Ruy González's 1553 Letter to Emperor Charles V An Annotated Translation

1986 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 473-487
Author(s):  
Arthur P. Stabler ◽  
John E. Kicza

The letter sent by Ruy González, a councilman of Mexico City, to the Spanish monarch, Charles I (Emperor Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire), in April 1553 constitutes an excellent example of the genre of correspondence sent by the conquerors and early settlers of the colonies back to Spain. These men, self-assured and successful, proud of their achievements and unbothered by moral doubt, though now generally well off and powerful, were nonetheless greatly perturbed in their old age by a growing governmental reluctance to allow them to pass on their status and wealth undisturbed to the next generation. To them there appeared to be a great influx of royal and ecclesiastical officials, characteristically accompanied by dependents and sycophants seeking favor and grants, as well as an unjustified questioning of the moral probity of the actions of the conquerors themselves. In this climate, feeling that his wisdom and deeds were unappreciated, Ruy González sent his several-page letter to the king, justifying his life, arguing his point of view, and advising changes in royal policies towards the colony that he had helped to found.

Author(s):  
Joachim Whaley

Martin Luther was a subject of the Elector of Saxony in the Holy Roman Empire. His emergence as a reformer was made possible by the sponsorship he received in Wittenberg. He owed his survival to the protection afforded him by the Elector when Emperor Charles V outlawed him and ordered that the papal ban of excommunication be enforced in the empire. The audience to which Luther appealed was the general population of German Christians, both lay and ecclesiastical, who wanted a reform of the church and the reduction of the pope’s influence over it. That his appeal resonated so widely and so profoundly had much to do with a combination of crises that had developed in the empire from the 15th century. That his reform proposals resulted in the formation of a new church owed everything to the political structures of the empire. These facilitated the suppression of radical challenges to Luther’s position. They also thwarted every effort Charles V made over several decades to ensure that the empire remained Catholic. Lutheranism became entwined with the idea of German liberty; as a result, its survival was secured in the constitution of the empire, first in 1555 and then in 1648.


2010 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 268-292
Author(s):  
Lucas Prakke

Nation-state formation – Holy Roman Empire – Dissolution and realignment – Spain, fragmented – Reconquista – Charles V – Wars of succession – Centralisation under house of Bourbon – Napoleon – Spanish war of independence – History of the Cortes – Constitution of Cádiz – Weakness of Spanish Constitutionalism – German Confederation – Monarchical principle in Vienna Final Act – Old and new ideas of sovereignty – Metternich and fear of revolution – March revolution – Bismarckian empire as constitutional monarchy – Degeneration of the Reich – Exit the Kings – Enter Juan Carlos


2009 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 595-619
Author(s):  
Christopher W. Close

In summer 1546, armed conflict erupted in the Holy Roman Empire. The war pitted the Catholic Emperor Charles V against the Schmalkaldic League, an alliance of Protestant imperial estates led by Landgrave Philip of Hesse and Prince-Elector John Frederick of Saxony. While the conflict's most famous and final battle took place in Thuringia at Mühlberg, the Schmalkaldic War's first military action occurred in southern Germany in the Danube River basin. This area housed numerous evangelical imperial cities, several of which sat south of the Danube in eastern Swabia. When hostilities began in July 1546, magistrates throughout the region ordered their forces to occupy the local countryside. With their soldiers came the Reformation, as city councils sent preachers to reform the seized parishes. For councilors in Augsburg, Ulm, and elsewhere, evangelization complemented the general war effort, since true believers must “first and foremost consider God's word and honor … and let God's word be preached. … Such a thing should not be delayed until after the war, for if one undertakes the Christian work of improving the corrupted churches of these poor subjects now, God will grant us victory more quickly and allow the newly won Christians to remain with us.” Closely tied to the religious goals of this wartime program of reform, therefore, was the concrete political objective of spreading urban jurisdiction to areas formerly controlled by Catholic lords.


2017 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-62
Author(s):  
Klaus C. Yoder

Purification of the Church is frequently invoked to narrate Protestant justifications for the break from Rome during the Reformation. It also functions to link the Reformation to a process of modern disenchantment. However, little attention has been paid to the rhetoric of pollution and precisely how the reformers articulated the dangers of polluted ritual. The historical location of the sources examined here is the middle decades of the 16th century when Protestants were dealing with political setbacks to the Reformation cause in the Holy Roman Empire, particularly the imposition of the Augsburg Interim by Charles V. This law was designed to find some middle ground between Catholics and Protestants until the schism would be settled at the Council of Trent. However, the debates about whether certain ceremonies, supposedly non-binding with respect to doctrinal commitments, could be used for politically expedient purposes, pushed Protestant thinkers to reassess the power and dangers of liturgical practices and paraphernalia. This article interprets the discourse of pollution in Protestant controversies about compromise in ritual matters by treating the responses of two theologians writing against the Interim from different parts of Germany: Joachim Westphal and Wolfgang Musculus. By laying out the causes of ritual pollution and its negative effects upon body and soul according to individuals who worked for reform in both their intellectual activity as well as their pastoral service, this article demonstrates the importance of ritual matters for Protestant moral thought.


Author(s):  
Yu. Tsvietkova

The article aims to analyse the peculiarities of implementation of the Reichstags' and Emperor' acts which concern the legal relations of the Utraquism, Lutheran and Calvinism proceeding. These are the Act of the Diet of Worms 1521, the Act of the Diet of Speyer 1526, the Act of the Diet of Speyer 1529, the Speyer Protest Act 1529, the Act of the Diet of Augsburg 1530, the Religious Peace Treaty of Nuremberg 1532, the Acts of the Diets of Speyer 1542 and 1544, the Treaty of Passau 1552, the Treaty of Augsburg 1555 with the Declaratio Fernandea, the Prague Compactata 1436 signed by the Emperor Sigismund, Charles V Habsburg recess 1530, interim of Augsburg and Leipzig 1548 signed by Charles V. The article evaluates the depth of the whole-empire legislation practical implementation through the review of public-legal and private-legal freedom of faith phenomena which took place on the territories of the Imperial subjects practising different faith during the Reformation and the Counterreformation arousal. The historical, dialectical, comparative, formal, teleological methods as well as the methods of analysis and synthesis are applied to analyse historical events, legal mentalities peculiarities, definite legal causes, local legislation acts authorised by princes, magistrates, burgomasters. Based on the abovementioned, the author comes to certain conclusions. The contradictory nature of the central empire legislation on about the new confession and the legal status of its believers led to the spreading of the legal nihilism on the imperial subjects' territories. This nihilism strengthened the centrifugal processes in the Holy Roman Empire creating the threat to the state unity and integrity. Despite their victory in Shmalkalden war, the emperor and the catholic lobby realized the real scope of public and private regulation of the freedom of faith legal institute, taking place on the territories of the Empire's subjects. Their concessions they made resulted in the creation of a paradoxical social-legal and state-political dichotomy. On the one hand, granting the freedom of faith empowered local governments and increased decentralization of the Holy Roman Empire, and on the other hand it contributed to its unity and stopped the splitting processes. It has practically proved that personal concessions on common interests could hold the Empire solid.


Author(s):  
Adam Teller

This chapter assesses the meetings of the Polish Jewish refugees with the German Jews on the ground in the communities of the Holy Roman Empire. It begins by examining the chapbook Di bashraybung fun Ashkenaz un Polak (The Description of a German and a Polish Jew). Published in Prague sometime in the second half of the seventeenth century, it provides a satirical look at the interaction of the Polish Jewish refugees with the German Jews they met on their travels in the empire. The satirical poem presents this in two large blocks: the first gives the point of view of the Polish Jew and his complaints about his reception in the empire; the second brings the perspective of the German Jew and his opinions of the indigent refugees with whom he is faced. The chapter then determines the extent to which the chapbook was an accurate portrayal of the mid-seventeenth-century reality, considering the Jewish refugees in Frankfurt a.M. and Hamburg, as well as in Vienna.


Geophysics ◽  
1977 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 890-896
Author(s):  
Howard W. Pollock

While a number of concepts date back to Roman Law, the origins of the modern law of the sea might very well be said to have occurred early in the 16th Century. Charles V, King of Spain and Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, decreed that the seas were to be divided between the Portuguese and the Spanish. His first challenge came from his cousin, Francis I, King of France, who had organized and financed an expedition to explore the New World. Charles sent an Ambassador to Francis reminding him of the imperial decree forbidding all but the Portuguese and Spanish to navigate to the New World. Francis’ answer to the envoy was very straightforward: “Tell my good cousin Charles that if he will show me where in Adam’s will the sea was bequeathed to the Spanish and Portuguese, then I will obey.” Accordingly, Francis’ expedition, led by an Italian, Verrazano, sailed and discovered what is now New York harbor.


1982 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 151-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard F. Hardin

The advent of the great autocrats of the sixteenth century—Francis I, Charles V, and Henry VIII—was a source of concern and perplexity to many sensitive observers of that age, a reaction that was more than the mere aversion to magnificence that Hans Baron saw motivating an earlier civic humanism. The sixteenth century brought with it a series of disastrous wars and an expansion of monarchies the likes of which the preceding century had not known. The Holy Roman Empire came to include, at least nominally, a vast area of Europe from Austria to the Netherlands; the ambitious Francis I had designs on Italy and the Netherlands; Henry VIII was pursuing the reconquest of France.


Author(s):  
Edward J. Watts

Greek-speaking Romans writing after the fall of Constantinople soon abandoned hope of a final Roman renewal. Some, like Laonikos Chalkokondyles, looked to a renewed Hellenism that would reassert Greek virtues that the millennia-long Christian Roman period of Greek history had suppressed. Others, like Michael Critobulus, saw the Roman future as one in which Romans worked with the new Ottoman regime. Western figures ranging from Enea Sylvio Piccolomini (the future Pope Pius II) to the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I took up the idea of a restoration of Roman control of Constantinople spearheaded by the Holy Roman Empire. These ideas even inspired Maximilian’s grandson Charles V to undertake campaigns against the Ottomans in Europe and the Mediterranean that he equates to Republican and imperial Roman wars, but the combination of the Lutheran teaching and a French alliance with the Ottomans weakened Charles’s claims to universal, Christian Roman leadership.


2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (33) ◽  
pp. 47-70
Author(s):  
Vincenc Rajšp

Following the publication of Luther’s theses on 31 October 1517, the Diet of Worms was the next fundamental step in the reform movement of the 16th-century European Christianity. In the “Holy Roman Empire,” the way was opened for further religious and new institutional development in the previously unified church, culminating in the Peace of Augsburg in 1555, which granted individual rulers of political units in the country, princes, prince-bishops etc. the right to decide on the religion of their Catholic and Lutheran subjects. The immediate cause of “Worms 1521” and the consequent “Edict of Worms” were two papal bulls addressed to Luther. The first, Exsurge Domine from 1520, threatened him with excommunication unless he recanted almost one half of the theses published in 1517. Luther responded by proclaiming the pope the Antichrist, although he had until then somewhat avoided criticising him, and publicly burned the bull in December of the same year. Exsurge Domine was followed in January 1521 by the bull Decet Romanum Pontificem excommunicating Luther, which also meant death sentence and exile from the state. According to the established doctrine and practice the execution of the sentence would follow automatically. This doctrine was rejected by Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, who was not convinced by the arguments about Luther’s “heresy” and demanded judgement by domestic experts and authorities. He had his University of Wittenberg in mind, which firmly defended Luther’s views. Frederick the Wise reached the agreement with Emperor Charles that “the case of Luther” would be discussed at the Diet, and that Luther was guaranteed safe arrival in Worms and return to Wittenberg. Luther appeared before the Diet on April 17 and 18. The party representing Luther’s conviction gave him only the option of renouncing the convicted theses, which is why he requested more time for reconsideration and was granted the emperor’s personal permission. The next day, on April 18, Luther performed brilliantly, to which the emperor personally responded on April 19. Thus, Emperor Charles and the monk Luther literally stood opposite each other at the Diet, in front of the highest representatives of the state, which was previously completely unimaginable. Both presented their religious perceptions and understandings, referring to their own conscience. They were in a very unequal position not only as emperor and monk; it was a much more sensitive matter, since the emperor was religiously “free” while Luther was a validly convicted and excommunicated “heretic”. The case of Luther at the Diet was far from solely religious in nature, but rather a reflection of the broader socio-religious situation at the turning point in history. The conflict culminated in the contradictions between “cultural” Rome and barbaric “Germanism”, as perfectly illustrated by the correspondence of the papal nuncio, Girolamo Aleandro the elder. The great understanding for Luther’s resistance to Rome was supported at the Diet by decades-old German complaints (gravamina) debated at Diets, which were not taken seriously in Rome. The most notable figures in the case of Luther (causa Lutheri) at the Diet were: Martin Luther, Emperor Charles V, Elector of Saxony Frederick the Wise, and the papal nuncio Girolamo Aleandro the elder. Although at the end of the Diet each of them was “victorious” in one way or another, the actual winner was Martin Luther, who achieved unprecedented success only by appearing before the Diet, not renouncing the convicted theses and being able to return to Wittenberg under the emperor’s protection. It is true that he published his fundamental reform writings as early as 1520, but the door for the Reformation has only now opened. After Luther was “abducted” on his way back, he undertook the translation of the Bible into German, which became the only recognized religious basis, and he incorporated his theology into the translation. He used his native, German language to communicate the faith. This was already demonstrated at the Diet, where he spoke first in German and only then in Latin for those who did not understand German, e.g. the emperor and the papal nuncio Aleandro. Pamphlets (Flugschriften) handed out in the streets also reported about the events at the Diet in German. At first glance, the conclusion of the Diet was not favorable for Luther. The Edict of Worms, dated May 8 and signed by the emperor on May 26, as an act of the emperor and not as a resolution of the Diet, legitimized Luther’s conviction. The edict was drafted by the nuncio Aleandro, and partly also by Peter Bonomo, later Trubar’s teacher. However, the edict did not have fatal consequences for Luther, because the emperor did not send it to the province of Saxony; consequently Frederick, Elector of Saxony, did not have to declare it, so the edict did not apply where the “heretic” lived. This, in turn, enabled Luther to continue working as both a religious reformer and a university professor at the University of Wittenberg, which became a central institution for the education of Lutheran reformers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document