position of Hungarian-Croatian king and the bishop of Zagreb. The king used his right to present candidates only once, while bishop used his right of »free« collation three times. Thus, the role of bishop was re-defined – his right to collate candidates served to ensure
the realization of provision rather than denominate canons. The same was true in the case of the Zagreb chapter canons. Evidence from 1401-1402 suggest that they overtook some of the bishop’s prerogatives – for the first time canons acquired the right to collate candidates. However, they too did not use it to install their own candidates. Like bishops, Zagreb canons used the collation to ensure the realization of papal bull. By cross-referencing biographical data on the candidates, several other trends were determined. Firstly, unlike some other European cathedral chapters which granted prebends only to aristocracy, the Zagreb chapter was not a socially homogenous institution. Provisions for the Zagreb chapter prebends could be acquired by members from different social groups: both, by
landed noblemen (but of different social and economic status) and by burghers. Geographical and diocesan origin of candidates was also heterogonous: among them clerics from the Diocese of Zagreb dominated, but there were also candidates from other parts
of the medieval Hungarian ecclesiastical provinces. Apart from them, one cleric from the Salzburg archdiocese and one from the French Diocese of Elne were also included in provisions. Priestly ordination also was not a precondition for acquiring the Zagreb chapter prebends. Namely, being ordained into a sub-deacon was enough for acquiring a prebend. Nevertheless, Zagreb chapter encouraged its members to receive priestly ordination. On the other hand, it was necessary to reach an adequate age to become installed canon. Those who received canonry to possess it sine cura had to be 18, but those who received stallum which included pastoral care had to be at least 25 years old. Provisions issued by Pope Boniface IX suggest that only one candidate (who was 12) did not reach the required age. Academic degrees were also not necessary in order to receive the bull of provision. However, candidates were obliged to master Latin language and singing skills, which was proven by the taken examen idoneitatis. The most numerous group, candidates from the Zagreb diocese, had the opportunity to learn the necessary skills in the cathedral school, which offered scholarly program based on trivium disciplines and music lessons. Cathedral prebends were attractive to clerics mainly because they could be combined with other ecclesiastical benefices. This opportunity led to the variety and accumulation of benefices. In total, 15 candidates for the Zagreb canonries possessed at least one ecclesiastical benefice extra. They were cumulating benefices mainly in the territories of the
Hungarian ecclesiastical system: fourteen of them gained 28 benefices in these dioceses. The most attractive were collegiate prebends of the Čazma chapter (6) and the parochial
benefices in the Zagreb diocese (6). Cathedral prebends in Veszprém (2), Pécs (3), Bač (2), Csanád (2) and Várad (2); collegiate prebends in Veszprém, Pécs, Buda (one in each)
and two benefices in Székesfehérvár (one parochial benefice and one collegiate prebend) were also cumulated. This trend encouraged clerics to possess canonries sine cura, and due to that almost 50% of candidates had a real chance to acquire non-residential stallum.
Roman Curia restricted abseentism and non-pastoral tenancy of a prebend but could not suppress it entirely. In theory papal administration tolerated possession of more than three sinecures, but in reality provisions regularly demanded from candidates to resign all but one benefice cum cura. In some cases candidates were not allowed to keep even one benefice with pastoral care. And finally, provisions showed that Roman Curia applied two models when estimating annual income provided by prebends. One was used if the type of assigned benefice was not specified in the provision. In those cases canonries were just one possible benefice to acquire, and their income was estimated onto 25 silver marks (if prebend included cura animarum) or 18 silver marks (if it was a sinecure). The other model was applied when candidates received provisions for the concrete chapter’s canonry. The annual income from prebends varied, but the average estimated value was 10-30, most commonly 15 silver marks. Incomes from higher dignities and archdeaconries varied even more: 10-100 silver marks. These variations undoubtedly additionally encouraged clerics to cumulate other benefices. It was their way to cope with existential insecurity as
well as to fulfill their hopes and ambitions.