Martí, Tibor

Repository of the Academy's Library

228Hungarian Historical Review 6,  no. 1  (2017): 200–267Pázmány, a jezsuita érsek: Kinevezésének története, 1615–1616. Mikropolitikai tanulmány [Pázmány, the Jesuit prelate: His appointment as Primate of  Hungary, 1615–1616. A micro-political study]. By Péter Tusor. (Collectanea Vaticana Hungariae. Classis I, 13) Budapest–Rome: MTA–PPKE Lendület Egyháztörténeti Kutatócsoport, 2016. 459 pp.The aim of  this monograph is to explore the historical background of  Péter Pázmány’s (1570–1637) appointment as Primate of  Hungary. Focusing on one of  the most influential figures of  Early Modern Hungarian Catholicism, this micro-political study is based on an exceptionally wide range of  primary sources. One of  its key features and unquestionable merits is its methodological awareness, reflected not only in the structure of  the work but also in the narration and the critical analysis and interpretation of  the relevant historical sources. This approach is consistently applied throughout the work. The monograph carefully investigates the motives for and circumstances of  Pázmány’s appointment as Primate of  Hungary. Its greatest addition to the existing scholarship is the in-depth examination and detailed exploration of  Pázmány’s career, culminating in his appointment as Archbishop of  Esztergom. Tusor’s work also brings into focus why the Hungarian Jesuit had no choice but to quit the Society of  Jesus and temporarily join another religious order.The monograph addresses a subject that has been of  outstanding importance and has long been discussed in Hungarian historiography. Furthermore, it corresponds to a state-of-the-art trend in international historiography as well. Although a great deal has already been written on the pontificate of  Pope Paul (Borghese) V (1605–21), with particular emphasis on the diplomacy and the decision-making processes of  the Holy See, it was German historian Wolfgang Reinhard who first adopted a micro-political approach to the history of  the papal diplomacy. Thus, Reinhard proved the forerunner of  a new school of  historiography, and Tusor’s monograph on Pázmány’s appointment complements it nicely.In addition to micro-political studies, it has now become increasingly popular in international historical research to unearth and publish diplomatic instructions written to the papal nuncios, who represented the Holy See in various European courts. Publications by Klaus Jaitner and Silvano Giordano offer examples of  this trend. Moreover, the relevant contemporary historical research has also tended examine seventeenth-century diplomatic relations, with BOOK REVIEWS229a particular focus on relations between the Habsburg dynasty and the Holy See. (The latest volumes of  the series Nuntiaturberichte aus Deutschland nebst ergänzenden Aktenstücken and the conference “Der Papst und der Krieg. Kuriale Diplomatie am Kaiserhof  1628–1635. Die jüngsten Publikationen der 4. Abteilung der Nuntiaturberichte aus Deutschland: Eine Bilanz (Il papa e la guerra Diplomazia curiale alla corte imperiale 1628–1635. Le pubblicazioni recenti della 4° sezione delle “Nuntiaturberichte aus Deutschland”: Un bilancio)” organized by the DHI in Rome in December 2016 can be referred to as examples.)Although the monograph is primarily concerned with the historical background of  the appointment of  Hungarian Jesuit Péter Pázmány as Archbishop of  Esztergom, the scope of  the research on which it is based was not limited to this specific event. In fact, the work offers insights into various aspects of  Pázmány’s appointment, and is intended for a diverse range of  scholars who are curious about the history of  the seventeenth century in general. For instance, in addition to tackling issues related to secular and canon law, Tusor also investigates the historical figures who masterminded diplomatic relations between the Habsburg Court and the Holy See in the aforementioned period. A precise review and critical analysis of  the relevant primary and secondary sources enables him to present well-known historical facts and events from a new angle and to turn the spotlight on some lesser-known participants in seventeenth-century Habsburg and Vatican diplomacy, such as Cardinal Melchior Klesl, Chargé d’affaires Lodovico Ridolfi, Papal Nuncio Placido De Mara, etc.With regards to the reasons for Pázmány’s appointment as Archbishop of  Esztergom, Tusor has taken account of  a wide range of  political issues on the basis of  seventeenth-century Habsburg and Vatican diplomatic sources. For example, he highlights the importance of  the War of  Gradisca between the Habsburg Empire and Venice (1615–17), an event that eventually resulted in the emergence of  shared interests between the Habsburgs and the Vatican. While at first sight there appears to be no immediate connection between Pázmány’s appointment and this local conflict, the plans of  Rome and Prague concerning the war indicate mutual interests that were deeper than either before or after the war. Pope Paul (Borghese) V almost launched a war against Venice in order to teach the Republic a lesson, and Habsburg diplomacy also made efforts to encourage the Papal State to enter into the struggle by providing either financial aid or direct military support. Politically, the Papacy focused increasingly on Italy in this period, and, for geopolitical reasons, the emperor was its most important partner in foreign affairs.230Hungarian Historical Review 6,  no. 1  (2017): 200–267In his monograph, Tusor also sheds light on the relevance of  the complications that surrounded the succession to the Habsburg throne, one of  the most important issues of  contemporary European power politics. As he points out, historical sources appear to confirm that Pázmány was deeply involved in the courtly power struggles induced by the issue of  succession. Cardinal and Imperial Chief  Minister Klesl was one of  Pázmány’s strongest supporters, and he could reasonably suppose that, with Pázmány’s appointment, he would ensure the absolute loyalty of  the new archbishop, one of  the prominent leaders of  Royal Hungary.Although Pázmány’s appointment as Primate of  Hungary was supported by all key elements, i.e. the prominent figures in Papal and Habsburg diplomacy and the Hungarian Catholic and secular elites, several challenges arose and had to be faced. Clearly, the problem was not simply that the additional fourth vow of  obedience to the Pope, which all members of  the Society of  Jesus were supposed to pronounce, at that time included a prohibition against occupying the position of  a prelate. Difficulties also emerged due to the fact that, as a Jesuit, if  appointed Archbishop of  Esztergom, Pázmány would come into possession of  the most important benefice of  the Catholic Church in Hungary and thus would violate Act No. 8 of  1608, passed by the Diet of  Hungary, which prohibited Jesuits from owning or possessing any kind of  landed property in Hungary. As a consequence, Pázmány’s appointment would have proved unlawful and void. In order to circumvent the aforementioned legal difficulties and become eligible to occupy the position of  Prelate of  Hungary, Pázmány had no alternative but to leave the Society of  Jesus, and he temporarily joined the Order of  the Somascan Fathers. Tusor shows that, contrary to the assumptions found in the early secondary literature, this step was made out of  necessity, and not owing to the resistance of  the Society of  Jesus. Pázmány opted for the Somascan Fathers because he was supported by the Papal Nuncio to Prague, Placido de Mara, who had just established a Somascan college in the town of  Melfi in southern Italy, where he had his episcopal See at the time. A religious order with a remote house under the supervision of  the Nuncio could make Pázmány’s preparatory period as a novice officially lawful but practically symbolic. Eventually, Pázmány did not complete his novitiate, because he spent only half  a year as a novice of  the Somascan Order before being appointed Archbishop of  Esztergom. His appointment, however, which occurred on 28 September 1616, can be regarded as completely lawful according to canon law.Tusor’s research reinforces a central concept of  micro-political research into the history of  the Early Modern period, namely, that the main motive for political BOOK REVIEWS231nominations was to ensure absolute loyalty. Therefore, the prevailing patron-client system, which served as one of  the foundations of  European societies, needs to be taken into consideration when interpreting political nominations. Tusor’s research suggests that Pázmány managed to occupy the position of  Archbishop of  Esztergom thanks at least in large part to the assistance of  Imperial Chief  Minister Klesl, who had a decisive influence on imperial decision-making at the time.On the other hand, Tusor argues that Pázmány enjoyed the absolute confidence of  the Pope as well, and this fact played an equally pivotal role in his appointment. There is evidence to suggest that the reason for the Pope’s favorable opinion of  Pázmány was the strong impression that the Hungarian Jesuit made on him during an audience on 5 January 1615. On this occasion, Pázmány gave a precise description of  the religious and political situation in the Kingdom of  Hungary at the time and called the Pope’s attention to the importance of  ensuring the succession to the Hungarian, Bohemian, and Holy Roman Imperial thrones. Tusor points out that, in the Roman Curia, Pázmány was regarded as a personality on whom Vatican diplomacy could rely to ensure a favorable outcome of  the succession to the Habsburg throne, an issue that was referred to as “the most important issue for the entire Christianity” by Scipione Borghese, cardinal-nephew who controlled the papal Secretariat of  State. Another factor that needs to be taken into account is Pázmány’s unshakeable loyalty to the Habsburg dynasty, which he considered the only conceivable protector of  both his faith and his country. In light of  all this evidence, it is of  particular historical importance that the newly appointed archbishop succeeded in convincing the Protestant majority of  the Hungarian diet to elect a Catholic Archduke from Graz, Ferdinand II, as king of  Hungary in 1618. Pázmány also managed to arrange the succession of  the Habsburg dynasty to the Hungarian throne without coming into serious conflicts with his patron, Klesl, who had been pulling strings for him to facilitate his career advancement. The monograph also revisits several topics that are more loosely related to its main focus. For example, Tusor provides an overview of  the Hungarian Catholic noblemen who furthered Pázmány’s appointment as Archbishop of  Esztergom, and he also sheds light on how Pázmány’s ambition to found a university in Hungary fulfilled the expectations of  the contemporary Catholic intelligentsia. Importantly, Tusor reexamines Pázmány’s relationship with his predecessor, Archbishop Ferenc Forgách. Although historians had already taken notice of  Pázmány’s decisive influence on his predecessor, it was Tusor who first managed 232Hungarian Historical Review 6,  no. 1  (2017): 200–267to find sound evidence proving that Pázmány served as Forgách’s confessor. Namely, he revealed a source in which Ridolfi, the Imperial Chargé d’affaires to Rome, alludes to Pázmány’s important role as a confessor and policy-maker. In this position, Pázmány could indeed have exerted a considerable influence on his predecessor’s “governance and methods” (p.31).In conclusion, with this monograph Tusor, who has distinguished himself  for his broad-based and penetrating research on church history, has made an outstanding contribution to historiography on the Early Modern era in Hungary.Tibor MartíHungarian Academy of  Sciences

Pázmány, a jezsuita érsek: Kinevezésének története, 1615-1616. Mikropolitikai tanulmány [Pázmány, the Jesuit prelate: His appointment as Primate of Hungary, 1615-1616. A micro-political study]. By Péter Tusor. (Collectanea Vaticana Hungariae. Classis I, 13) Budapest-Rome: MTA-PPKE Lendület Egyháztörténeti Kutatócsoport, 2016. 459 pp.]

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Repository of the Academy's Library