Letter #3892
[Ioannes DANTISCUS] to [Samuel MACIEJOWSKI]s.l., [ca. 1543-01-01]
English register:
Dantiscus has recently received three letters from the addressee. He thanks him for his concern about his health. His ailments are still making it necessary for him to dictate his correspondence.
He notes the confusion in Danish affairs and how they have a negative impact on Polish matters. In his opinion, this comes from the actions of bad advisors. He advises the king [Sigismund I Jagiellon] against sending an envoy to Denmark, arguing that peace negotiations should be conducted with those who hold a stronger position. Instead, he proposes corresponding by letter with the king of the Romans [Ferdinand I of Habsburg], and the emperor [Charles V], who has been dragged into this war. Dantiscus has included more detailed suggestions in a letter addressed directly to the king.
Unless the subjects of the king [of Poland] can enjoy freedom of navigation in the spring, which has been abolished by Queen Maria [of Hungary], Dantiscus is convinced that all the king’s possessions will suffer irreparable losses, with the greatest harm falling on the people living along the banks of the Vistula River. The war with Denmark is being waged by the emperor, not by the subjects of the king of Poland, who shares a friendship with the emperor. The subjects provide much needed supplies, especially grain and other goods, to imperial possessions. If this message is conveyed to the emperor through the king of the Romans, the emperor will permit free navigation. The king of Denmark [Chrisitian III of Oldenburg] can be written to, urging him not to close the Danish straits. Nobles who are subjects of the king of Poland stand to suffer significant losses because goods floated down to Gdańsk (Danzig) would lose their value. The letter to the king of Denmark might add that a favourable response to the request of the king of Poland would facilitate peace negotiations with the emperor’s supporters. [Paragraph text damaged in many places].
Dantiscus encloses the materials requested by the addressee concerning the defendants [Barthel Brand, Tiedemann Giese Jr]. So far, the defendants have not decided whether they will appear [at the scheduled hearing]. However, they are sending a syndic [Konrad Lagus], who is expected to arrive before the hearing date. Presumably, he will not arrive empty-handed. Dantiscus recommends agreeing to the proposals which he will present.
Dantiscus has presented his opinion on suppressing the unrest [in Gdańsk] in a letter to the king. Accordingly, he provides a brief summary here. The syndic, the preacher [Pankratius Klemme], and the teacher should be expelled from the city, and the previously mentioned triumvirate must be brought under control in the defendants’ case. However, if the king shows mercy to the defendants and postpones the matter until the spring session of the Diet [of Royal Prussia], Dantiscus asks that his intercession not be overlooked. This way, free from suspicions [of acting against the town’s interests], in the future he will be able to learn more easily what is in the king’s best interest.
The addressee’s servant, Mikołaj Loka, will be able to take possession of the [Ermland (Warmia)] canonry during the upcoming [Royal Prussian] Diet in Marienburg (Malbork), to be held on Epiphany, a fact about which Dantiscus has already informed the king. [Further text damaged].
Manuscript sources:
| ||||
Text & apparatus & commentary Plain text Text & commentary Text & apparatus
Reverendissime in Christo Pater et Domine, frater et amice carissime atque plurimum observande.
Salutem et obsequiorum meorum officiosam commendationem.
Post eas cf. , CIDTC IDL 7481⌊litterascf. , CIDTC IDL 7481⌋, quas nuper
Res Danicae satis perturbatae, quae etiam per malos consultores usque ad nos se extendunt, quomodo pacari debeant, nondum video. Neque profuturum puto, si a
Quodsi subditis serenissimae
Quod Dominatio Vestra Reverendissima a me postulat[1] in causa
De reliquo non est, quod Dominationem Vestram Reverendissimam commoneam. Consilium meum de sedando tumultu serenissimae
Servitori Dominationis Vestrae Reverendissimae
Datae ut [supra].
[1 ] There is no mention about citati in two preserved of cf. , CIDTC IDL 7481;