Das Kammerregister Papst Martins IV. (Reg. Vat. 42) (review)

In several articles of the 1970s Edith Pásztor pointed out the need for a critical edition of the chamber register of Pope Martin IV. This task was referred to Peter Herde, who engaged Gerald Rudolph for the edition that he submitted as a dissertation to the University of Würzburg in 2005. It contains over 600 complete letters of the pope, along with shorter items, covering his entire pontificate (1281–85). It differs from the chancery register in that the records of the chamber relate to the administration of the Papal States and papal finances. Four such registers survive for the late-thirteenth-century popes Urban IV (1261–64), Clement IV (1265–68), Martin IV (1281–85), and Nicholas IV (1288–92), as well as a fragment for Boniface VIII (1294–1303), which went over to marginal notes in the chancery register for chamber items. The next extant chamber register did not surface until the pontificate of Innocent VI (1352–62).The camera,first mentioned in 971, had taken on importance in the central administration of the Sacred Lateran Palace by the late-eleventh century, especially under Censius a century later, and then operated out of new quarters at the Vatican under Innocent III and remained there into the pontificate of Nicholas III.

One unique feature is the longevity of the camerariusBerard of Camerino, who served four popes from February 1279 to December 1288. He began to operate independently of individual popes as the chamber became essential for the complex system of papal finances. Reg. Lat. 42 is the chief source for his activity. It has 121 folio pages. Each entry in the edition has a descriptive rubric in German, includes folio pagination, identifies the scribe who wrote the entry, and has a transcription of the pertinent papal letter. The apparatus fontiumcontains up-to-date biographical references and concise identifications of places and persons, e.g., a detailed listing of places in the British Isles for the purpose of assessing taxes according to the Liber Censuum(no.125). I have detected only one misprint: On page 658, the registers of Urban IV (Paris 199–1958) should read (Paris 1901–1958).

Beyond formalities of the edition, my initial concern was whether the editor drew any comparisons between the Olivier-Martin edition of the chancery (Paris, 1901–35) and his edition. He does and also provides comments on chamber registers of other popes of this era (pp. xvi–xx). Rudolph writes that this chamber register is the only papal register of the thirteenth century yet to be edited. It contains 612 complete letters of Martin IV, 162 that begin with I e m= In eundem modum(i.e., identical directives addressed to a number of different places or persons), one letter of Charles I of Anjou (no. 402), and one by Boniface VIII (omitted from this edition). Reg. Lat. 41, the chancery register, has one scribe, whereas Reg. Lat. 42 has eleven different scribes; has no rubrics; and gives a somewhat disorderly impression with many corrections, empty lines, additions, and numerous marginal notes. As a work copy, it is the exception among thirteenth-century registers. Papal letters are often complete and all but three are dated. Some letters of the chamber register also appear in the chancery register. A very few are identical in both registers or have only a few variations. The chancery register also contains some items pertaining to administration and finance, but no chancery items appear in the chamber register. The editor concludes that the chamber register contains the concept or rough draft of curial letters while the chancery register has their definitive form when items are identical.

Unlike other registers, which reflect more often than not the desires and wishes of petitioners, the chamber register is a much better gauge of papal policies...