1 Introduction: Anatomy of a Pragmatic Book
Pragmatic books related to moral theology, pastoral, and catechetical literature were widespread in the early modern Ibero-American world. But this literary or, we could say, âeditorial genreâ â to employ a category which scholars have recently been focusing on1 â did not raise the attention of legal historians for a long time because of its apparent simplicity and lack of learned knowledge.2 This chapter aims to look inside one of these pragmatic books in order to understand the knowledge base of the pragmatici. We will see that pragmatic books, dealing with moral theological topics, could be very learned.
In particular, I propose to analyse one the most famous and most successful pragmatic books, the Manual for Confessors (Manual de Confessores), written by the celebrated Spanish canon law professor, MartÃn de Azpilcueta. The text was a real best seller: Emilio Dunoyer counted eighty-one editions printed in Portuguese, Spanish and Latin, between 1549 and 1625, in addition to at least ninety-two editions, if we count the compendia and the Italian translations.3 This incredible number of editions and translations was probably related to both the importance of the author, who was an undeniable authority in his time4 (named as âiuris monarchaâ, he was considered as a living legal library),5 and to a series of different factors directly connected to the Manual: its peculiar nature of Luso-Spanish and then Roman text, its fundamental value in Counter-Reformation Europe (spreading from the first results of the Council of Trent) and the fact that it was able to meet needs that were considered particularly urgent.
The Manual, in fact, soon became a reference work in the courts of conscience both in Europe and in missionary contexts in the frontier regions of the early modern empires. It was a fundamental text for the education of confessors and was also adopted as an official manual by the Jesuits, who used it in their lessons, thus contributing to the development of moral theology as a discipline.6 Moreover, it was the first manual used in the new Tridentine seminars and the basis for the diocesan discussions established by the Council of Trent on cases of conscience.7 At the same time, as I said, it was very important in the missionary context of the Spanish and Portuguese Empires.8 In Goa, as well as in Japan, the Manual was a primary resource;9 moreover, it was a real best seller in the New World, omnipresent in the Mexican and in the Peruvian book trades, in the personal libraries of priests with little formal education, and in seminary libraries.10 In Mexico and Guatemala, it was highly recommended as a fundamental text for the confession of indigenous people.11
It is clear that neither the author nor the Manual are a new object of study; many different aspects of Azpilcuetaâs intellectual production have been deeply analysed on topics ranging from his contribution to economic thinking12 to his political thought;13 from the relevance of the Manual for the elaboration of contract law14 to its contribution to the debate about the validity of positive law in the court of conscience,15 to mention just a few.
Even though many studies have been conducted, one question still remains: why was this manual so successful? In the following pages, I will try to analyse the reasons for its success, firstly by looking closely into the Manual, with an attentive eye to the ways in which knowledge and, in particular, learned normative knowledge (from canon law and civil law) was organised and condensed into a pragmatic manual for confessors. Condensing and epitomising knowledge was a common practice in early modern times, handed down from late antiquity and the Middle Ages. This practice, related to both didactic and professional purposes, was also used in legal and catechetical literature. But this process of condensation from a learned legal text to a pragmatic book did not end, in the case of Azpilcueta, with a static or crystallised work. Studying Azpilcuetaâs Manual as a material object and following its transformations into the different editions and translations, we will see that the Manual was a living text, in which canon law was constantly interrogated, interpreted, and updated in order to give answers to the burning questions of a rapidly changing world.
2 Pragmatic Books and Law: Epitomisation of Legal Knowledge in the Early Modern Period
2.1 Law and Moral Theology: the âSpecificâ Literature for Confessors
As I mentioned before, legal historians did not pay much attention to pragmatic literature, whose lack of learned legal knowledge made it appear weak in terms of canon law and theology to a critical eye. This was, even more, the case for a particular kind of pragmatic book, the specific literature for confessors, which was long considered to only relate to the forum internum, giving a kind of Catholic deontology, and dealing exclusively with morals. But such was not exactly the case.
Early modern literature dedicated to confession, handed down from the late medieval tradition of summae confessorum, was mainly composed of small texts to be used by all priests, especially those who heard confessions. This literature could also count big structured texts with a rich casuistry, but the little manuals were largely more common.16 These were âpracticalâ books, âdesigned for useâ,17 in which the confessor could find instructions for best administering the sacrament of penance, following, in particular, the order of the seven sins and of the Decalogue. They were compendia of dogmatic-moral principles and, at the same time, practical manuals, with many useful indications â on the process of interrogating a penitent as well as on the penance to be imposed.
During and after the Council of Trent, the attention on the education of priests contributed to a perceived need for tools to implement the decrees on penance. In this respect, numerous practical instructions were printed, to explain the way in which confessors ought to interact with the penitent, such as the Avvertimenti by Federico Borromeo (1574).18 Moreover, many late medieval summae were updated in line with the decrees of the Council of Trent, later becoming classics of the post-Tridentine literature.19 The result was an explosion of manuals for confessors and cases of conscience in the post-Tridentine period, that lead to the need for brevity, selection, and reorganisation of the material in a more efficient way.20
A strong intertwining between law and morality characterised this literature for confessors since its origins.21 Medieval Summae and manuals for confessors, in fact, were not only often written by jurists but also contained a juridical discourse with solid theological bases. From the perspective of avoiding sin (âratio peccati vitandiâ), the Summae confessorum provided deep analysis of the legal relationships governing medieval Christian societies.22 The casuistic approach, which characterized many of these works, allowed very profound examination of legal institutions, especially those dealing with contracts, which become the most important part of the summae concerning the seventh commandment, âdo not stealâ.23 The solution of moral theological questions was based on civil and canon law.24
The connection between law and moral theology grew stronger in the Catholic tradition with the Council of Trent, which âaffirmed and reinforced the tendency within the late medieval manuals for confessors to use legal argument as an essential tool in solving cases of conscienceâ.25 But this strong intertwining of canon law, civil law and moral theology, this âsymbiosisâ26 between law and morality, was already a trend, particularly in the Spanish legal culture: that can be clearly seen in Azpilcuetaâs works, namely in his Manual.
The portrait depicted by Beyerlinck in his Magnum theatrum vitae humanae (1631) is clear in this regard; Azpilcueta was the best theologian among jurists and the best jurist among theologians.27 What has not been analysed until now, though, is the process through which canon and civil law were transferred and translated from the erudite legal books in universities to practical manuals, which were conceived for use by confessors and penitents. This process, which is the main object of these pages, can be described by the word âepitomisationâ.
2.2 Epitomising Legal Knowledge
In the early modern period, epitomising was a common practice. Drawing on traditions from late antiquity and the Middle Ages, this process was greatly developed during the Renaissance.28 The making of epitomae and compendia of already existing texts, thus selecting, condensing and briefly summarising them, as well as compiling different works by providing excerpts from them in a convenient and pre-digested way, were among several techniques used for managing scholarly information.29 The aim of brevity went hand in hand with the will of excerpting only what was considered important and interesting for the reader, while organising the information conveniently in a clear way. This went along with new attitudes toward page layouts (like the creation of indexes, chapter headings lists, and other finding devices), whose potential was largely developed with the printing press.30
Jurists largely practiced the compilation and epitomisation of knowledge. Collecting, selecting and summarising were techniques particularly used in the Middle Ages and in the early modern period, when jurists had to deal with a large number of âuniversalâ corpora of civil and canon law and, for that reason, they elaborated tools and memory devices (like promptuaries, alphabetic dictionaries, florilegia and summae) for accessing to these corpora, always subscribing to the idea of having an entire library in one book. Therefore, in the 16th century epitomae were a specific category for the organisation of knowledge, directly associated with law and the specific literature for confession. That can be illustrated by Conrad Gessnerâs Pandectae (1548â49), the work that organised by subject the huge bibliographic material of his Bibliotheca Universalis (1545). In the section dedicated to civil and âPontificalâ law, Gessner mentions the âepitomae in utroqueâ, in which he refers to legal compendia and promptuaries and to the summae confessorum.31
What Azpilcueta did in writing his manual belonged somehow to this intellectual universe of making epitomae and, if we believe Azpilcuetaâs first biographer, those who possessed the Manual could say to have an entire library in their hand.32 In his Manual, in fact, Azpilcueta briefly and clearly explained â âbreveâ, âbrevedadâ, âbreves y clarasâ, âbrevissimamenteâ, âaffectata brevitasâ, are words quoted more and more often in the paratexts, in the different editions of the book33 â a large body of knowledge, which was needed to resolve new and complicated cases. As we hear in Azpilcuetaâs own words, confessors were asked to manage a large body of knowledge, especially in larger spaces like a kingdom or in complex and new situations like in the Americas (âEn una Indiaâ), or in places in which there was no learned person to be consulted for advice.34 For this reason, having a brief and clear text was particularly important.
However, the Manual was addressed not only to confessors (who remained the principal target readers of this kind of books); in fact it was conceived as reaching different kinds of readers and having different levels of reading. As Azpilcueta says in the dedication to the reader, the book was a Manual of Christian doctrine for everybody, an inventory and memory tool concerning conscience for learned people, and finally, a treatise with the rules for confessing and being confessed, addressed to both confessors and penitents.35 And this implied different levels of epitomisation of learned knowledge.
In the specific case of Azpilcuetaâs Manual, the epitomisation of normative knowledge involved different intellectual processes. Not only did it mean collecting, selecting, organising systematically and condensing, but also translating and updating all the normative knowledge concerning conscience in one book (transformed many times), whilst combining the transformations of the text with the self-translation of the Manual into different languages. On the one hand, epitomisation went hand in hand with a very special process of cultural translation of legal ideas.36 While condensing and summarising the content, Azpilcueta translated learned canon law knowledge from the Latin of his university courses to the vernacular language of the Manual, thus adapting the technical words of canon and civil law to the practical application in confession. On the other hand, the condensation of normative knowledge was a dynamic and diachronic process, achieved in the many transformations, translations and updates of the Manual, which were directly connected with Azpilcuetaâs travels, as well as with the questions related to newer and more complicated cases of conscience presented to Doctor Navarrus from both the Old and the New World.
3 MartÃn de Azpilcueta, âel mayor teólogo de todos los juristas y el mayor jurista de todos los teólogosâ
It is probably fair to say that Azpilcueta condensed in the Manual the knowledge and the experience of his entire life, a long life in which he was not only a professor of canon law and an advisor, but in which he had the âinvoluntary chanceâ to âphysically followâ the most relevant passages in the history of the Iberian peninsula and of the Church, moving from one city to another and from a country to another in crucial moments for the religious and political history of the time.37
We can identify three moments in Azpilcuetaâs very long life related to the elaboration, main transformations and translations of the Manual, moments in which Azpilcueta was in direct contact â as an adviser â and consultor with the Portuguese and Spanish Crowns and later with the Roman Curia.
The first period can be related to his activity as a professor of canon law, first in Salamanca (1524â1538) and then in Coimbra (1538â1554), where the first edition of the Manual appears. Coming from a Spanish noble family of the kingdom of Navarra, Azpilcueta studied theology at Alcalá de Henares and law in Toulouse, where he obtained his doctoral degree in canon law, and started his teaching activity in Toulouse and Cahors. Then he moved to Salamanca, where he obtained a second doctoral degree in canon law and then became a professor, holding first the chair of Decretum and then the one of Prima de Canones, the most prestigious chair at that University.38 In Salamanca Azpilcueta already showcased some very special features of his teaching, directly connected to his main scholarly interests. First of all, while his colleagues concentrated their teaching on the canons dedicated to the forum externum, namely those matters, which could guarantee an income to canon lawyers, he showed a particular interest for those canons related to spiritual matters and directed to the salvation of the soul. Moreover, he demonstrated his preference for the ius antiquum of the Decretum Gratiani, the ancient canon law, instead of the Decretals, on which, at that time â as he complained many years later, remembering those years â teachers preferred to base their courses, even in the Decretum chair.39 Reading Gratian, Azpilcueta focused particularly on the seven Distinctiones on Penance, which are the object of his very well-known commentaries on Gratianâs De Poenitentia (1542).40 To this period dated also his works on indulgences, his democratic relectio on the royal power, as well as his works on exchange and usury: all topics debated within the School of Salamanca, characterised by a deep and constant thinking on the most current topics of the time.41
At the moment of Azpilcuetaâs greatest success in Salamanca, Charles v decided to send his most celebrated professor to Portugal. For this reason, in 1538, Azpilcueta arrived at the new University of Coimbra, reorganised by João iii, King of Portugal, to provide an education for the Portuguese future elites. Here Azpilcueta held the chair of Prima de Canones. The content of the classes was decided by the University Council (and was particularly dedicated to the second book of the Decretals), but he continued to teach extra courses in spiritual matters, which became the bases of his Manual. He also gave daily courses on civil law matters related to canon law.42
It is also important to stress, once more, that Azpilcuetaâs canon law courses were directly related to the urgent and contemporaneous religious topics that often originated from the concrete questions, which crossed the Iberian Peninsula and the early modern Empires. Azpilcueta questioned and interpreted canon law at the university in order to offer solutions to the biggest political and legal questions of the time, like, for instance, the topic of trade with Muslims, which was a crucial aspect of the Portuguese imperial life in the middle of the 16th century. In 1550, for instance, Dom João iii, urged on by the Jesuit community, asked Azpilcueta to comment, in his university, upon the chapter Ita quorundam, de judaeis (x, 5.6.6), established at the iii Lateran Council by Alexander iii. Behind Azpilcuetaâs relectio there was a concrete question posed to the King from the frontier regions of the Portuguese Empire (Goa) by the vicario general, Fernandes Sardinha.43 This question raised a huge debate in Portugal and provided Doctor Navarrus the occasion for his lecture, later printed in 1550. In the dedication to Simão Rodrigues (the superior of the Jesuit Province of Portugal), Azpilcueta underlined that several questions related to this topic had also been posed not only by Jesuits in Africa, but also by Manuel da Nóbrega and Azpilcuetaâs nephew, Juan, in their letters from Brazil.44 Two years later, Azpilcueta would have constantly referred to this text, as well as to his other books related to his teaching of canon law at the university, in his Manual for confessors.
In this period, in fact, Doctor Navarrus was closely connected to the new Jesuit communities. In particular, he was in contact with the Jesuits sent out to set up the first mission in Brazil (1549), namely with Nóbrega, the leader of that mission, and with Azpilcuetaâs nephew, Juan. Azpilcueta was particularly close to Juan, who had been living together with him, in the same house, for many years.45 Both Jesuits had been his students in Coimbra and, as we can guess from the mentioned preface to the Reader of the mentioned Relectio of 1550, they maintained epistolary communication with their professor and friend as soon as they reached the Brazilian coasts. Azpilcueta, on the other hand, proved to be an important point of reference for the solution of crucial topics in the Portuguese mission in Brazil.
During his stay at Coimbra, Azpilcueta became closely related to the Portuguese Crown, being named the Kingâs advisor in canon law matters as well as the Confessor of Charles vâs daughter Doña Juana, the âprincess of the Catholic reformationâ who was married to Prince João of Portugal in 1552.46 When the princess of Portugal and Queen of Spain became regent of Castile in 1554, Azpilcueta returned to Spain. These years in Spain (1554â1567), when he became an advisor to the Spanish Crown, mark the second period of Azpilcuetaâs life.
Finally, in 1567, following the trial of the Archbishop of Toledo, Bartolomé de Carranza, Azpilcueta moved to Rome, where he lived for his remaining 19 years, working as a consultor at the Court of the Apostolic Penitentiary. His stay in Rome (1567â1586) marks the third important phase of our periodisation.
4 The Printing Press as a Tool? Looking at Azpilcuetaâs Manual as a Material Object
I insisted on Azpilcuetaâs biography because this information is particularly important not only to understand the kind of knowledge Doctor Navarrus condensed in his Manual, but also because the most important transformations of the Manual are strictly related to his biography and travels. The epitomisation of normative knowledge was a dynamic process, which went hand in hand with, and was made through, these different editions and translations. For this reason, before presenting my hypothesis concerning the strategies that Azpilcueta adopted for epitomising and condensing normative knowledge within the Manual, it is important to look at the different editions, and take into account the transformations and the evolution of the book, bearing in mind the authorâs moves from Portugal to Spain and Rome. I shall consider only a few of those editions which marked major changes, and in which the transformations of the text were accompanied by Azpilcuetaâs self-translations of the Manual. Its author requested, as we will see, the privilege of print for better controlling the editorial process.
4.1 From a Small Book to a Big One: Self-Translation
If we turn to the editorial history of the book, from a diachronic perspective we can perceive an evolution of the text, from a small and relatively thin book, printed in octavo and written in vernacular language (initially in Portuguese), to a big and much thicker one, in quarto, finally written in Latin. What traditionally has been considered âtheâ Manual of Azpilcueta, were, in fact, several different texts. Azpilcueta himself, in the paratexts, took care of informing the reader about the transformations of the text as well as â we will see this later â on the intellectual process, which stood behind them. As we can read in the preface to the reader of the 1556 edition, the Manual had grown from a small book, âpequeñoâ, into a big one: âhezimos este grandeâ.47
It is particularly important to consider Azpilcuetaâs Manual as a material object, keeping in mind the differences from one edition of the Manual to another â not so stressed by the historiography until now â which can help in reconstructing the evolution of the authorâs thinking. These differences are directly connected to the essential instability of early modern printed books, in which the âfixityâ of a text was not an ââinherentâ qualityâ, but rather a ââtransitiveâ oneâ.48 Once printed, early modern books were often rethought and reorganised â also in the light of other books printed at the same time.49 This instability was a feature, depending not only on the authorâs intention but also on external reasons more related to the printerâs technical and economic needs. The multiplicity of actors involved in the printing process, which somehow complicated the topic of the âauthorshipâ in the early decades of the printing press, contributed to this instability, which also impacted the âreadershipâ of the book and its use. In the case of Azpilcuetaâs Manual, we can add to this instability the authorâs purpose of transforming and updating the text. Here we can probably adopt Anne Blairâs words that the printing press was a âtoolâ, which influenced the authorâs method as well.50
As I said, these main transformations and updates appeared in the translation process, which was â to mention an interesting category to which scholars have recently paid attention â a process of âself-translationâ (or, as we will see, a «collaborative» one).51 Self-translation, âauthored by a writer who can compose in different languages and who translates his or her text from one language into another [â¦] was a common practice in the ambient translingual world of early modern Europe, when bilingualism was the norm and writers increasingly translated between Latin and vernacularsâ.52 The self-translator was a kind of cross-cultural interlocutor, a âlanguage brokerâ between different cultural parties, who accorded to himself much more freedom in the translation process than a normal translator.53 As we can detect also in Azpilcuetaâs work, each self-translation produced another version, another âoriginalâ of the text, which was connected to the different political and cultural contexts of the authorâs life (in Portugal, Spain and Rome). The privileges of print granted to Doctor Navarrus for the different editions of the Manual that we consider (which however did not prevent several pirate editions and translations that actually appeared in Spain and Italy) show the intertwining and overlapping of the different political powers, whom the author had asked for protection, very probably in order to better control the publication of his works.54 For instance, in addition to the papal privilege of the 1552 Portuguese edition, printed in Coimbra, Azpilcueta received the privileges of Castile, Aragón and Portugal (as he did for the 1560 Portuguese translation) for the 1556 Spanish edition, printed in Salamanca.55 While the Spanish updates related to the Council of Trent of the 1570 edition, printed in Valladolid and Zaragoza, went hand in hand with a new privilege of Philip ii, the 1573 Latin edition was accompanied by a papal privilege, then renovated for the 1584 edition.
4.2 Traveling Texts in Space and Time: the Manual and its Editorial History
The Manual had a very complex editorial history.56 The starting point can be identified in the 1549 edition, printed in Coimbra by the printers of that University, Ioão da Barreira and Ioão Alvares: a small in octavo book, in Portuguese.57 Two aspects related to this edition can be considered as particularly interesting. The first interesting aspect of this edition is that its core part was not written by Azpilcueta, but by a Franciscan friar from the Portuguese Provincia da Piedade who, for being extremely humble (humility characterised the members of this Province), remained anonymous.58 Who was this author? The historiography has identified him as Rodrigo do Porto, but without providing much more information on him and with some incongruence.59 If his identity at the present state of research remains a mystery, it is possible to reconstruct some information on this Province and its importance for the Portuguese Empire, thus infer some hypothesis on the text and its history.
Founded in 1517 by the Franciscan community who came from Spain to Portugal under the protection of duke D. Jaime de Bragança, the Provincia da Piedade (1517) was a Province of strict observance.60 The province soon provided many of the Franciscan missionaries for the Portuguese Estado da India.61 According to Ãngela Barreto Xavier, the text attributed to Rodrigo could be considered an interesting source of information on the specific models of confession concretely practiced by Franciscans in the missionary context.62 From this province also came King João iiiâs confessors;63 moreover, Cardinal Dom Henrique, king João iiiâs younger brother, Archbishop of Evora and Inquisitor General of Portugal, was particularly linked to this Province and their members.64
It was Dom Henrique who asked Azpilcueta to read and check for the Inquisition the conformity of âRodrigoââs text with the Catholic faith, and then to publish it, to connect it with the general reformation of the Portuguese religious life that he aimed at. In fact, not only was Dom Henrique the protagonist of the foundation and spread of the Portuguese Inquisition (1536), which within thirty years had become a powerful machine, but he also promoted the reformation of the religious orders and the secular clergy, paying particular attention to the examination of confessors as well as to the education of the priests, which was perceived as particularly urgent due to the ignorance of the clergy.65 For that reason, he promoted and often financed the publication of several books, mainly small promptuaries for confessors:66 such as Arte para bem confessar (1537) (a Portuguese translation made by Aires da Costa of a treatise composed by an anonymous Spanish friar, belonging to the order of S. Jerome); a new edition of Sacramental by Sanchez de Vercial (1539), and the Spanish translation by Paulo de Palacio of the Summa Caietana (1557). To these texts, we might add several manuals for confessors, which were more generally printed under the protection of the Portuguese Crown between 1546 and 1552.67 So Dom Henrique was certainly one of the most active bishops who made a large use of the printing press for the sake of religious reformation in Portugal.68 Among these editorial initiatives, the Manual was, with no doubt, the most successful one.
Returning to the author of the Manual, it can be assumed that the anonymous Franciscan friar knew Azpilcuetaâs work particularly well. Even if, at the present state of research, it is impossible to distinguish with absolute certainty the different parts of the Manual written respectively by âRodrigoâ and Azpilcueta (and we have to rely on the printed book), it would not be surprising, for instance, to find him amongst the several Portuguese students who attended his classes at the University of Salamanca or amongst his students in Coimbra.69 In fact, in the Manual, he refers largely to Navarrusâ works arising from his teaching activity in Salamanca and in Coimbra, namely his commentary to the three last distinctiones De Poenitentia of Gratianâs Decretum (1542) as well as his commentary on the chapter Inter verba (1544), printed only some years before.70 To âRodrigoââs text, Azpilcueta added the explanation of 93 unclear passages of the Manual, which he had been asked to clarify once the 27 chapters of the Manual were printed but not diffused. In this part, he added further references to his learned works.71
Concerning this edition, a second aspect is worth mentioning. This edition, accomplished on 27 July 1549, can be described as particularly instable: it was printed with several variants, at the point that amongst the copies today preserved at the National Library of Portugal, two identical copies do not exist. While differences are mainly formal, sometimes the copies differed also in the content. It is the case, for example, of few copies that showcased a supplementary ending folder, containing specific particular questions asked by some prelates.72
This edition was followed by a 1552 Portuguese edition (which was a bit more stable),73 in octavo, which grew bigger, and by a 1553 Spanish close translation of it, in quarto. Both of them were published in Coimbra by Barreira and Alvares, who appear in the book as royal printers. This version of 1552/1553 (we know that Azpilcueta and âRodrigoâ worked contemporarily at the Portuguese and at the Spanish text),74 which kept the structure in 27 chapters while integrating Azpilcuetaâs âDeclaraciónâ, included important revisions of the first text. As we can read in the paratext, Azpilcueta, with the help of âRodrigoâ, worked hard at these modifications, thus producing a completely new version.75
After these editions, the text got successively larger and started to be printed mainly in quarto, thus revealing probably a shift in the target reader.76 1556 saw a new Spanish edition, printed in Salamanca by the well-known Andrea de Portonaris.77 This revision, made with the help of fray Antonio da Zurara, also coming from the Provincia da Piedade, was requested by the King of Spain and featured some major modifications.78 Firstly, Azpilcueta added five commentaries on canon law regarding economic matters, printed separately. This edition also contains a sizeable Repertorium, which was also printed separately, together with the Comentarios. Doctor Navarrus additionally provided more solutions to challenging cases of conscience, and updated the text with further references to the decrees of the ongoing Council of Trent. Thanks to Dom Henrique, the directives of the Council circulated quickly from 1553 in Portugal, when Azpilcueta was there.79 But Azpilcuetaâs indirect involvement in the Portuguese participation in the Council began even earlier and dates back at least to 1545, when he was consulted by João iii in occasion of the first convocation of the Council.80 Azpilcuetaâs profound knowledge of the decrees of the Council (largely and publicly recognized) would appear clearly, once the Council was closed, in the parascer Azpilcueta gave to Philip ii, on the interpretation of the decree on the episcopal jurisdiction on the cathedral chapters.81
In 1560, Azpilcueta also supervised a Portuguese translation of the 1556 text, including the comentarios and the reportorio, and in 1570, there was an important update to the Manual, with a 28th chapter (capitulo veynte y ocho), printed in the kingdoms of Castile (Valladolid) and Aragón (Zaragoza) and later in Portugal, which already contained all the references to the Council of Trent to be integrated in each of the 27 chapters of the Manual.82 All the previous modifications would be condensed in the 1573 Latin edition, printed in Rome by Vittorio Eliano in which a more theoretical section, organised in 10 preludia, was included.83 Latin became the final language, preserved also in the last revision, printed in 1584.84
These modifications, which transformed the Manual into a big, complex and erudite book, led to the need for the numerous Compendia, which appeared form 1567 onwards and on which we will come back later.85 They sometimes also reveal the interest in comparing the different versions of the text. That is particularly clear if we look at a manuscript compendium, today preserved at least in two almost identical copies: one at the University Library of Coimbra and the other one in Rome, at the Casanatense Library.86 As we can see from the title, these two manuscripts contain notes on Azpilcuetaâs Manual (the Coimbra manuscript shows the title âAliqua adnotata in Manuale Navarriâ,87 while the title of the Roman one is âAnnotationes quaedam circa D. Nauarri manualeâ).88 Actually, it compares the Spanish and the Latin versions of the Manual. Pointing at specific questions discussed in the Manual, by precisely referring to passages of the texts via the marginal numbers which marked each paragraph in every chapter, these notes mainly registered the similarities between the two versions: expressions like âtam in manuali latino quam in vulgari [â¦]â;89 âin utroque manuali [â¦]â90 open the major part of them. But they also show the awareness of the differences between these two versions (underlining, for example, when something was added in the last version, âin manuali latinoâ).91
4.3 Finding Devices
These multiple transformations of the text went hand in hand with the inclusion of some typographical tools, to which it is important to pay attention. These tools, some of which could be described as âfinding devicesâ,92 show us the pragmatic nature of the book, which was meant for practical use by readers.
One of these typographical signs appears already in the 1549 edition. Here the letter âMâ stood as an abbreviation for the words âmortalâ or âmortallyâ, related to the classification of sins. It was probably an ingenious way the printer adopted for saving space (and money). But it could also have been a way to visualise quickly on the page which behaviour implied a mortal sin.
Beginning with the 1552 edition, many daggers ââ â began to appear in the text. It was a typographical sign with different meanings and, since Azpilcueta does not explain it, as he does in other cases, at the present state of research it is difficult to ascertain the meaning he intended to give it in the Manual. According to the Orthographia da lingoa portuguesa, by Duarte Nunez do Lião (1576), this sign was often used to indicate that the section between daggers was not found in the original text.93 But it was more likely a device connected to the way in which the books were meant to be read and the information found in the text. These daggers seem to be part of a system of signs, which included marginal numbers and was connected to the table of contents. On the one hand, the reader could locate in the page the exact place of an argument found in the table of content, which referred to the chapter and to the marginal number: the dagger, placed on the corresponding line, indicated the very place in which this argument started. On the other hand, following the daggers on the page, the reader was able to find the exact point at which the argument started and could maybe jump from one dagger to another in order to follow the main arguments of the reasoning.94
But from the point of view of the typographical tools, the 1556 edition is probably the most interesting one. In this edition, the asterisk â*â appears and is used for showing the updated parts of the edition, both in the texts and in the notes, making these changes visible to the reader.95 That was apparently a common use at that time. The 1536 edition of Nebrijaâs Castillian-Latin Dictionarium, made by his sons, showcased the same device: new entries were marked with an asterisk, thus making the lexical additions immediately visible to the potential buyers.96 Moreover, from 1556 onward, an extensive Repertorium would be added, in which, under the label âMandamientoâ, the author listed, in a few pages, all those conducts, which would imply mortal sins against the Decalogue and the Commandments of the Church.97 As we can read in the âavisoâ, which closes the dedication to the reader, this part was expressly addressed to both the penitents, who desired a very small tool to quickly remember all their sins, and the confessors, who needed a small practical memory for the examination of the penitent.98
So, we can assume that particularly this edition of the Manual was addressed to different kinds of readers. Also, the use of the marginal notes can contribute towards our understanding in that regard. While in the 1549 edition the not so frequent doctrinal references were embedded in the text (and it will be the same for the Latin edition), the 1552 and the 1556 edition showcased an important apparatus of marginal notes, written in Latin. The learned information and use of Latin for the erudite apparatus of notes (which generally referred to Latin works and was characterised by the complex system of abbreviations with which only erudite people were familiar with) suggests that they were clearly written for learned people, while the rest of the text could be understood by simple penitents and confessors.
4.4 A Linguistic Travel towards Universality?
But let us return to the linguistic journey of the text, directly connected to Azpilcuetaâs own travels from Portugal, to Spain and finally to Rome; what would it mean to move from vernacular to Latin in the second half of the 16th century?
The choice of vernacular was a general trend for the literature for confessors in the 16th century, which tried to satisfy the urgent need for education of confessors, providing all the instruments they needed to fulfil their tasks properly.99 Azpilcuetaâs Manual, too, at least at the beginning of the story, was probably meant to satisfy this need, in the framework of the religious reformation sought by Dom Henrique in Portugal. That was probably also the reason, which stood behind the Castilian edition, requested by the king of Spain via the Council of Castile, which, on the other hand, as we saw, became more complex and erudite. Here the choice of vernacular language probably accompanied the early awareness of its âImperial faceâ, following Antonio Nebrijaâs statement that âlanguage was always the companion of empireâ.100
The final move to Latin, back to the language of the Church, theology and law, suggests perhaps a new and more universal aim of the Manual, and also a further shift of the target reader.101 In his preface to the reader, Azpilcueta, being more than eighty years of age, lists several reasons that pushed him into making the big effort of translating his Manual into Latin. First of all, he did not do it for glory but in order to better serve the entire Respublica Christiana. Many excellent men from both Spain and Italy had asked him for the Latin translation of his Manual and a Latin version so juicy and brief (âtam succiplenae tamque affectatae brevitatisâ). Providing the solution of many difficult cases concerning theology, canon and civil law required not only to perfectly know both Latin and Spanish but also a comprehensive knowledge of the three mentioned disciplines which only a few people could reach before old age. Another reason was related to some bad translations into Italian and Latin, which damaged his name, as well as the entire res christiana. But the main reason was that Latin was clearer (âclarius verbisâ) and more suitable for judgment (aptius sententiis), and more solid in reasoning (âfirmior rationibusâ) than Spanish. That was even more so for the ten praeludia as well as the last updates on penance concerning the Council of Trent which had to be written in Latin in order to preserve the purity of the language (âsermonis castitateâ). So, for Azpilcueta, Latin allowed expressing the concepts of law and theology more clearly than Spanish.102 But it was also more widespread (âcommuniusâ) than Spanish. The choice of Latin was perhaps also related to the universal aim of the book (conceived to better serve the entire Respublica Christiana), and might have corresponded to a further shift of the target reader. We can imagine that while the vernacular Manual was mainly addressed to the confessors of the Portuguese and Spanish empires, the Latin Enchiridion was written for the erudite people of the entire world.
Such a change in the aims and target readership went hand in hand with Azpilcuetaâs new role in Rome as a consultor of the Apostolic Penitentiary. This dicastery of the Roman curia, recently reformed by Pius v and Charles Borromeo, administered the sacrament of penance for those particular cases reserved to the Pope as head of the Universal Church. In 1569, Doctor Navarrus was appointed jurist of the court103; the Latin edition of the Manual, which appeared in 1573, right after the reformation of the Penitentiary was completed, became an important tool used by Azpilcueta in his consulting activity. If we look at the posthumously printed consilia, which were mainly the fruit of his work in that court, the Manual is constantly quoted. But his work as a consultor also contributed to updating the last revision of the Manual.104
In sum, the small 1549 book, conceived for daily use by confessors and penitents, became â with the Latin edition â the canonistâs instrument of work. In this long journey from Portugal to Spain and Papal Rome, Azpilcueta made the book, originally written by an anonymous Franciscan friar, more and more his own work. We can assume that he made this process of appropriation visible by inserting his coat of arms (a parted quarterly shield, with a reversed crescent in the 1° and 4° quarters, and the 2° and 3° chequered quarters) on the front-page of the 1573 edition.105
5 Processes of Epitomisation: Condensing and Updating Legal Knowledge106
But which kind of knowledge was condensed in the Manual? Looking once again at the different editions, we can detect a double process, directly related, on the one hand, to the need for a small and portable text, and, on the other hand, to the importance for confessors to manage an extensive and updated amount of knowledge, which could help in resolving all the concrete and new cases of conscience a confessor might have to deal with.
First of all, we can perceive what we could call a âtop-downâ process of selection, condensation and reorganisation of learned normative knowledge, in a brief book and in a systematic way, to concretely adapt it for use in confession. But along with brevity, the other requirement of the Manual was to provide updated knowledge about conscience. The way in which Azpilcueta reached this goal was by significantly transforming the text from one edition to another. As said before, not only did Doctor Navarrus added progressively more and more references to the Council of Trent â the first sessions of which were coeval to the first editions of the Manual. But he also integrated the Manual, with more and more solutions to cases of conscience as well as answers to urgent political and religious questions, coming from the global political contexts, in which the different transformations of the Manual were conceived. This can be understood as a âbottom-upâ process, related to concrete questions Azpilcueta was asked from correspondents from both the Old and the New World.
It is hard to say if these processes of condensing legal knowledge and updating it with answers to those concrete questions marked Azpilcuetaâs specific contribution to the literature for confessors of the time. But it is probably fairly to say that what distinguished Azpilcuetaâs Manual from other Manuals for confessors, at least from those printed under the initiative of the Portuguese Crown in the same years, was the crucial role he attributed to canon law and civil law which he condensed and somehow injected into âRodrigo do Portoââs text.
Of course, the need for condensing learned doctrinal knowledge in a brief manual was quite common, expressed particularly in the texts written by learned authors. That was the case, for instance, of the Spanish theologian Francisco de Monzón, belonging to the Dominican order, who was Azpilcuetaâs colleague at the University of Coimbra and the Kingâs chaplain and preacher. Dedicating to João iii his Norte de confessores (1546) â which was meant to guide confessors like a compass in the resolutions of complex cases â, he described his books as small in size (âpequeño en el volumenâ) but very condensed in sentences (âmuy compendioso en las sentenciasâ) because it contained the flowers of the doctrine written by the sacred doctors in theology and canon law (âporque contiene las flores de la doctrina que a este proposito escriueron los sagrados doctores teologos y canonistasâ).107 But in the case of Azpilcuetaâs Manual we can see something more.
In the preface to the reader of the 1549 edition, in which Azpilcueta largely testified the conformity of the content of âRodrigo do Portoââs work with Christian doctrine, we can read what specifically distinguished the text he was publishing from the other manuals that Doctor Navarrus could have seen in his over twenty years of teaching experience on canon law, not only in Portugal but also in Salamanca and Toulouse. In his opinion, there was no book (with the exception, of course, of the canon law books), neither in Latin nor in vernacular (Portuguese, Castilian or French), which was so âuseful and safeâ as this book.108 In fact, some authors of those books spoke unclearly, or in general, without going down to the particular, while others went too much into particular cases, thus becoming obscure for the common knowledge of confessors and penitents.109 Some of them spoke like âpretoresâ, without referring to reasons, texts or authorities, hoping that their dicta had the force of law.110 While some authors followed false opinions, others did not offer any reference at all â often in order to avoid quoting the âmodernosâ, especially in those texts in which they argued better than the ancients. On the contrary, âRodrigoâ, or, better, the anonymous author of the manual that Azpilcueta was introducing, treated clearly and briefly both the general and the particular cases. Azpilcueta stressed that the author had previously discussed with erudite men and experienced confessors of his Order about all the doubts related to what had been written on penance, both by canonists and theologians, in order to choose the most truthful opinions. And in order to justly give to each one his own, he quoted (âallegaâ) even the most contemporary authors (âaun de los modernissimosâ) â and amongst them, also Doctor Navarrus himself. According to this preface, âRodrigoâ did not include offensive references, nor did he silence someone because he belonged to another order or religion, but, with the only desire of serving God, he searched for the truth â and found it â with the simplicity characteristic of the Provincia da Piedade.111
As this attitude towards doctrinal allegations was the distinctive character of the first version of the text, by studying the preface to the reader of the 1552 edition we can observe the nature of the intellectual exercise of epitomising learned legal knowledge that both Azpilcueta and âRodrigoâ, in collaboration, performed on the text.
5.1 An Effort That Almost Killed Him. Azpilcuetaâs Words on Epitomisation
In Azpilcuetaâs preface to the reader of the 1552 edition, we can read in his own words what I called the âtop-downâ process. He explains the intellectual processes related to the reformation of the 1549 edition of the Manual which he carried out in continuous collaboration with the anonymous author of the first version of the text. It comprised, first of all, selecting (he uses the expression manojo de flores, bunch of flowers, which directly recalls the legal tradition of flores legum) and translating the learned legal knowledge, expressed in Latin, related to his university teaching experience, into a practical manual in vernacular language. We might think about translation here not only in a literal sense; what was at stake was probably a process of adapting learned canon law knowledge to the everyday practice of confessors.
Azpilcueta refers to the great weight and technical complexity of his task, in reforming the 1549 edition, which consisted not only in acknowledging othersâ opinions in the difficult matters of cases in theology, canon and civil law, but also in articulating these opinions and explaining them very briefly. Moreover, when the available arguments were insufficient, it was necessary to find and offer new ones. He explains that the help of God made him overcome the spiritual anguish and physical suffering, which was related to the great doubts and the fear of erring in his resolutions, as well as to the concern that he could not leave the resolutions of these doubts to the simple confessors.112 For preserving and increasing his authority, it would probably have been better (and easier) to have cleaned and revised some material on the Decretum and Decretals, written in Latin (the most common language), which he had already prepared for his courses and which was largely demanded by his audience. On the contrary, he decided to write the Manual in Portuguese and Spanish, therefore doubling his works and writing in two languages âthat did not cross the Pyreneesâ (but actually crossed the Atlantic!).113
So, writing briefly and in vernacular languages what could be more easily expressed in Latin after revising canon law materials already prepared, was an effort that almost killed Azpilcueta (âesto ha sido matarnosâ). The Manual, in fact, looked simple, because of the extreme brevity required, but it was, indeed, the fruit of very intense efforts. According to Doctor Navarrus, certain half-pages demanded of him the same work and study needed for preparing an entire repetitio (which was an academic exercise that usually took days to prepare), and other pages required the same study and work as many good lessons at the most important chair in canon law. Azpilcueta conceded that by looking at those pages written in a vernacular language, and in such a brief and clear manner, one would not surmise that it took so many hours of study. But he insisted that it would not have been possible to accomplish this âpious workâ if he had not been so experienced, namely if he had not taught for more than twelve years on matters of theology, civil law, and canon law, from which he took the mentioned decisions. Some of them were offered to the public for the first time in the Manual, after the author had been asked âby many excellent confessors of this and other kingdomsâ.114
Although Azpilcuetaâs prose was probably following the topos of the jurist overwhelmed by his endeavour, this passage reveals the importance of his teaching experience as a fundamental component of the Manual, as well as the difficulty of this process of condensing learned legal knowledge into a brief, clear and vernacular text, which also provided new solutions to new problems. Moreover, as I said, Azpilcueta dedicated many learned books to the topics discussed in the Manual, and these works, together with many other sources, are constantly quoted in it. The preface, in fact, also makes a reference to Pliny the Elderâs opinion about the importance of acknowledging all the sources that were of help to an author.115 Giving evidence of their statements was, of course, a common practice among jurists. At the same time it can be considered as the other side of epitomisation: providing access to an entire library of selected books on conscience.
5.2 From the University Comentarios to a Practical Manual. Epitomisation in Action
This process of selection, condensation and translation of learned knowledge in the Manual can be demonstrated with regard to one of the most famous of Azpilcuetaâs learned works, which was related to his teaching experience in Salamanca and Coimbra: his commentary to the section of Gratianâs Decretum dedicated to penance, the last part of which (the comment on the 5th, 6th, 7th distinctiones De Poenitentia) was printed in Latin in 1542, and was the first of Azpilcuetaâs books to be printed.116 One of the initial sections of this commentary is dedicated to the fundamental topic of the circumstances of sins, to which confessors paid more and more attention because of their relevance for determining the penance, asking the penitent to clearly describe these circumstances. I am referring to Azpilcuetaâs commentary to the chapter consideret, which opens the 5th Distinctio. If we take a brief look at this commentary, comparing it with chapter 6 of the Manual, explicitly dedicated to the circumstances of sin, we can gain a first impression into the way in which Azpilcueta transformed and condensed learned legal knowledge.117
Let us begin with the 1549 edition. The chapter opens saying that the confessor had to expressly ask the penitent for the circumstances that he necessarily had to confess. The text focuses particularly on those aggravating circumstances which transformed a sin into another one, thus modifying the nature of the sin (e.g., committing theft in a sacred place became sacrilege); or those circumstances, which mortally aggravated a sin, meaning a venial sin became a mortal one.118 Alleviating circumstances are also mentioned later in the chapter but did not necessarily have to be confessed, as well as those aggravating circumstances which recast a small sin as a big (but not a mortal) one.
The same schema is reproduced in the 1552 edition, but here Azpilcueta added something and reorganised the text. Starting from the 1552 edition onwards, Azpilcueta clearly augmented âRodrigo do Portoââs text with legal knowledge, then further enriching his legal discourse in the following 1553 and 1556 Spanish editions, as well as in the 1573 Latin edition. In particular Doctor Navarrus translated, condensed and âinjectedâ in the chapter, what he largely developed in the already mentioned commentary to the chapter consideret.119
First of all, the connection between chapter 6 and Azpilcuetaâs commentary on chapter consideret is clear at first glance if we look at the marginal notes. In fact, in chapter 6 of the Manual, Azpilcueta constantly refers to his commentary; one-third of the marginal notes recall explicitly Azpilcuetaâs commentary to the chapter Consideret, using expressions like âas we demonstrated elsewhereâ (âsegundo que ho declaramos em outra parteâ; âcomo aly ho dissemosâ).120
Epitomisation implied, first of all, a process of selection and translation, from Latin to vernacular. What Azpilcueta added to âRodrigoââs chapter was the legal definition of the circumstances of sins, which is totally lacking in the first 1549 version and which is condensed in the two first paragraphs of chapter 6, added in the 1552 edition.
Let us look at these first two paragraphs of chapter 6 of the Manual, comparing it with the Commentary, starting with the comparison of the summaries (for the summary of the Manual we consult the 1556 edition, where the summaries first appear). âCircumstantia quidâ, which opens the list in the Commentary, becomes âCircunstancia que es?â in the 1556 Manual. This first point is followed, in the Manual, by the statement that there are seven kinds of circumstances ây que ay siete especies dellaâ, which recalls the fourth point of the Latin summary âcircumstantiae septem & quare totâ.121 The Spanish summaries are translated into Latin for the 1573 editions, in which we read âCircunstantia quid nu. 1 & septem eius speciesâ.122
Chapter 6 of the 1552 edition begins, in fact, with the definition of âcircumstance of sinâ, translating into vernacular (firstly into Portuguese, then into Spanish) the same definition offered in the commentary: âa circumstancia do peccado, segundo a mente de S. Tho[mas] & outros, he hum accidente daquilo, que he peccadoâ,123 (coming from âcircumstantia peccati accidens quoddam ipsius erit peccatiâ).124 In a marginal note, together with Aquinas, Azpilcueta recalls also the other authors (S. Antoninus of Florence and Jean Gerson) on which he based his commentary to chapter consideret, which is expressly quoted in the Manual.125 The same definition is preserved in the Spanish editions (1553, 1556). But by rethinking the text in another language, moving from Portuguese to Spanish, interestingly Azpilcueta makes a little shift: before mentioning the interpretes, expressly quoted in the marginal note together with his commentary, he refers to Gratian himself, namely to the chapter consideret, stressing that the given definition was, first of all, a legal one: âla circunstancia del pecado, según la mente del derecho y de sus interpretes es un accidente de aquello, que es pecadoâ.126
The second paragraph that Azpilcueta adds in the 1552 edition is dedicated to the different types of circumstances of sin, taking them, once again, from his commentary to chapter consideret. Both in the Manual and in his commentary, Azpilcueta chose the ones proposed by Thomas Aquinas, who enumerated them, as it was usual in the summae confessorum recurring to the mnemonic known from Ciceroâs Rhetoric: âQuis, quid, ubi, quibus auxiliis, cur, quomodo, quandoâ (who, what, where, by what help, why, how, when).127 In both texts Doctor Navarrus expressed his preference for this classification instead of the one proposed by Pierre de la Palu, in his commentary on Petrus Lombartusâ Sententiae, who also added the word âquotiesâ, frequently, to his list. In Azpilcuetaâs mind, this last one was not a circumstance but simply a multiplication of the sin. Interestingly, but not surprisingly, the Manual provided not only the Latin version â which, in the Spanish 1553 and 1556 editions, was âenclosedâ in a marginal note â but also the vernacular translation of the verse.128
But epitomising knowledge also implied a major stylistic modification, directly related, again, to a very attentive selection process: from the scholastic prose of university relectiones to a simple, more linear style by choosing only the solution provided for a special doctrinal question. In fact, if the commentaryâs reasoning is organised in the scholastic way of pro, contra and resolutio, the Manual directly provides a definition and some arguments, which are âdeclaredâ or âcrumbledâ â Azpilcueta uses the expression âde declaraâ,129 âse desmenuzaraâ130 â in corollaries (âilaçõesâ, âcorolariosâ), thus directly proposing the solution instead of showing the dynamics of the reasoning. This is the case, for example, of the explanation of his choice of the expression âde aquello (que es pecado)â, instead of using directly the word âpecadoâ, sin, in his definition of circumstances; the reason given by Azpilcueta in the Manual was that sometimes a sin could become a sin only because of the circumstances, and was not a sin by itself. This is precisely the translation of the respondeo in the first reasoning pro et contra of the commentary, located in paragraph 3: Azpilcueta does not recall the entire reasoning, but directly provides the solution of the respondeo, to which he refers in marginal note c).131
As I said, Azpilcueta also reorganised the text in a new and clearer manner. Right after the mnemonic, a paragraph follows which starts with a clear list of all and the only circumstances (âtodas & soos aquellasâ) that had necessarily to be confessed. Here, once again, he selected, translated and condensed what he said in his Commentary.132 Azpilcueta mentions those circumstances that transformed an action into a mortal sin, and the ones that could change the typological character of a mortal sin. By stressing the mortal nature of the sin, as a fundamental element for necessarily including the circumstances of sin in the practice of confession, Azpilcueta clarified an aspect that was not clearly defined in the 1549 edition. It is an interesting point that doctor Navarrus develops in the following transformations of the text, namely enriching the discussion and updating the text with the new canons and chapters of the Council of Trent.
5.3 Updating and Condensing Knowledge: Azpilcueta and the Council of Trent
Some early references to the ongoing Council are already present in the 1552 edition, namely to Session vi, of 13 January 1547, which deals with the crucial topic of justification. But the first most important updates of the text with references to the Council of Trent appeared in the 1556 edition, and were made visible by an asterisk â*â. In Chapter 6, we can easily identify this kind of addition on the page, inserted right after the paragraph listing the typologies of circumstances that had to be confessed. This is a good example of how Azpilcueta updated the text by translating and interpreting the conciliar norms, and then condensed and injected them into the text. Here Azpilcueta makes references, in particular, to Session xiv, of 24 November 1551, expressly dedicated to the sacrament of penance. He refers namely to Chapter 5 and Canon 7, which deal with the circumstances of sin.
As is stated in the text, doctor Navarrus did not have the possibility to integrate systematically the decisions of Council in the previous editions â* [â¦] avisamos, que despues que esto se imprimio, declaro por herege el concilio Tridentino, al que dixere, que no somos obligados a confessar la circunstancia, que muda la especie de pecado [â¦] *â. Only after the publication of the Manual the Council condemned as heretics those who affirmed that it was not necessary to confess the circumstances that changed the type (âespecieâ) of sin. Here Azpilcueta translated Canon 7,133 also explaining the way in which this passage should be understood and interpreted. In particular he excluded the need to confess those circumstances that transformed a venal sin into another venal one: âLo qual se ha de entender, de la circunstancia, que muda la especie de pecado venial en mortal, o la del mortal en otra mortal, y no de la que muda en otro venial, que no es necesario confessarloâ.134 Dr. Navarrus, in fact, went beyond the letter of the norm, and elucidated even what the decrees as such did not say. In particular, he added a third type of circumstances to be necessarily confessed, not mentioned by the Council: those circumstances that made good (or non-bad) behaviour a mortal sin.135 For grounding his interpretation he referred to a passage taken from the already mentioned chapter five of Session xiv, thus somehow interpreting the Council through the words of the Council itself: the confessor, being a judge, cannot correctly judge the case of the penitent without knowing the circumstances that change the kind of sin.136
Azpilcueta refers to the conciliar norms also in the eighth âcorollaryâ of his argumentation and the reference to the Council â this time in the marginal note â is functional to support a contrario his idea that it was not necessary to confess all the aggravating circumstances but only the ones responding to the criteria mentioned above.137 In this way Azpilcueta reinforced his opinion against the theologian Marsilius of Inghen, who affirmed the need to confess also those circumstances that clearly and significantly aggravated the sin.138
This point, in which Azpilcueta not surprisingly draws largely on his Comentario, was further developed in the section dedicated to chapter six of the Capitulo veynte y ocho (1570) and integrated, as well, in the Latin edition.139 Here doctor Navarrus adds to his eighth âcorollaryâ a discussion with the Dominican Domingo de Soto, a crucial figure of the School of Salamanca, confessor and theologian of Charles v at the Council of Trent. While de Soto in his commentary of Petrus Lombardusâ fourth book of Sentences (1557) takes side with Marsilius of Inghen,140 Azpilcueta does not change his position, confirmed by the Council, and his reasoning moves from the doctrinal level to the concrete difficulties of confessors and penitents, in dealing with circumstances in the everyday practice of confession.141
5.4 Updating Knowledge. Questions from the New Worlds and Answers from the Old One
The condensation of learned legal knowledge was functional, in that it intended to offer confessors the instruments for finding solutions to every concrete case of conscience. Sometimes these cases, analysed by Doctor Navarrus in his Manual, arose from concrete questions coming from the Old and the New Worlds. That is what I called the âbottom-upâ process.
First of all, as we can read in the 1556 preface to the reader, Azpilcueta was asked by Dom Henrique to answer a lot of questions and doubts (âun montón de questiones y dudasâ) received mainly from the Archdiocese of Evora, where the text circulated largely. The answer to these questions and doubts were integrated into the new edition, and made visible to the reader, as we have seen, recurring to the typographical sign of the asterisk â*â. But this environment, a target of Dom Henriqueâs reform, seems to feature also earlier: in the âDeclaracion de algunos passos dubdososâ that Azpilcueta added to âRodrigo do Portoââs text, as well as in the few special copies of the 1549 and 1552 editions of the Manual, today preserved at the National Library of Portugal and the Municipal Library of Porto mentioned before. These copies show two folders, at the end of the book, which contain answers to specific new questions concerning priests and friars. These appendices, in which the layout of the page corresponds perfectly to the layout of the editions they are bound to, are clearly related to the Manual and they constantly refer to it. Usually the author refers to specific sections with expressions like âpolo acima ditoâ, âcomo acima se disseâ and, sometimes, they refer to other Azpilcuetaâs learned works saying âou tratou ho doctissimo doutor Navarroâ.142
But also Jesuits, especially those in the New World, asked many questions.143 I mentioned the relation between Azpilcueta and the first Jesuits sent to Brazil, namely with Manuel da Nóbrega and Juan de Azpilcueta. With both of them Doctor Navarrus entertained an intense epistolary correspondence since the beginning of the mission.144
Especially Manuel da Nóbrega constantly sent questions to the theologians and jurists in Portugal. We know that he consulted his former professor on several topics, related to the strategies for the conversion of the indios or to specific issues connected to the marriage of converted people,145 as well as about the crucial topic of slavery, namely on the practice of selling the indiosâ children as slaves with their parental assent.146 If we take a look at these letters, it is possible not only to understand how important Azpilcuetaâs doctrines were in the New World, but also to understand how the questions raised from the Brazilian missionary context reached Portugal and were integrated into the Manual.
An example can be seen in two letters, addressed by Manuel da Nóbrega to the Jesuit Provincial, Simão Rodrigues, in late July and late August 1552, and their possible influences on the evolution of the Manual from one edition to another.147
The letters to Simão Rodrigues were directly connected to the arrival of the new Bishop in Bahia, who criticised the Jesuitsâ practice of confessing indigenous people through an interpreter as being a new practice never used in the church before.148 Nóbrega, replying to these critics, referred to Azpilcuetaâs commentary De poenitentia (1542), namely his commentary on the c. Fratres of the fifth distinctio, to support â against the Bishop â his argument for the possibility to confess this way, without prejudice to the sacrament of confession. In fact, in the afore-mentioned passage of the commentary on De Poenitentia quoted by the Jesuit, Azpilcueta said that even if confession was a secret, it was possible (but not compulsory) for the penitent who did not understand the confessorâs language, to confess with the help of an interpreter.149 Nóbrega recalled the same passage of Azpilcuetaâs commentary also in the second letter in which he asked Rodrigues to send a list of urgent questions to the theologians and jurists of Coimbra. The first one was the problem of confessing with an interpreter.150
There is no trace of this topic in the 1549 edition, printed the same year, which saw the arrival of the missionaries in Brazil. But we can imagine that the Jesuits drew very early the canon lawyerâs attention to this topic in their letters, or at least that the question was perceived as urgent by Azpilcueta if he felt the need to transpose into Portuguese the mentioned passage of his commentary De poenitentia, in the twenty-first chapter of his Manual (1552), dedicated to the obligation to confess once a year as a commandment of the Church.151 The topic was without any doubt amongst the most discussed ones at that time. Two years later, in fact, Doctor Navarrus would have referred to this section of his Manual, giving the same answer in one of the five handwritten consultations made to reply to some further questions coming from the Brazilian mission, today preserved at the Biblioteca Publica de Ãvora, one of which dealt with the topic of confessing black slaves who did not understand Portuguese.152
In the 1556 Spanish edition of the Manual, the statements on the possibility of confessing with the help of an interpreter was followed by an addition, indicated with an asterisk â*â, referring especially to those who claimed that this kind of confession was entirely new and not valid (and we can perhaps find here an allusion to the position taken by the Bishop of Bahia). In fact â Azpilcueta said â not only had the church always confessed in this way, but not confessing with the help of an interpreter could distance persons speaking other languages (âlos de la lengua extrañaâ) from confession.153 This statement of the importance and validity of this kind of confession was finally condensed in the Latin version of 1573.154
Even a specific reference to Brazil is already present in the 1552 edition of the Manual, in Chapter 23 dedicated to the seven cardinal sins, namely to the fraud (deriving from the sin of avarice) in selling and buying. Here Azpilcueta deals with the topic of the legitimacy of buying and selling indios as slaves. Generally speaking, buying someone as a slave, while knowing that he was a free man or that he was not captured in a just war, implied a mortal sin (like in the case of black people or indios captured by Christian corsairs and sold to Christians as slaves). But this was not the case for those indios sold by their enemies as slaves, who kept them with the purpose of eating them â because life was more precious than freedom.155 Once again, Azpilcueta would have referred to this precise section of his Manual, in another of his handwritten consultations preserved in Ãvora dedicated to the topic of slavery in Brazil.156
It is also likely that Juan received guidance regarding new and complicated issues from his uncle, offering Azpilcueta, in return, some important elements for writing the Manual. In his short but intense missionary activity, Juan worked tirelessly in the conversion of Brazilâs indigenous people. He was not only the first Jesuit who was able to confess in an indigenous language, but he also translated the basics of the Christian doctrine into the Tupi language, recurring also to the music, dancing and typical gestures of the native people.157
6 Epilogue
Analizing Azpilcuetaâs Manual, as well as its multiple transformations in the self-translation process, it is possible to identify different processes and levels of epitomisation of learned legal knowledge. Azpilcueta condensed, translated and updated in one material object, a relatively small book, the legal knowledge that confessors and penitents needed for resolving, in the concrete act of confession, new cases of conscience coming from a rapidly changing world.
Epitomising learned legal knowledge in a pragmatic manual for confessors meant, in the case of Azpilcueta, building a bridge between the world of canon law and its concrete everyday practice. This condensation of normative knowledge was always done with the aim of providing immediate solutions to the concrete and contemporary problems which concerned simple priests or Kings, the Old and the New World, the Franciscan and the Jesuit missionary experiences, the Portuguese and the Spanish empires. Doctor Navarro then collected and updated these solutions, also considering the new norms of the Council of Trent, which made his Manual into a reference work for resolving cases of conscience of the entire Respublica Christiana.
Azpilcuetaâs peculiar narrative on the genesis of each new edition of the text very often stressed the contingent reasons (related to the spread of the printed word that he could not fully control) that generated the need to further work on in. That held particularly true for the last transformation of the text. As we have seen, it was not only the impossibility of finding a good Latin translator for his Manual, capable of combining the truth of the doctrine with the clarity and brevity that was needed, that pushed him â an old man â to translate, improve, augment and update the Enchiridion himself. Another important factor was the existence of several bad Latin and Italian translations, printed without his consent (which often contradicted what was written in the original text and the true Christian doctrine).158
However, this was not the end of the story. If we trust the words used by Azpilcueta to address the King of Spain (and Portugal) in 1586, many people thought that the Manual, being published in Spanish, was more useful in the Kingâs very extensive kingdoms (âen sus amplissimos Reynos de Españaâ). For that reason they produced several compendia of the Spanish Manual without adding, improving and correcting what Azpilcueta added, improved and corrected in his last version and even saying the contrary of what was written there, but still ascribing the text to him.159 This side effect of the printing revolution â which radically reduced the possibilities for the author to control in advance the correct dissemination of his words â animated, once again, Azpilcuetaâs pen, compelling doctor Navarrus, aged more than ninety years, to make his own Compendio. Doing so, he finally provided the language, (Spanish) and probably also the format (a small compendium) more suitable to the needs of simple readers and big empires.
Actually, the Compendio immediately appears simpler to the readerâs eyes, especially if compared to the last versions of the Manual. First of all, the text is much shorter (âonlyâ 562 pages in quarto). It retains the structure of the Enchiridion (the ten praeludia placed at the beginning are summarised and translated into Spanish) but doctrinal references are almost completely eliminated. Some of the very few references in the text (in the form of marginal notes, albeit extremely scarce) refer to the Manual and, in this way, the Compendium appears like a tool for having access to it. The remaining references â generic, with no indication to the pertinent Session, chapters or canons â are mainly to the Council of Trent, but without any allusion to the doctrinal debates related to the canons which had characterised very much the sections added to the 1556 edition as well as the additions of Chapter 28. In fact, they merely focus on those behaviours imposed or condemned by the Council. Also, the organisation of the text within each chapter becomes clearer. The structure of the text in the Manual that generally followed the reasoning in numbered corollaries and secondary points is substituted by a linear sequence of numbered arguments.
This becomes evident by a look at chapter 6 of the Compendio, dedicated, as said before, to the circumstances of sin. While in the Manual and in the Enchiridion this chapter is organised into three first points (the legal definition, the seven kinds of circumstances and the circumstances that have to be confessed) and eighteen corollaries (these last ones themselves subdivided into sub-arguments), the Compendio simply shows fourteen numbered arguments.160 Very interestingly, the legal definition of the circumstances of sin that Azpilcueta injected into the text from the 1552 edition onwards, disappears: the most important aspect seems to be the different kinds of circumstances, and the mnemonic (following Thomas Aquinasâ version), kept only in the Spanish translation. Doctrinal references are reduced in very simple terms, and more often disappear completely. This is the case, for example, of the entire debate on the circumstances that aggravate notably, but not mortally, the sin. The ideal discussion with Marsilius of Inghen already present in the 1552 edition, as well as the interpretation of Chapter 5 and Canon 7 of Session xvi of the Council of Trent added in the 1556 edition, and the dialogue with Domingo de Soto which we find in the capitulo veynte y ocho and which was later integrated into the Latin edition, are radically cut from the text. What remains is only the essential message: the fact that aggravating circumstances are not to be confessed, unless when they transform a venal sin into a mortal one, or when they change the typology of a mortal sin.161 Likewise the reasons on which Azpilcueta grounded his arguments (the omnipresent âla razon esâ, âporqueâ and âratio estâ, âquoniamâ, or âquiaâ in the Spanish and Latin Manual, respectively) are very much reduced. Moreover, the original contexts of the concrete questions answered in the Manual are omitted: for example, the fact that a specific question was asked by Antonio de Zurara. With regard to the Compendio, more important than the reasons, the debates with other authors, or the motivation that grounded the arguments was the precept in itself, expressed without a margin of doubt.
Extracting the very essence of the updated and revised Manual constituted, one might say, the last and ulterior level of epitomisation. What could seem at first glance a simple and small book, with no erudite references, conceived to be understood by simple people, was actually the result of an extremely complex and life-long intellectual process. The famous portrait in the front-page can be understood as its adequate emblem. Traditionally, the picture is said to have been made unbeknown to Azpilcueta in the first years of his Roman stay.162 (Doctor Navarrus did not want to be portrayed, but his image could not lack in the galleries of viri illustres that decorated the libraries of some of the greatest collectors of the time, as well as the illustrated printed biographies of the 16th century.) The engraving of the front-page seems to testify not only to the authorship of the book but also to the fact that the entire erudition of the old and celebrated canonist had been condensed in the Compendio.
Description of the main editions of Azpilcuetaâs Manual de Confessores quoted in the article
| Year | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MC1549 | 1549, July 27 | Coimbra | Ioão da Barreira, Ioão Alvares emprimidores da mesma universidade | Manual de confessores & penitentes | in 8°, 720 pp.a | POR | The Reader |
| MC1552 | 1552, December 13 | Coimbra | Ioannes Barrerius, et Ioannes Alvarez Regii Typographi | Manual de confessores & penitentes | in 8º, 1000 pp. | POR | Dom Henrique The Reader |
| MC1553 | 1553, August 30 | Coimbra | Ioannes Barrerius, et Ioannes Alvarez Regii Typographi | Manual de confessores y penitentes | in 4º, 588 pp. | SPA | Princess Juana of Austria The Reader |
| MC1556 | 1556, July 10 | Salamanca | Andrea de Portonariis, Impressor de la S. C. M. | Manual de confessores y penitentes | in 4°, 813 pp. | SPA | Princess Juana of Austria The Reader |
| CR1556 | 1556, August 12 | Salamanca | Andrea de Portonariis, Impressor de la S. C. M. | Comentario resolutorio de usuras Reportorio general |
in 4°, 235 pp. | SPA | Emperor Charles V The Reader |
| MC1560 | 1560, January 20 | Coimbra | Ioam de Barreyra, Impressor da Universidade, impressor del Rey | Manual de confessores & penitentes | in 4°, 767 pp. | POR | Princess Juana of Austria The Reader |
| CR1560 | â | Coimbra | Ioam de Barreyra, Impressor da universidade | Comentario resolutorio de onzenas | in 4°, 169 pp. | POR | Emperor Charles V The Reader |
| MC1570 C281570 |
1570 1570 |
Valladolid Valladolid |
Por Francisco Fernandez de Cordoua impressor de la Magestad Real. Vendese en la Libreria en casa de Antonio Suchet Por Adrian Ghemart. Vendese en la Libreria, en casa de Antonio Suchet |
Manual de confessores y penitentes con cinco Comentarios [...] Nuevamente Revisto, emendado, y añadido el Capitulo veynte y ocho, por el mesmo Autor Capitulo XXVIII de las Addiciones de los XXVII capitulos del Manual de confessores y penitentes |
in 4°, 1049 pp. in 4°, 198 pp. |
SPA SPA |
Princess Juana of Austria The Reader â |
| EC1573 | 1573 | Rome | Victorium Elianum | Enchiridion sive Manuale confessariorum et poenitentium | in 4°, 1136 pp. | LAT | Pope Gregory XIII The Reader |
| EC1584 | 1584 | Rome | Ex Typographia Georgii Ferrarii, Apud Vincentium Accoltum | Enchiridion, sive Manuale Confessariorum et poenitentium | in 4°, 1107 pp. | LAT | Pope Gregory XIII The Reader |
| CM1586 | 1586 | Valladolid | En casa de Diego Fernández de Córdoua Impressor de Su Magestad. Por Antonio Suchet | Compendio del Manual de Confessores y Penitentes | in 4°, 562 pp. | SPA | King Philip II |
For the sake of consistency, page numbers always comprise the recto and the verso of the page, even when some original editions only count the folios (recto).
Short description of some elements related to the privileges of print of the editions mentioned in the article
| MC1549 | Pope, Paul III: short reference to Paul IIIâs privilege of print granted to Azpilcueta for his lectures, at the end of the Declaración | â | â | â | â |
| MC1552 | Pope Paul III: privilege granted for Azpilcuetaâs lectures | 1543, January 8 | Entire Christian World (per universum orbem christianum) | 7 years | From publication date (1552â1559) |
| MC1553 | Pope Paul III: privilege granted for Azpilcuetaâs lectures | 1543, January 8 (Rome) | Entire Christian World | 7 years | From publication date (1553â1560) |
| MC1556 | Princess Juana for the King Princess Juana King of Portugal |
I. 1555, May 4 (Valladolid) II. 1556, July 3 (Valladolid) III . 1554, September 4 (Lisbon) |
Privilege of the king of Castile: territory of Castile Privilege of Aragon: territory of the crown of Aragon Privilege of Portugal: territory of Portugal |
10 years 10 years 10 years |
From the date of the cédula (1555â1565) From the cédula (1556â1566) From the alvara (1554â1564) |
| CR1556 | Pope Paul III: privilege granted for Azpilcuetaâs lectures | 1553, January 8 (Rome) |
Papal Privilege: entire Christian World | 7 years | From publication date (1556â1563) |
| MC1560 | King of Portugal Prince of Castile Princess Juana for the King Princess Juana |
I. 1554, August 6; September 4 (Lisbon) II . 1554, March 29 (Valladolid) III . 1555, May 4 (Valladolid) IV . 1556 July 3 (Valladolid) |
Privilege of Portugal: territory of Portugal Privilege of Castile: kingdom of Castile Privilege of Castile: territory of Castile Privilege of Aragon: territory of Aragon |
10 years 10 years 10 years 10 years |
From the alvara (1554â1564) From the cédula (1554â1564) From the cédula (1555â1565) From the cédula (1556â1566) |
| CR1560 | Pope Paul III: privilege granted for Azpilcuetaâs lectures | 1553, January 8 (Rome) | Papal Privilege: entire Christian World | 7 years | From publication date (1560â1567) |
| MC1570 C281570 |
Philip II Philip II Philip II |
I. 1565, December 16 II . 1570, March 10 I. 1569, May 10 |
Privilege of Philip II: kingdoms of Philip II Privilege of Philip II for Manual updated with ch. 28 Licence to every printer to print it once, but in conformity to the Original |
6 years 6 years Once |
From end of the previous privilege From end of the previous privilege |
| EC1573 | Pope Gregory XIII | 1572, November 5 (Rome) | Privilege of Pope Gregory XIII + Naples, Venice, Milan, Ferrara and all Italian dominions | 7 years | From publication date (1573â1580) |
| EC1584 | Pope Gregory XIII | 1581, November 21 (Rome) | Privilege of Pope Gregory XIII + Naples, Venice, and all Italian dominions | 10 years | From date of privilege (1581â1591) |
| CM1586 | Philip II Pope Gregory XIII |
I. 1586, August 2 (Lorenço) II . Suma del privilegio del Papa |
Privilege of Philip II, for territories of Philip II Recalls the papal privilege of print for EC1584 |
10 years â |
From the date of the cédula â |
Short description of the most important sections of the Manual in the different editions mentioned in the article
| MC1549 | âDeclaracion de algunos passos dubdosos, por el mismo doctor Martin de Azpilcueta Navarroâ | 27 chapters | List of chapter titles: Seguese a tavoada dos capitulos que em ho presente livro se contem | ||
| MC1552 | 27 chapters | Alphabetical table of contents: Tavoada ou reportorio | |||
| MC1553 | 27 chapters | List of chapter titles | Alphabetical table of contents: Tabla o repertorio | ||
| MC1556 | 27 chapters | 5 comentarios (CR1556) | List of chapter titles | Alphabetical table of contents: Reportorio (in CR1556) | |
| MC1560 | 27 Chapters | 5 comentarios (CR1560) | List of chapter titles | Alphabetical table of contents: Reportorio general & muy copioso do Manual de Confessores. E dos cinco comentarios | |
| MC1570 | 27 chapters | 5 comentarios | List of chapter titles | Reportorio general & muy copioso do Manual de Confessores. E dos cinco comentarios | |
| C281570 | c. 28 | Alphabetical table of contents: Tabla delo contenido en este capitulo XXVIII | |||
| EC1573 | 10 Preludia | 27 chapters | List of chapter titles: Materia contentorum in hoc libro | Alphabetical table of contents: Index copiosissimus | |
| EC1584 | 10 Praeludia | 27 chapters | List of chapter titles: Elenchus Capitum | Alphabetical table of contents: Index copiosissimus | |
| CM1586 | 10 Preludios | 27 chapters | Alphabetical table of contents: Tabla de lo contenido en este Compendio del Manual de Confessores |
See, for instance, Réach-Gnô, âDe la catégorisation bibliothéconomique du livre à la genèse éditoriale de lâoeuvreâ.
For a broad discussion on pragmatic normative literature, see the introduction in the current volume by Thomas Duve (Chapter 1).
Dunoyer, LââEnchiridion Confessariorumâ de Navarro, 77â108.
On the relation between âauthorshipâ and âauthorityâ in early modern legal books, see Beck Varela, âThe Diffusion of Law Books in Early Modern Europeâ, 203â213.
Ramlotaeus, Vita excellentissimi iuris monarchae Martini ab Azpilcueta Doctoris Navarri: âIpse vero lectione assidua, & meditatione diuturna, pectus suum fecit bibliothecam iurisâ.
Angelozzi, âLâinsegnamento dei casi di coscienza nella pratica educativa della Compagnia di Gesùâ, 143â144; OâMalley, The First Jesuits, 146.
Prodi, Settimo non rubare, 225; OâBanion, ââA priest who appears goodââ, 336.
Barros, âIntérpretes e confessionários como expressões de politicas linguÃsticas da Igreja voltadas à confissãoâ, 293. On the influence of Azpilcuetaâs Manual on the directory for confessors and penitents of the Third Mexican Provincial Council, see the contribution in this volume by Osvaldo R. Moutin (Chapter 8).
Barros, âIntérpretes e confessionários como expressões de politicas linguÃsticas da Igreja voltadas à confissãoâ. See also Wicki (ed.), Documenta Indica, vol. 3, 153; Wicki and Gomes (eds.), Documenta Indica, vol. 16, 639; López Gay, âLa primera biblioteca de los JesuÃtas en el Japón (1556)â, 364â365.
OâBanion, ââA priest who appears goodââ, 336.
Barros, âIntérpretes e confessionários como expressões de politicas linguÃsticas da Igreja voltadas à confissãoâ, 293. Cfr. Baciero, âLa obra y sus fuentesâ, 65.
Muñoz de Juana, Moral y economÃa en la obra de MartÃn de Azpilcueta; Afanaseyev, âLa Escuela de Salamanca del siglo XVIâ.
Dios de Dios, âLa doctrina sobre el poder del prÃncipe en MartÃn de Azpilcuetaâ.
Decock, Theologians and Contract Law.
Lavenia, Lâinfamia o il perdono; Condorelli, âLe origini teologico-canonistiche della teoria delle leges mere poenales (secoli XIIIâXVI)â.
Michaud-Quantin, Sommes de casuistique et manuels de confession au moyen âge, 9â10.
Tentler, Sin and Confession in the Eve of the Reformation, 48â53. See also Blanco, Historia del confesionario.
Boer, The Conquest of the Soul.
Turrini, La coscienza e le leggi, 72.
Turrini, La coscienza e le leggi, 68.
On the legal bases of the literature for confessors, see Michaud-Quantin, Sommes de casuistique et manuels de confession au moyen âge; Grossi, âSomme penitenziali, diritto canonico, diritto comuneâ, 1966, then reprinted as Grossi, âSomme penitenziali, diritto canonico, diritto comuneâ, 2013: for this work I consulted this edition; Prodi, Una storia della giustizia, 87â92.
Grossi, âSomme penitenziali, diritto canonico, diritto comuneâ, 143.
Prodi, Settimo non rubare, 115â121.
It has been stressed that, drawing largely on Roman and Canon law, and, at the same time, being directly related to the concrete practice of confession, this literature became a privileged way in which ius commune reached the lower levels of society. See also Goering, âThe Internal Forum and the Literature of Penance and Confessionâ, 405â406. See also Decock, Theologians and Contract Law, 46.
Decock, Theologians and Contract Law, 55.
Decock, Theologians and Contract Law, 44. On the âcross-fertilization between the ius commune, the canon law and the moral theological literatureâ which characterized the âsyncretic nature of the Spanish legal culture of the early modern periodâ, see Decock, Theologians and Contract Law, 40.
Beyerlinck, Magnum theatrum vitae humanae, vol. 4, parte ii, 468.
On the different techniques and aims of epitomisation of Latin legal texts of late antiquity and the early modern period, see Christoph H.F. Meyerâs contribution (Chapter 2) in this volume.
On âcompilers, their motivations and methodsâ, see Blair, Too Much to Know, 173â229; Hamesse, âIl modello della lettura nellâetà della scolasticaâ, 103â108. See also Minnis, âLate Medieval Discussions on Compilatio and the Role of Compilatorâ, 386â387; Cevolini, De arte excerpendi.
Rouse and Rouse, âStatim invenireâ, 201â225.
Gessner, Pandectarum sive partitionum universalium Conradi Gesneri Tigurini, lib. xix, tit. ii, 336.
Ramlotaeus, Vita excellentissimi iuris monarchae Martini ab Azpilcueta Doctoris Navarri.
The idea of brevity is stressed more and more in the different editions of the Manual. That appears clearly if we look at the prefaces to the readers of the four main editions of the text. In the 1549 edition (El doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro al lector, in: MC1549), Azpilcueta recalls the sweet brevity (âdulce brevedadâ) with which the anonymous Franciscan friar treated both general and particular matters in this first edition of the Manual. In the 1552 edition (Al pio lector, el doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro. Salud, MC, 1552) the idea of brevity appears much more often, as an effect of the complex process of transformation and revisions he made to the Manual, in which he very briefly (âbrevissimamenteâ) gave evidence of the arguments he mentions in the Manual on the hard and huge matters of cases in theology, canon law and civil law. He recalls the briefness needed (âsumma brevedadâ) and describes the pages as brief and clear (âbreves y clarasâ). We can find these two last statements also in the 1556 edition (Al pio Lector, el doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro. Salud. en N.S. Iesu Christo, MC1556), in which Azpilcueta mentions the style of affected brevity (âestilo dela brevedad affectadaâ) which characterised the Manual; he recalls also a special section of the Reportorio, added in this edition, which could serve as brief memory tool (âbreve memoriaâ, âmemorial breveâ) for both penitents (for remembering their sins) and confessors (for examining the penitent). The idea of affected brevity (âaffectatae brevitatisâ) appears twice also in the Latin edition (Candido Pioque lectori, EC1573).
MC1552, cap. 4, § 4, 28; MC1556, cap. 4, § 4, 27; EC1573, cap. 4, § 4, 64v.
MC1552, Al pio lector, el doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro. Salud: âdoctrina Christiana, para todos: memorial y reportorio de lo necessario ala consciencia, para los doctos: Confessionario perfecto, para confessores: espejo de azero, grande y claro para penitentesâ.
On âcultural translationâ see Burke, âCultures of Translation in Early Modern Europeâ, 9. On the importance of âcultural translationâ in legal history, see Duve, âEuropean Legal Historyâ.
For a comprehensive reconstruction of Azpilcuetaâs biography and an updated bibliography, see Lavenia, âMartÃn de Azpilcueta (1592â1586)â (for the quotes, see 71; trans. M.B.); Tejero Tejero, âAzpilcueta, MartÃn deâ; Belda Plans, MartÃn de Azpilcueta. On Azpilcueta, see now Decock, âMartÃn de Azpilcuetaâ.
Some interesting notes on Azpilcuetaâs teaching activity in Salamanca are to be found in RodrÃguez-San Pedro Bezares and Weruaga Prieto (eds.), Historia de la Universidad de Salamanca, vol. 5, 391â394. See also GarcÃa y GarcÃa, âJuristas Salamantinosâ, 141â142.
Tejero, âMartÃn de Azpilcueta en la historia de la doctrina canónica y moralâ, 455. See Praefatio, in Azpilcueta, Commentaria in septem distinctiones de Poenitentia, 3.
Azpilcueta, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii. The commentaries to all the seven distinctiones would be printed in 1581.
Tejero Tejero, âAzpilcueta, MartÃn deâ, 430.
On Azpilcuetaâs teaching in Coimbra, see Solinas Quijada, âEl doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta en la Universidad de CoÃmbraâ; Tejero, âMartÃn de Azpilcueta cinco veces universitarioâ, 859â862.
Marcocci, Lâinvenzione di un impero, 90â107.
Eruditissimo viro magistro Symoni Roderico, in Azpilcueta, Relectio cap. ita quorundam de Iudaeis: âQuaestiones item illae, quas perdoctus Emanuel a pridem a nobis laurea donatus, religione, doctrina, & genere clarus, & Ioannes ab Azpilcueta, meus ex fratre nepos chiarissimus ex Brasilia: quo eos ad negotia Iesu Christi agenda misistis, ante annum suis literis interrogarunâ.
Cardoso, âIV Centenario do P. João de Azpilcueta Navarroâ, 16. On Juan de Azpilcueta see also PalacÃn, âAzpilcueta (Navarro), Juan deâ, 317.
On Juana de Austria, regent in Spain (1554â1559) during the absence of Philip ii, see Bataillon, âJeanne dâAutriche, Princesse de Portugalâ, 283.
MartÃn de Azpilcueta, Al pio Lector, el Doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro, Salud. en N.S. Iesu Christo, in MC1556.
Johns, The Nature of the Book, 19. Only recently legal historian started to pay attention to legal books as material objects, bringing the gap between material bibliography and the history of legal thought. See in particular Hespanha, âForm and content in early modern legal booksâ; Beck Varela, âThe Diffusion of Law Books in Early Modern Europeâ.
Réach-Ngô, âDu texte au livre, et retourâ, 33.
Blair, âHumanism and Printing Press in the Work of Conrad Gessnerâ, 30.
On the several processes of self and collaborative translations of Azpilcuetaâs Manual, see Bragagnolo, âLes voyages du droit du Portugal à Romeâ. On âcollaborative translationâ, see Cordingley and Frigau Manning (eds.), Collaborative Translation.
Hokenson and Munson, The Bilingual Text, 1. Bilingualism was the norm between Portuguese and Spanish (both at the Portuguese courts and in the Castilian popular environment) and that not only for the geographical and cultural proximity but also because of the great circulation of people and books. On this point, see Carabias Torres, âCastilla y Portugalâ. See also Ridruejo, âCastellano y portugués en la época de los descubrimientosâ; Buescu, âAspectos do Bilinguismo Português-Castelhano na época modernaâ.
Cordingley, âIntroductionâ, 1.
For a description of some elements related to the privileges of print of the editions mentioned in this article, see table 6.2.
In Spain, book privileges were mainly granted to authors in order to prevent anyone else but the printer they choose to print the text for a certain time, thus giving to the author the chance to supervise the publication. On the Spanish book privilege system, see Mateu y Llopis, âLicenciaâ; Simón DÃaz, El libro español antiguo, 128; Reyes Gómez, âCon privilegioâ; Reyes Gómez, âLa estructura formal del libro antiguo españolâ, in particular on the privileges granted to Azpilcueta for the 1556 Spanish edition of his Manual (that reflected the administrative subdivision of Spain and, as often happened, included also the privilege of Portugal), see 40.
For a description of the main editions of Azpilcuetaâs Manual de Confessores quoted in this article, see table 6.1. For a description of the most important sections of the Manual in the different editions, see table 6.3.
MC1549. On the contractual relations between the University and Barreira and Alvares, see Fonseca, Antunes, Vaquinhas, Vargues, Torgal and Regateiro, Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, 13â14.
Silva, âA primeira suma portuguesa de teologia moral e sua relação com o «Manual» de Navarroâ, 368. Azpilcueta himself underlines that the author preferred to remain anonymous due to great humility: âEl autor por su humilidad no quiere nõbrarseâ. MartÃn de Azpilcueta, Al muy alto, y muy excellente seõor, el Cardenal Infante don Henrique, in MC1552. For some reflections on the relation between the Franciscan friarâs work and Azpilcuetaâs Manual, see also Dunoyer, LââEnchiridion Confessariorumâ de Navarro, 77â84; Fernandes, âDo manual de confessores ao guia de penitentesâ.
See in particular Vilas Boas, Memorias históricas do ministério do púlpito, 142; Machado, Bibliotheca Lusitana, vol. 3, 654; Machado, Bibliotheca Lusitana, vol. 1, 213. On the attribution to Rodrigo do Porto, see also Silva, âA primeira suma portuguesa de teologia moral e sua relação com o «Manual» de Navarroâ, 368â370. Recently Rodrigo do Porto has been mentioned as a theology teacher (lente) in 1446. Rodrigues (ed.), Memoria professorum Universitatis Conimbrigensis, vol. 1, 39. If we believe Azpilcuetaâs explanation on his collaboration with the author of the 1549 edition for preparing the 1552 edition, this hypothesis seems not to be possible.
On the Provincia da Piedade, see Monforte, Chronica da Provincia da Piedade. Guedes de Campos, A ordem das ordens religiosas, 196â208.
Amongst the others, in 1546 João iii chose from this province six Franciscan friars, to be sent to the Indian mission; two of these returned to Portugal in 1548. The leader of the group was Antonio do Porto who wrote a detailed report of these events to João iii on 7 October 1548. See Rëgo (ed.), Documentação para a história das missões do padroado português do Oriente, vol. 3, 258â266, esp. 259â260; Rëgo (ed.), Documentação para a história das missões do padroado português do Oriente, vol. 4, 16â22; 59â65.
Xavier, âItinerários Franciscanos na Ãndia Seiscentista e algumas questões de história e de métodoâ, 97.
Marques, âFranciscanos e Dominicanos Confessores dos Reis Portugueses das duas Primeiras Dinastiasâ, 58.
Monforte, Chronica da Provincia da Piedade, 340.
Polónia, âEspaços de intervenção religiosa do Cardeal Infante D. Henriqueâ; Polónia, D. Henrique.
On the manuals promoted by Dom Henrique, see Fernandes, âAs artes da Confissãoâ, 76â79. See also Polónia, âEspaços de intervenção religiosa do Cardeal Infante D. Henriqueâ, 19, 23; Marcocci, I custodi dellâortodossia, 155â175.
Several manuals were dedicated to João iii, King of Portugal: Sancho de Noronhaâs Tractado da segunda parte do sacramento da penitentia, que he confissam (1547); Enchiridion o Manual de Doctrina Christiana (quae tambien puede servir de confissionario), (1552), written by the Dominican Diego de Ximenez, firstly requested by the Fray Juan de Zumarraga, the first archbishop of Mexico. The king directly commissioned Norte de confessores, by João iiiâs chaplain and preacher, the theologian Francisco de Monzón (1546).
Paiva, âBispos, imprensa, livro e censura no Portugal de Quinhentosâ, 691.
On the important presence of Portuguese students at the University of Salamanca during the 16th century, see Serrão, âPortugueses no Estudo de Salamanca (1250â1550)â. The presence of Rodrigo at the University of Salamanca or Coimbra for the moment has to remain a hypothesis. In Serrãoâs work, in fact, there is no trace of a Rodrigo coming from Porto amongst the Portuguese students in the years in which Azpilcueta was a professor there.
The author apparently knew Azpilcuetaâs other works very well. He frequently quoted âNavarroâ, namely his work on De Poenitentia (1542) and Inter Verba (1544). See, for example, MC1549, 25 (in which the author refers to âNavarroâsâ commentary on ch. Consideret of his commentary De Poenitentia); 263 (in which âNavarroâsâ Inter verba is quoted).
Several printing errors characterise this part of the book, namely the numbers of Azpilcuetaâs explanations: the last one corresponds to number 90, but actually there are three more explanations in the section, not correctly numbered.
I examined all the copies of the 1549 edition today preserved at the Biblioteca Nacional de Portugal (BNP): Res. 1060 P.; Res. 1625 P.; Res. 1662 P.; Res. 2929 P.; Res. 2930 P.; Res. 4722 P.; D.S. xviâ19. Among them, only the two last ones showcased the supplementary folder I mentioned, which is also present in a copy preserved in the Biblioteca Publica Municipal do Porto (BPMP): X-1-3-16.
The only variant I found concerned a supplementary folder with âAlgumas preguntas acerca dos religiosos. E primeiramente dos preladosâ showcased, once again, only in few copies preserved in the BNP: Res. 1679//1 P.; Res. 1754//1 P.; and in the BPMP: X-1-3-17-1.
In the 1552 preface to the reader, Azpilcueta writes about the new âeditionâ, a revision of the previous one, as being written both in Portuguese and Spanish. MC1552, Al pio Lector, el doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro.
For a reconstruction of the co-authorship of the revisions of the Manual (to which Azpilcueta himself refers in the dedication to the reader of the 1552 edition), see Silva, âA primeira suma portuguesa de teologia moral e sua relação com o «Manual» de Navarroâ, 371â373.
On the importance of the 8° format for the definition of the readership in the 16th century, see Infantes, Del libro áureo, 137â145. See also McKenzie, Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts.
MC1556. On Andrea de Portonaris see Ruiz Fidalgo, La imprenta en Salamanca (1501â1600), vol. 1/3, 65â73.
Azpilcueta mentions Antonio da Zuraraâs help in the preface to the reader of the 1556 edition, and also refers to it in the preface of the 1573 Latin edition. In the Latin text, the name of the Franciscan friar changes into Joannes, and Azpilcueta adds that he was asked to make the 1556 revision by Philip ii, through the Council of Castile. See Al pio lector, el Doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro, Salud. en. N. s. Iesu Christo, MC1556; Candido, pioque Lectori, EC1573.
Polónia, âRecepção do Concilio de Trento em Portugalâ; Marcocci, I custodi dellâortodossia, 159.
Brandão (ed.), Actas dos Conselhos da Universidade de 1505 a 1537, vol. 1, 144.
Azpilcueta, âParescer del Doctor Nauarroâ.
MC1560; CR1560; MC1570; C281570.
EC1573. Vittorio Eliano, nephew of Elia Levita, converted in Venice in the 1540s and was a censor of Jewish books and printers; see Casetti Brach, âEliano, Vittorioâ.
EC1584.
On the printed compendia of the manual, see Dunoyer, LââEnchiridion Confessariorumâ de Navarro, 100â108. On the importance of the Compendia in Ibero-America see Muguruza Roca, âDel confesionario ibérico de la Contrarreforma a los manuales para confesores en la América colonialâ.
ucbg, Ms. 1173, cc. 1râ65r, referenced in Catálogo de Manuscritos, 162; BC, Ms. 740, cc. 3râ203r.
ucbg, Ms. 1173, c. 1r.
BC, Ms. 740, c. 3r.
ucbg, Ms. 1173, c. 1v.
ucbg, Ms. 1173, c. 2r.
ucbg, Ms. 1173, c. 9r. A similar awareness of the differences between the Spanish and the Latin editions is also present in Francisco de Gouveaâs (1540â1628) more critical Antinavarrus; see Gouvea, ââAntinavarrusââ.
On early modern finding devices, see Blair, Too Much to Know, 132â160.
Leão, Orthographia da lingoa portuguesa, obra util et necessaria assi pera bem escrever a lingoa Hespanhol, como a Latina, & quaesquer outras que da Latina tem origen, 78.
I would like to thank Alexander Wilkinson and Christiane Birr for their precious help in finding a possible use of daggers.
The use of the letter M., as well as of the asterisks is clearly explained in the Aviso, which ends the dedication to the reader of the 1556 edition. MartÃn de Azpilcueta, Al pio Lector, el Doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta, Navarro, Salud. En N.S. Iesu Christo, in MC1556. According to the 16th century Portuguese gramatica, the asterisk was used to show that some words or verses were missing in a text. Leão, Orthographia da lingoa portuguesa, obra util et necessaria assi pera bem escrever a lingoa Hespanhol, como a Latina, & quaesquer outras que da Latina tem origen, 78.
Ellsworth Hamann, The Translations of Nebrija, 25.
Reportorio general y muy copioso del Manual de Confessores, y de los cinco Comentarios para su descalacion compuesto, Salamanca, Andrea de Portonariis, 1556 (CR1556), cc3râcc5v.
MartÃn de Azpilcueta, Al pio Lector, el Doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta, Navarro, Salud. En N.S. Iesu Christo, in MC1556: âAl desseo de los penitentes, que desseavan una muy breue memoria para acordarse de todos sus pecados muy presto, se satisfaze en el reportorio con aver puesto muy brevemente en la palabra mandamiento todas las maneras comunes de pecar contra el mãndamiẽto de amar a Dios, y el de amar al proximo, y los otros diez del Decalogo, y los cinco dela yglesia, por su ordẽ, y en cada palabra de cada pecado mortal, y aun de cada otro pecado las maneras comunes de caer en cada uno dellos. Por lo qual mesmo se ha satisfecho tambien alos cõfessores, que desseavan un memorial breve, para pregÅ©tar de todos los pecados con la alegacion del lugar del Manual, donde podran ver si, o quãdo es mortal, o venial: o ni mortal, ni venial. Y asi enel Manual, como enel Reportorio M. significa mortal, o mortalmenteâ.
On the large opening to vernacular for the literature for confessors, which marked mainly the second half of the 16th century, see Turrini, La coscienza e le leggi, 113. The choice of vernacular for religious education, both of believers and priests was confirmed by the Council of Trent. While Latin still remained the official language of the Church, vernacular was the language chosen for religious education. Concilium Tridentinum, Sessio xxiv (11 Novembris 1563), Decretum De Reformatione, can. vii, in Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Generaliumque Decreta. The Oecumenical Councils of the Roman Catholic Church. From Trent to Vatican II, vol. 3, eds. Ganzer, Alberigo and Melloni, 136â137.
Burke, Languages and Communities in Early Modern Europe, 20.
On the use of Latin in the early modern period, see Waquet, Latin or the Empire of a Sign. On translations from vernacular into Latin in the Renaissance see Burke, âTranslations into Latin in early modern Europeâ; Fery-Hue (ed.), Traduire de vernaculaire en latin au Moyen Ãge et à la Renaissance.
EC1573, Candido pioque lectori. On the 16th century debates on the use of Latin for theological and spiritual texts, see Fragnito, La Bibbia al rogo. For the Spanish context, see Andrés, La teologÃa española en el siglo XVI, vol. 2, 570â576.
Borromeo, âIl concilio di Trento e la Riforma postridentina della penitenzeria apostolica (1562â1572)â, 131.
Azpilcueta, Consiliorum seu Responsorum, lib. i, De Iis quae, cons., n. ix, 217â220: 219B. âut singulariter declaravit Caiet. super 22 S. Tho. q. 189 art 5 quem piget non allegasse in Manual. Confes. hactenus edito ubi tamen citabitur Deo annuente in proxima aeditioneâ. The handwritten Consilium is preserved at the Vatican Archive: asv, A.A. Arm. iâxviii, 3129, cc. 1râ7v: 5r.
The coat of arm is explicitly attributed to Azpilcueta in the 1584 Roman edition of the Enchiridion (EC1584). In the title page verso, in fact, the coat of arm, printed right below Azilcuetaâs portrait, is provided with the following caption: âAuctoris insegna gentiliciaâ. On Azpilcuetaâs family coat of arm, see Atienza, Nobiliario Español, 394.
The analysis of the transformation process of the Manual across the editions supervised by Azpilcueta is the object of the project âHyperazpilcuetaâ at the Max Planck Institute for European Legal History:
Prologo endereçado al mui alto y muy poderoso Rey nuestro segnor don Juan tercero deste nombre, in Monzón, Norte de confessores. On Francisco de Monzón and his works see Fernandes, âFrancisco de Monzónâ.
MC1549, El doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Nauarro al lector: âa mi iuyzo muchos años ha, que ninguna obra de su tamaño se imprimio, ni en latin, ni en romance Portogues, Castellano, ni Frances tan prouechosa, y segura para los confessores y penitentes como esta, sacados los textos de canonesâ.
MC1549, El doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Nauarro al lector: âalgunos hablan confuso, o en general, sin descender a lo particular, o bien poco. Otros descienden mas: pero por tan luengos y obscuros grados, y escalones de disputationes, que el commun saber de los confessores y penitentes, no los puede andarâ.
MC1549, El doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Nauarro al lector: âDellos hablan como pretores, sin razon, texto, ni otro autor, queriendo que sus dichos tengan fuerca de editosâ.
MC1549, El doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Nauarro al lector: âEl autor empero desta como prudente con gran cordura igual iuyzio & diligencia, todo lo general, y particular ha tocado [â¦] Y de todos los que en su materia han escripto: assi Canonistas como Theologos, y mixtos, comunicadas las exquisitas dubdas, con muy doctos varones, y muy experimentados confessores, quales los ay cierto en su orden, ha trabaiado de escoger las mas verdaderas opiniones. Y por dar a cada uno lo suyo, como iusto, los lugares aun de los modernissimos, allega sin retener nada delo ageno: como amador de la muy alta pobreza, que professo y guarda. A nadie allega para lo afrentar. A nadie calla por ser de orden, o religion diuersa. Antes con solo amor y desseo de seruir a iesv CHristo, busca y toma la verdad de doquier que se halla: sin ningun sabor de rancor, faction o parcialidad, sin ningun olor de vanidad, inuidia y ambicion, con muchos perfumes de charidad, y prudentissima simplicidad: dignos de las boticas de los padres exemplares dela prouincia dela piedadâ.
MC1552, Al pio Lector, el doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro: âquanto es la [obra] de no solamente referir, los paresceres agenos en infinitas, difficiles, y altas materias de casos quotidianos de las tres soberanas facultades, Theologia, Canones, y Leyes, de tanto peso quanto es dezir si es o no peccado. M. si ay censura o irregularidad, o necessidad de restituir. Pero aun affirmarlos y brevissimamente por la mejor razon, texto, glosa, o authoridad especial, y ciertamente allegada, fundarlos, y hallar y probar nuevos, quando los hallados no bastavan: como con la ayuda de Dios lo hemos hecho o por mejor hemos sido su instrumento a que ha dado esfuerço para suffrir muchas angustias de animo y trassudores del cuerpo, causadas por las grandes dubdas, y ygual temor de errar enla determinacion dellas: y por veer que no convenia a esta edad y opinion de letras remetirla al simple confessorâ.
MC1552, Al pio Lector, el doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro: ây aun porque nos paresciera mas conveniente para la conservacion y augmento de nuestra authoridad (la qual para mas servir a Dios, se deve procurar por las personas publicas) sacar en limpio, con la mitad de trabajo, y estudio, lo que sobre muchas partes del Decreto y Decretales años ha, tenemos en Latin (comun lengua de la mayor parte de Europa) escritos y prometidos a nuestros oyentes, y a otros muchos: y por falta de tiempo para los perfectionar retenidos, que con doblando trabajo y tiempo ocuparnos en hazer esto en romance Portugues y Castellano, que no passa los montes Pyreneosâ.
MC1552, Al pio Lector, el doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Navarro: âCa en verdad algunas medias paginas ay en esta reformacion, que se ha compuesto con estudio bastante para una repeticion: y muy muchas con bastante para dos, tres, y quatro liciones de prima buenas aun que, por veer las en romance, y tan breve y claras, no os parecera que llevan sendas horas de estudio: y aun os certificamos que no nos bastara esto, diez annos antes, ni aun agora si Dios para tan pio negocio, no proveryera, en que nos hallassemos tan curtidos, con tan vehementes, y continuas liciones, repeticiones, disputaciones, y resoluciones dictadas, y escrita estos diez, o doze años en las materias dela dichas tres facultades, de donde se avian de coger las sobredichas determinaciones: alguna delas quales nunca hasta agora osamos dar siendo importunados por palabra y cartas de muchos excellentes confessores destos y otros reinosâ.
MC1556, Al Pio Lector, el Doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta Nauarro, Salud. en N.S. Iesu Christo; EC1573, Candido Pioque Lectori. On Plinyâs model of organization of knowledge, see Blair, Too Much to Know, 18.
On the connections between Azpilcuetaâs Commentary and the Manual, see Lavenia, Lâinfamia o il perdono, 233.
For exploring the transformation process of chapter 6 of the Manual accross the editions analyzed, I made use of the digital tool LERA:
MC1549, cap. 6, 23â31. On the aggravating circumstances of sin, see Tentler, Sin and Confession in the Eve of the Reformation, 116â120.
Azpilcueta, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii, 27â73.
For instance, MC1552, cap. 6, 32 § 1, § 2.
MC1556, cap. 6, 30â31. Azpilcueta, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii, 28â31.
EC1573, cap. 6, 65v.
MC1552, cap. 6, 32 § 1.
Azpilcueta, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii, 32, n. 1.
MC1552, cap. 6, 32 § 1 marginal note p). See Azpilcueta, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii, 32, princ.
MC1556, cap. 6, 31 § 1. Interestingly, this shift in meaning is already present in the 1553 Spanish edition, in which Azpilcueta, for the first time was rethinking the text in another language. MC1553, cap. 6, 19 § 1. The same definition is somehow stabilised in the Latin edition. EC1573, 66r. âPro fundamento materia praesentis, in primis asserimus circunstantiam peccati iuxta mente iuris [â¦] esse quoddam accidens rei, quae peccatum estâ.
MC1552, cap. 6, 32 § 2. See S. Thomae de Aquino, Summa Theologiae, Prima Secundae, q. 7, a. 3.
MC1553, cap. 6, 20 § 2; MC1556 cap. 6, 31 § 2.
MC1552, cap. 6, 33 § 3.
MC1553, cap. 6, 20 § 3; MC1556, cap. 6, 31 § 3.
MC1556, cap. 6, 31 § 1. See Azpilcueta, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii, 33 § 3.
MC1552, cap. 6, 33 § 3. Azpilcueta, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii, 33â34 § 5.
âSi quis dixerit, in sacramento poenitentiae ad remissionem peccatorum necessarium non esse iure divino, confiteri omnia et singula peccata mortalia [â¦] et circumstantias, quae peccati speciem mutat [â¦]: anathema sitâ. Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta, ed. Istituto per le Scienze Religiose, Sess. xiv, cap. 7, 712.
MC1556, cap. 6, 32 (emphasis added, M.B.).
âY aunque el concilio no expressa, sino de la que muda la especie del pecado, pero tambien (y por mas fuerte razon) se ha de entender de la que haze a la obra, que de suyo es buena, o no mala, mortalâ. MC1556, cap. 6, 32 (emphasis added, M.B.).
âCa la razon que a ello movio al concilio, es que el confessor es juez y no podria bien sencenciar el caso del penitente, sin se le manifestar la circunstancia, que muda la especie del pecado, la qual razon milita en las tres dichas circunstancias *â. Cfr. Sess. xiv, cap. 5 âColligitur praeterea, etiam eas circumstantias in confessione explicandas esse, quae speciem peccati mutant, quod sine illis peccata ipsa nec a poenitentibus integre exponantur, nec iudicibus innotescant, et fieri nequeat, ut de gravitate criminum recte censere possint, et poenam, quam oportet, pro illis poenitentibus imponereâ. Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta, ed. Istituto per le Scienze Religiose, Sess. xiv, cap. 5, 706.
MC1556, cap. 6, § 7, 33, note h.
Marsilii von Inghen, Quaestiones super quatuor libros sententiarum, lib. 4, q. 12, art. i, corol 4, 572.
EC1573, cap. 6, § 7, 67v-68v; See C281570, 9v-10v.
Soto, Commentariorum, dist. 18, q. 2, art. 4, 763.
C281570, 9v-10v; EC1573, cap. 6, § 7, 67v-68v.
See, for example, at page 21 § 17 of the supplementary folder of the 1552 edition, referring to Azpilcuetaâs relectio In Levitico (1550) printed two years before.
There is a trace of the questions coming from the Brazilian missions and addressed to the Portuguese jurists and theologians, as well as of their answers in a manuscript preserved in the Public Library of Evora, which contains also the responsa on five questions given by Azpilcueta: Sententiae circa resolutionem aliquorum casuum, qui in Brasilia frequenter occurrunt, bpe, cod. cxvi/1â33 (cc. 100â160): cc. 126râ130r. The manuscript is described by Rivara, Catalogos manuscriptos da biblioteca publica eborense, vol. 1, 16.
See, for example, the letters sent to Dr. Navarro by Nóbrega (10 August 1549) in Leite (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 1, 132â143 and the letter addressed by Juan de Azpilcueta to the fathers in Coimbra (19 September 1553), in which he mentions his epistolary contact with his uncle, in Leite (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 2, 3â10: 10. On the relations between Azpilcueta and the Jesuits see Lavenia, âMartÃn de Azpilcueta (1592â1586)â, 103â112.
Letter sent to Azpilcueta by Nóbrega (10 August 1549) in Leite (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 1, 141. On the point, see Castelnau-LâEstoile, âLe mariage des infidèles au XVIe siècleâ, 112â121.
See the letter by Nóbrega to Simão Rodrigues (end of July, 1552) in Leite (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 1, 369â375, esp. 370â371.
See the letters by Nóbrega to Simao Rodrigues (end of July and end of August, 1552), in Leite (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 1, 369â370, 407. On the point, see Cantù, La conquista spirituale, 328; Lavenia, âMartÃn de Azpilcueta (1592â1586)â, 109â110.
See the letter by the Bishop Pedro Fernandes Sardinha to Simão Rodrigues (late July, 1554) in Leite (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 1, 357â366: 361.
Azpilcueta, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii, cap. Fratres, Distinctio 5, § 85, 130â160: 153.
Letter by Nóbrega to Simão Rodrigues (end of August, 1552), in Leite (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 1, 400â409: 407.
MC1552, cap. 21, § 36, 433.
BPE, cod. cxvi/1â33 (cc. 100â160): cc. 126râ130r: 128vâ129r.
MC1556, cap. 21, § 36, 373.
EC1573, cap. 21, § 36, 304v.
Cfr. MC1552, cap. 23, § 95, 565. Nóbrega had informed Azpilcueta about the anthropophagy of the indios in his first letter from Brazil. Letter sent to Azpilcueta by Nóbrega (10 August 1549) in Leite (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 1, 136â137. On the different ways in which native people were captured as slaves (amongst them the âresgatesâ concerned precisely the case of saving with slavery the indios from the anthropophagic rituals), see Abreu, âO P. Manuel da Nóbrega e a evangelização dos indÃgenas do Brasilâ, 165.
BPE, cod. cxvi/1â33 (cc. 100â160): cc. 126râ130r: 129râ129v.
Leite, História da Companhia de Jesus no Brasil, vol. 8, 84. Cfr. Extracto de uma carta do Padre Joao de Azpilcueta Navarro da India do Brasil, (March, 28, 1550) in Cartas Avulsas, 76. On the use of Tupi gestures and dancing, see Barros, âNotas sobre os catecismos em lÃnguas vernáculas das colônias portuguesas (séculos XVIâXVII)â, 54; Leite, História da Companhia de Jesus no Brasil, vol. 2, 299.
Candido Pioque lectori, EC1573; Dedication to the S[acra] C[atólica] R[eal] M[ajestad], in CM1586.
scrm, in CM1586.
CM1586, 24r.
CM1586, 24v.
On Azpilcuetaâs portrait, dated 1572, which seems to have been commissioned by the Spanish theologian and great collector Alfonso Chacón during his stay in Rome, see Herkolz, âAlfonso Chacón e le gallerie dei ritratti nellâetà della Controriformaâ. See also Ramlotaeus, Vita excellentissimi iuris monarchae Martini ab Azpilcueta Doctoris Navarri, who mentions the engraver Philippe de Soye as the artist who secretly sketched the portait, requested by the painter, illustrator, cartographer, print publisher, active in Rome, Antonio Lafreri. The portrait that was sold individually, appears also in some of the iconographic collections of viri illustres printed by Lafrery, namely attached to the collection of Illustrium iureconsultorum imagines (1566). See Rubach, Ant. Lafreri Formis Romae, 370.
Bibliography
Manuscripts
Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Città del Vaticano (asv), A.A. Arm. iâxviii, 3129, cc. 1râ7v.
Biblioteca Casanatense, Roma (BC), Ms. 740, cc. 3râ203r.
Biblioteca Pública de Ãvora, Ãvora (bpe), cod. cxvi/1â33, cc. 100â160.
Universidade de Coimbra. Biblioteca Geral, Coimbra (ucbg), Ms. 1173, cc. 1râ65r.
Printed Sources
a) Azpilcuetaâs Works
[MC1549] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de and Rodrigo do Porto, Manual de confessores & penitentes, Coimbra 1549: João de Barreira and João Alvares.
[MC1552] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Manual de confessores & penitentes, Coimbra 1552: João de Barreira and João Alvares.
[MC1553] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Manual de confessores y penitentes, Coimbra 1553: João de Barreira and João Alvares.
[MC1556] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Manual de confessores y penitentes, Salamanca 1556: Andrea de Portonariis.
[CR1556] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Comentario resolutorio de usuras, Salamanca 1556: Andrea de Portonariis.
[MC1560] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Manual de confessores & penitentes, Coimbra 1560: João de Barreira.
[C281570] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Capitulo XXVIII de las Addiciones de los XXVII capitulos del Manual de confessores y penitentes, Zaragoza 1570: En casa de la viuda de Bartholome de Nagera.
[MC1570] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Manual de confessores y penitenets con cinco Comentarios [â¦] Nuevamente Revisto, emendado, y anadido el Capitulo veynte y ocho, por el mesmo Autor, Valladolid 1570: Francisco Fernandez de Cordoua impressor de la Magestad Real. Vendese en la Libreria en casa de Antonio Suchet.
[EC1573] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Enchiridion sive Manuale confessariorum et poenitentium, Romae 1573: Victorium Elianum.
[EC1584] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Enchiridion, sive Manuale Confessariorum et poenitentium, Romae 1584: Ex Typographia Georgii Ferrarii.
[CM1586] Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Compendio del Manual de Confessores y Penitentes, Valladolid 1586: En casa de Diego Fernández de Córdoua Impressor de Su Magestad. Por Antonio Suchet.
Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, In tres de poenitentiae distinctiones posteriores commentarii, Coimbra 1542: João de Barreira and João Alvares.
Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Relectio cap. ita quorundam de Iudaeis, Conimbricae 1550: Ioannes Barrerius & Ioannes Alvarus.
Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Commentaria in septem distinctiones de Poenitentia, Romae 1581: Ex typographia Georgii Ferrarii.
Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, Consiliorum seu Responsorum, 2 vols.,Venetiis 1601: Apud Ioannem Guerilium.
Azpilcueta, MartÃn de, âParescer del Doctor Nauarro sobre el decreto del Tridentino quanto a los cabildosâ, in Arigita y Lasa, Mariano (ed.), El doctor Navarro Don Martin de Azpilcueta y sus obras. Estudio histórico-crÃtico, Pamplona 1895, 585â600.
b) Other Sources
Beyerlinck, Laurens, Magnum theatrum vitae humanae, vol. 4, Lugduni 1665.
Brandão, Mário (ed.), Actas dos Conselhos da Universidade de 1505 a 1537, vol. 1, Coimbra 1941.
Cartas Avulsas. Azpilcueta Navarro e outros. Cartas Jesuiticas 2, Coleção reconquista do Brasil. 2ª série, eds. Paim, Antonio, Roque Spencer, Maciel de Barros and Ruy Afonso da Costa Nunes, São Paulo 1988.
Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta, ed. Istituto per le Scienze Religiose, 3rd ed ., Bologna 1973.
Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Generaliumque Decreta, vol. 3: The Oecumenical Councils of the Roman Catholic Church. From Trent to Vatican II (1545â1965), eds. Ganzer, Klaus, Giuseppe Alberigo and Alberto Melloni, Turnhout 2010.
Gessner, Conrad, Pandectarum sive partitionum universalium Conradi Gesneri Tigurini, medici & philosophiae professoris [â¦] libri XXI, Tiguri 1548: Excudebat Christophorus Froschuerus.
Gouvea, Francisco de, ââAntinavarrusâ, Introducción y edición de Estanislao Olivares S.I.â, in Archivo teológico granadino 27 (1964), 271â384.
Leão, Duarte Nunes, Orthographia da lingoa portuguesa, obra util et necessaria assi pera bem escrever a lingoa Hespanhol, como a Latina, & quaesquer outras que da Latina tem origen, Lisboa 1576: Ioao de Barreira.
Leite, Serafim (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol. 1: (1538â1553), Roma 1956.
Leite, Serafim (ed.), Monumenta Brasiliae, vol 2: (1553â1558), Roma 1957.
Machado, Diogo Barbosa, Bibliotheca Lusitana, vol. 1, Lisboa Occidental 1752: Antonio Isidoro da Fonseca.
Machado, Diogo Barbosa, Bibliotheca Lusitana, vol. 3, Lisboa 1741: Ignacio Rodriguez.
Marsilii von Inghen, Quaestiones super quatuor libros sententiarum, Argentinae 1501: Martinus Flach.
Monforte, Manoel de, Chronica da Provincia da Piedade primeira Capucha de Toda a ordem, e Regular Observancia de nosso Serafico Padre S. Francisco, Lisboa 1751: Na Officina de Miguel Manescal da Costa.
Monzón, Francisco de, Norte de confessores, Lisboa 1546: En casa de Luis Rodriguez librero del rey.
Ramlotaeus, Simon Magnus, Vita excellentissimi iuris monarchae Martini ab Azpilcueta Doctoris Navarri, Romae 1574: Apud Victorium Elianum.
Rëgo, António da Silva (ed.), Documentação para a história das missões do padroado português do Oriente, vol. 3: (1543â1547), Lisboa 1950.
Rëgo, António da Silva (ed.), Documentação para a história das missões do padroado português do Oriente, vol. 4: (1548â1550), Lisboa 1950.
Soto, Domingo de, Commentariorum [â¦] in Quartum Sententiarum. Tomus Primus, Salamanticae 1569: Apud Ioannem Baptistam à Terranova.
Vilas Boas, Manuel do Cenáculo, Memorias históricas do ministério do púlpito, Lisboa 1776: Na regia officina typografica.
Wicki, Josef (ed.), Documenta Indica, vol. 3: (1553â1557), Romae 1954.
Wicki, Josef and John Gomes (eds.), Documenta Indica, vol. 16: (1592â1594), Romae 1984.
Literature
Abreu, Adélio Fernando, âO P. Manuel da Nóbrega e a evangelização dos indÃgenas do Brasil (1549â1570) (2). Os obstáculos à missãoâ, in HumanÃstica e Teologia 34:2 (2013), 149â186.
Afanaseyev, Anton Alexandrovich, âLa Escuela de Salamanca del siglo XVI: algunas contribuciones a la ciencia económicaâ, in Revista Empresa y Humanismo 19:1 (2016), 7â30.
Andrés, Melquiades, La teologÃa española en el siglo XVI, vol. 2, Madrid 1977.
Angelozzi, Giancarlo, âLâinsegnamento dei casi di coscienza nella pratica educativa della Compagnia di Gesùâ, in Brizzi, Gian Paolo (ed.), La âRatio Studiorumâ. Modelli culturali e pratiche educative dei Gesuiti in Italia tra Cinque e Seicento, Roma 1981, 121â162.
Atienza, Julio de, Nobiliario Español. Diccionario heráldico de apellidos españoles y de tÃtulos nobiliarios, Madrid 1948.
Baciero, Carlos, âLa obra y sus fuentesâ, in Baciero, Carlos, Jesús MarÃa GarcÃa Añoveros, Francisco Maseda and Manuel Corrales (eds.), Alonso de la Peña Montenegro. Itinerario para párrocos de indios. Libros I-II, Madrid 1995, 57â71.
Barros, Cândida, âIntérpretes e confessionários como expressões de politicas linguÃsticas da Igreja voltadas à confissãoâ, in DELTA 27:2 (2011), 289â310 (10.1590/S0102-44502011000200005).
Barros, Maria Cândida Drumond Mendes, âNotas sobre os catecismos em lÃnguas vernáculas das colônias portuguesas (séculos XVIâXVII)â, in Iberoromania 57:1 (2003), 27â63.
Bataillon, Marcel, âJeanne dâAutriche, Princesse de Portugalâ, in Bataillon, Marcel (ed.), Ãtudes sur le Portugal au temps de lâhumanisme, Coimbra 1952.
Beck Varela, Laura, âThe Diffusion of Law Books in Early Modern Europe: A Methodological Approachâ, in Meccarelli, Massimo and MarÃa Julia Solla Sastre (eds.), Spatial and Temporal Dimensions for Legal History. Research Experiences and Itineraries, Frankfurt am Main 2016, 195â239.
Belda Plans, Juan, MartÃn de Azpilcueta. El «Doctor Navavarro», Madrid 2015 (www.larramendi.es).
Blair, Ann M., Too Much to Know. Managing Scholarly Information before the Modern Age, New Haven, CT 2010.
Blair, Ann, âHumanism and Printing Press in the Work of Conrad Gessnerâ, in Renaissance Quarterly 70 (2017), 1â37.
Blanco, Arturo, Historia del confesionario. Razones antropológicas y teológicas de su uso, Madrid 2000.
Boer, Wietse de, The Conquest of the Soul: Confession, Discipline, and Public Order in Counter-Reformation Milan, Leiden 2001.
Borromeo, Agostino, âIl concilio di Trento e la Riforma postridentina della penitenzeria apostolica (1562â1572)â, in Sodi, Manlio and Johan Ickx (eds.), La penitenzeria apostolica e il sacramento della penitenza. Percorsi storici, giuridici, teologici e prospettive pastorali, Città del Vaticano 2009, 111â134.
Bragagnolo, Manuela, âLes voyages du droit du Portugal à Rome. Le âManual de confessoresâ de MartÃn de Azpilcueta (1492â1586) et ses traductions (The Travels of Law from Portugal to Rome. MartÃn de Azpilcuetaâs âManual de confessoresâ (1492â1586) and its Translations)â, Max Planck Institute for European Legal History Research Paper Series No. 2018-13 (http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3287684).
Buescu, Ana Isabel, âAspectos do Bilinguismo Português-Castelhano na época modernaâ, in Hispania 64:1, no. 216 (2004), 13â38.
Burke, Peter, Languages and Communities in Early Modern Europe, Cambridge 2004.
Burke, Peter, âCultures of Translation in Early Modern Europeâ, in Burke, Peter and Ronnie Po-Chia Hsia (eds.), Cultural Translation in Early Modern Europe, Cambridge 2007, 7â38.
Burke, Peter, âTranslations into Latin in early modern Europeâ, in Burke, Peter and Ronnie Po-chia Hsia (eds.), Cultural Translation in Early Modern Europe, Cambridge 2007, 65â80.
Cantù, Francesca, La conquista spirituale. Studi sullâevangelizzazione del Nuovo Mondo, Roma 2007.
Carabias Torres, Ana MarÃa, âCastilla y Portugal: el trajÃn de la cultura académicaâ, in Espinosa, Rosa MarÃa and Julia Montenegro (eds.), Castilla y Portugal en los albores de la edad moderna, Valladolid 1997, 31â53.
Cardoso, Armando, âIV Centenario do P. João de Azpilcueta Navarroâ, in Verbum 15 (1958), 15â48.
Casetti Brach, C., âEliano, Vittorioâ, in Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana (ed.), Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani. Dugoni â Enza, vol. 42, Roma 1993, 475â477.
Castelnau-LâEstoile, Charlotte de, âLe mariage des infidèles au XVIe siècle: doutes missionnaires et autorité pontificaleâ, in Mélanges de lâécole française de Rome 121:1 (2009), 95â121.
Cevolini, Alberto, De arte excerpendi. Imparare a dimenticare nella modernità , Firenze 2006.
Condorelli, Orazio, âLe origini teologico-canonistiche della teoria delle leges mere poenales (secoli XIIIâXVI)â, in Schmoeckel, Mathias, Orazio Condorelli and Franck Roumy (eds.), Der Einfluss der Kanonistik auf die europäische Rechtskultur, vol. 3: Straf- und Strafprozessrecht, Köln 2012, 55â98.
Cordingley, Anthony, âIntroductionâ, in Cordingley, Anthony (ed.), Self-Translation. Brokering Originality in Hybrid Culture, London 2013, 1â10.
Cordingley, Anthony and Céline Frigau Manning (eds.), Collaborative Translation. From the Renaissance to the Digital Age, London 2017.
Decock, Wim, Theologians and Contract Law. The Moral Transformation of the Ius Commune (ca. 1500â1650), Leiden 2012.
Decock, Wim, âMartÃn de Azpilcuetaâ, in Domingo, Rafael and Javier MartÃnez-Torrón (eds.), Great Christian Jurists in Spanish History, Cambridge 2018, 116â132.
Dios de Dios, Salustiano de, âLa doctrina sobre el poder del prÃncipe en MartÃn de Azpilcuetaâ, in Torijano Pérez, Eugenia, Salustiano de Dios de Dios and Javier Infante Miguel-Motta (eds.), El derecho y los juristas en Salamanca (siglos XVIâXX). En memoria de Francisco Tomás y Valiente, Salamanca 2004, 461â566.
Dunoyer, Emilio, LââEnchiridion Confessariorumâ de Navarro, Pamplona 1957.
Duve, Thomas, âEuropean Legal History â Concepts, Methods, Challengesâ, in Duve, Thomas (ed.), Entanglements in Legal History: Conceptual Approaches, Frankfurt am Main 2014, 29â66.
Ellsworth Hamann, Byron, The Translations of Nebrija. Language, culture, and circulation in the Early Modern World, Amherst, MA 2015.
Fernandes, Maria de Lurdes Correia, âAs artes da Confissão. Em torno dos manuais de confessores do século XVI em Portugalâ, in HumanÃstica e Teologia 11 (1990), 47â80.
Fernandes, Maria de Lurdes Correia, âDo manual de confessores ao guia de penitentes. Orientações e caminhos da confissão non Portugal post-Trentoâ, in Via Spiritus 2 (1990), 47â65.
Fernandes, Maria de Lurdes Correia, âFrancisco de Monzón, capelão e pregador de D. João III e de D. Sebastiãoâ, in Lusitania Sacra, 2a série, 3 (1991), 37â90.
Fery-Hue, Françoise (ed.), Traduire de vernaculaire en latin au Moyen Ãge et à la Renaissance. Méthodes et finalités, Paris 2013.
Fonseca, Fernando Taveira da, José Antunes, Irene Vaquinhas, Isabel Nobre Vargues, LuÃs Reis Torgal and Fernando J. Regateiro, Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra. Uma história dentro da História, Coimbra 2001.
Fragnito, Gigliola, La Bibbia al rogo. La censura ecclesiastica e i volgarizzamenti della sacra scrittura, Bologna 1997.
GarcÃa y GarcÃa, Antonio, âJuristas Salamantinos, siglos XVIâXVII: Manuscritos y impresosâ, in RodrÃguez-San Pedro Bezares, Luis E. and Ãngel Weruaga Prieto (eds.), Historia de la Universidad de Salamanca. Saberes y confluencias, vol. 3.1, Salamanca 2018, 139â170.
Goering, Joseph, âThe Internal Forum and the Literature of Penance and Confessionâ, in Hartmann, Wilfried and Kenneth Pennington (eds.), The History of Medieval Canon Law in the Classical Period, 1140â1234. From Gratian to the Decretals of Pope Gregory IX, Washington, D.C. 2008, 379â428.
Grossi, Paolo, âSomme penitenziali, diritto canonico, diritto comuneâ, in Annali della facoltà giuridica. Università di Macerata 1 (1966), 94â134.
Grossi, Paolo, âSomme penitenziali, diritto canonico, diritto comuneâ, in Fantappiè, Carlo (ed.), Scritti canonistici, vol. 1, Milano 2013, 115â153.
Guedes de Campos, Fernanda Maria, A ordem das ordens religiosas. Roteiro Identitário de Portugal (Séculos XIIâXVIII), Casal de Cambra 2017.
Hamesse, Jacqueline, âIl modello della lettura nellâetà della scolasticaâ, in Cavallo, Guglielmo and Roger Chartier (eds.), Storia della lettura nel mondo occidentale, Laterza 1995, 91â116.
Herkolz, Ingo, âAlfonso Chacón e le gallerie dei ritratti nellâetà della Controriformaâ, in Tosini, Patrizia (ed.), Arte e committenza nel Lazio nellâetà di Cesare Baronio, Roma 2009, 111â142.
Hespanha, António Manuel, âForm and content in early modern legal books. Bridging the gap between material bibliography and the history of legal thoughtâ, in Rechtsgeschichte 12 (2008), 12â50.
Hokenson, Jan Walsh and Marcella Munson, The Bilingual Text. History and Theory of Literary Self-Translation, Manchester 2007.
Infantes, VÃctor, Del libro áureo, Madrid 2006.
Johns, Adrian, The Nature of the Book. Print and Knowledge in the Making, Chicago, IL 1998.
Lavenia, Vincenzo, âMartÃn de Azpilcueta (1592â1586). Un profiloâ, in Archivio Italiano per la Storia della Pietà 16 (2003), 15â157.
Lavenia, Vincenzo, Lâinfamia o il perdono. Tributi, pene e confessione nella teologia morale della prima età moderna, Bologna 2004.
Leite, Serafim, História da Companhia de Jesus no Brasil, vol. 2: Século XVI â a obra, Lisboa 1938.
Leite, Serafim, História da Companhia de Jesus no Brasil, vol. 8: Escritores: de A a M. (Suplemento Biobibliográfico â I), Rio de Janeiro 1949.
López Gay, Jesús, âLa primera biblioteca de los JesuÃtas en el Japón (1556). Su contenido y su influenciaâ, in Monumenta Nipponica 15:3â4 (1959â1960), 350â379.
Marcocci, Giuseppe, I custodi dellâortodossia. Inquisizione e chiesa nel Portugallo del Cinquecento, Roma 2004.
Marcocci, Giuseppe, Lâinvenzione di un impero. Politica e cultura nel mondo portoghese (1450â1600), Roma 2011.
Marques, João Francisco, âFranciscanos e Dominicanos Confessores dos Reis Portugueses das duas Primeiras Dinastias. Espiritualidade e PolÃticaâ, in Revista da Faculdade de Letras â LÃnguas e Literatura Anexo V â Espiritualidade e corte em Portugal (sécs XVIâXVIII) (1993), 53â60.
Mateu y Llopis, Felipe, âLicencia, tasa y privilegio de impresion en la España de los siglos XVI y XVIIâ, in Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 40 (1965), 197â200.
McKenzie, D.F., Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts, London 1986.
Michaud-Quantin, Pierre, Sommes de casuistique et manuels de confession au moyen âge (XIIâXVI siècles), Louvain 1962.
Minnis, A.J., âLate Medieval Discussions on Compilatio and the Role of Compilatorâ, in Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 101 (1979), 385â421.
Muguruza Roca, Isabel, âDel confesionario ibérico de la Contrarreforma a los manuales para confesores en la América colonial: el Manual de confesores y penitentes de MartÃn de Azpilcueta como texto de referenciaâ, in Indiana 32:5 (2018), 29â53.
Muñoz de Juana, Rodrigo, Moral y economÃa en la obra de MartÃn de Azpilcueta, Pamplona 1998.
OâBanion, Patrick J., ââA priest who appears goodâ. Manuals of confession and the construction of clerical identity in early modern Spainâ, in Dutch Review of Church History 85:1 (2005), 333â348.
OâMalley, John W., The First Jesuits, Cambridge 1993.
Paiva, José Pedro, âBispos, imprensa, livro e censura no Portugal de Quinhentosâ, in Revista de Historia das Ideas 28 (2007), 687â737.
PalacÃn, L., âAzpilcueta (Navarro), Juan deâ, in OâNeill, Charles Edwards and JoaquÃn MarÃa DomÃnguez (eds.), Diccionario histórico de la CompañÃa de Jesús, vol. 1, Roma 2001, 317.
Polónia, Amélia, âRecepção do Concilio de Trento em Portugal: as normas enviadas pelo Cardeal D. Henrique aos Bispos do reino, em 1553â, in Revista da Faculdade de Letras-Historia, 2a série, 7 (1990), 133â143.
Polónia, Amélia, D. Henrique. O Cardeal-Rei, Lisboa 2005.
Polónia, Amélia, âEspaços de intervenção religiosa do Cardeal Infante D. Henrique: actuação pastoral, reforma monástica e inquisiçãoâ, in Amorim, Inês, Helena Osswald and Amélia Polónia (eds.), Em torno dos espaços religiosos â monásticos e eclesiásticos. Actas do colóquio de homenagem a Frei Geraldo Coelho Dias, Porto 2005, 17â37.
Prodi, Paolo, Una storia della giustizia. Dal pluralismo dei fori al moderno dualismo tra coscienza e diritto, Bologna 2000.
Prodi, Paolo, Settimo non rubare. Furto e mercato nella storia dellâoccidente, Bologna 2009.
Réach-Gnô, Anne, âDe la catégorisation bibliothéconomique du livre à la genèse éditoriale de lâoeuvre: le cas des Trésors imprimés à la Renaissanceâ, in Seizième Siècle 10 (2014), 211â224.
Réach-Ngô, Anne, âDu texte au livre, et retour: la production littéraire à la Renaissance, une création collaborative?â, in Genesis 41 (2005), 29â47.
Reyes Gómez, FermÃn de los, âCon privilegio: la exclusiva de edición del libro antiguo españolâ, in Revista General de Información y Documentación 11:2 (2001), 163â200.
Reyes Gómez, FermÃn de los, âLa estructura formal del libro antiguo españolâ, in Paratesto 7 (2010).
Ridruejo, Emilio, âCastellano y portugués en la época de los descubrimientosâ, in Sociedad V Centenario Tratado de Tordesillas (ed.), La lengua española y su expansión en la época del Tratado de Tordesillas, Valladolid 1995, 65â78.
Rivara, Joaquim Heliodoro da Cunha, Catalogos manuscriptos da biblioteca publica eborense, vol. 1, Lisboa 1850.
Rodrigues, Manuel Augusto (ed.), Memoria professorum Universitatis Conimbrigensis, vol. 1: (1290â1772), Coimbra 2003.
RodrÃguez-San Pedro Bezares, Luis E. and Ãngel Weruaga Prieto (eds.), Historia de la Universidad de Salamanca. Indice y figuras, vol. 5, Salamanca 2018.
Rouse, Richard H. and Mary A. Rouse, âStatim invenire. Schools, Preachers, and New Attitudes to the Pageâ, in Benson, Robert L. and Giles Constable (eds.), Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, Cambridge, MA 1982, 201â225.
Rubach, Birte, Ant. Lafreri Formis Romae. Der Verleger Antonio Lafreri und seine Druckgraphikproduktion, Berlin 2016.
Ruiz Fidalgo, Lorenzo, La imprenta en Salamanca (1501â1600), vol. 1/3, Madrid 1994.
Serrão, Joaquim VerÃssimo, âPortugueses no Estudo de Salamanca (1250â1550)â, in Revista da Faculdade de Letras, 3a série, 5 (1962), 1â515.
Silva, António Pereira da, âA primeira suma portuguesa de teologia moral e sua relação com o «Manual» de Navarroâ, in Didaskalia 5:2 (1975), 355â403.
Simón DÃaz, José, El libro español antiguo, Madrid 2000.
Solinas Quijada, Francisco, âEl doctor MartÃn de Azpilcueta en la Universidad de CoÃmbraâ, in Principe de Viana 47 (1986), 609â640.
Tejero, Eloy, âMartÃn de Azpilcueta en la historia de la doctrina canónica y moralâ, in Ius Canonicum 27:54 (1987), 425â492.
Tejero, Eloy, âMartÃn de Azpilcueta cinco veces universitarioâ, in Linehan, Peter (ed.), Life, Law and Letter: Historical Studies in Honour of Antonio GarcÃa y GarcÃa, Roma 1998, 839â862.
Tejero Tejero, Eloy, âAzpilcueta, MartÃn deâ, in Real Academia de la Historia (ed.), Diccionario biográfico español, vol. 6: De âAsuero Sáenz de Cenzanoâ a âBarco y Gascaâ, Madrid 2009, 430â433.
Tentler, Thomas N., Sin and Confession in the Eve of the Reformation, Princeton, NJ 1977.
Turrini, Miriam, La coscienza e le leggi. Morale e diritto nei testi per la confessione della prima età moderna, Bologna 1991.
Waquet, Françoise, Latin or the Empire of a Sign. From the Sixteenth to the Twentieth Century, trans. John Howe, London 2001.
Xavier, Ãngela Barreto, âItinerários Franciscanos na Ãndia Seiscentista e algumas questões de história e de métodoâ, in Lusitânia Sacra, 2a série, 18 (2016), 87â116.