Ferdinand I’s Interdiction of Czech Book-Print and its Impact on Czech Book Culture in the 16th Century

OPEN ACCESS Ferdinand I’s Interdiction of Czech Book-Print and its Impact on Czech Book Culture in the 16th Century* Bořek neškudla This paper resumes the evolution of censorship in Bohemia during the Jagellonian era and in the first half of the reign of Ferdinand I. Censorship in Bohemia started slowly and inconsistently in the first half of 16th century. During the reign of Ferdinand censorship became more thorough as part of Ferdinand’s imperial attitudes. The new system of privileges started after 1547 and laid the foundation for new publishing procedures in the second half of 16th century. KEYWORDS: Book print; censorship; Ferdinand I; Bartoloměj Netolický; printers privileges CENSORSHIP IN GENERAL Censorship, or in other words state surveillance of the content of books and the book market, usually accompanies the strengthening of the central government. The intervention of Ferdinand I between 1530s and 1540s in the Czech book printing and book market and the severe prohibition of 1547 as part of penalization measures after the Estates uprising, is felt in the Czech historiography primarily as an act of punishment. But this statement ignores the broader context of the developments in other European countries, where similar measures were taken approximately at the same time. Besides this larger context, I will present here some comparative views on the Czech book printing before and after the critical year 1547 as a basis for considering whether this act was really so detrimental as has been hitherto believed. The supervision of book-printing was entrusted to the Catholic Church. A Bull of Pope Alexander VI from 1499 prohibited the edition of unauthorized books under pain of excommunication.1 Censorial powers were usually delegated by bishops to universities. As Bohemia was mainly Utraquist and did not obey the papal orders, this supervision was ignored here. Nevertheless, Lutheran books were printed at first outside of Prague and after 1539 in Prague proper.2 In Moravia the influence of the * This study is a part of the research project, Prague — Residence of Ferdinand I of Habsburg and his Cultural Circle, 1526–1564, which is supported by Czech Science Foundation Grant No. 13–16963S. 1 Henricus INSTITORIS, Sanctae Romanae ecclesiae fidei defensionis clippeum adversus Waldensium, Olomouc 1501, fol. 3r. 2 Petr VOIT, Český knihtisk mezi gotikou a renesancí I. Severinsko-kosořská dynastie 1488–1557 [Bohemian Book Printing between the Gothic and the Renaissance I. The Severin-Kosoř Dynasty 1488–1557], Praha 2013, p. 424. 112 HISTORIE — OTÁZKY — PROBLÉMY 2/2015 OPEN ACCESS Catholic Church was stronger and the Olomouc bishopric was empowered to impose censorship. The supervision of Moravian book printing focused on the Unity of Brethren and administered mainly by the inquisitor Heinrich Institoris.3 Moravia also witnessed the public burning of books of Lutheran preacher Pavel Sperát in Olomouc in the presence of King Ludwig 1523.4 Nevertheless, the effect of censorship was marginal and the execution poor. The order was new and the authorities did not have enough experience to execute it. Therefore, in spite of the censors’ surveillance in Moravia, which was now Utraquist (1533 Náměšť nad Oslavou, 1538 Olomouc) or other confessional (Unity of Brethren in Bělá pod Bezdězem 1519, Litomyšl 1520 and Mladá Boleslav 1521, Habrovanští in Prostějov 1527/1543 and Luleč 1530) printers’ workshops emerged rapidly in the domains of aristocrats, partly because of non-Catholic immigrants.5 We do not have any evidence of Catholic book printing from this era. In Bohemia the church control began at the end of the Jagellonian era. A mandate of 26 July 1526 ordered preliminary censorship of manuscripts for printed books by the administrator of the Catholic consistory, and supplementary censorship of published books by the Prague mayor and counsellors.6 1539 the right of censorship was extended to the rector of Prague University.7 The actual impact on the publishing of non-Catholic literature was however negligible. Publishing of unauthorized publications continued. Ferdinand I therefore issued an order of 3 August 1537 prohibiting printing out of Prague.8 This order was maintained and the only person who disobeyed was Alexandr Oujezdecký in Litomyšl, who was publishing books for the Unity of Brethren. 3 Amedeo MOLNÁR, Protivaldenská polemika na úsvitu 16. století [The Anti-Valden Polemic at the Beginning of the 16th Century], in: Miroslav Řešetka — František Novák — Ivo Hlobil (edd.), Historická Olomouc a její současné problémy III. Sborník referátů z 3. celostátního sympozia, konaného v Olomouci ve dnech 16.–19. 6. 1980, Olomouc 1980, pp. 152–182. 4 František KAMENÍČEK, Zemské sněmy a sjezdy moravské. Jejich složení, obor působnosti a význam od nastoupení na trůn krále Ferdinanda I. až po vydání obnoveného zřízení zemského (1526–1628) III [Provincial Assemblies and Moravian Assemblies. Their Composition, Sphere of Influence and Significance after the Accession of King Ferdinand I until the Publication of the Renewed System of Provincial Government (1526–1628)], Brno 1905, p. 450. 5 On censorship in 16th century Moravia see Petr VOIT, Moravské prameny z let 1567–1568 k dějinám bibliografie, cenzury, knihtisku a literární historie. Příspěvky ke knihopisu 5 [Moravian Sources from 1567–1568 on the History of Bibliography, Censorship, Book Printing and History of Literature. Papers on Bibliography 5], Praha 1987. 6 Klement BOROVÝ, Jednání a dopisy konsistoře katolické i utrakvistické I: Akta konsistoře utrakvistické [Acts and Letters of the Catholic and Utraquist Consistory, Volume I, Acts of the Utraquist Consistory], Praha 1868, p. 19. 7 Sněmy české od léta 1526 po naši dobu I: 1526–1545 [Bohemian Assemblies since 1526 up to Our Time I: 1526–1545], Praha 1877, p. 467. 8 “[…] aby [tiskaři] od nynějšího času nikdyž jinde žádných knih ani traktátuov buďto latinských, českých ani německých v Království českém netiskli a tisknúti nedali kromě v Městech pražských […] leč s povolením a jistým vědomím administrátora Hradu pražského aneb druhého administrátora konzistoří pražské podobojí spuosobú nynějších neb budúcích […]” NA Prague, Královská registra, Vol. 16, fol. 162v. Cited by P. VOIT, Moravské prameny, p. 25. BOřEK nEšKuDLa 113 OPEN ACCESS After the Schmalkaldic War the position of the Catholic Church was also reinforced in Bohemia. The St. Vitus Chapter put forward a proposal for improvement of the situation of the Catholic Church in Bohemia.9 The proposal also imposed thorough censorship on the print and book market. Contacts with Nuremberg were to be a broken off and book printing was to be allowed only in Prague. Sixt of Ottersdorf saw in this the political influence of Ferdinand himself.10 In 1547 the printer Jan Olivetský of Olivet was executed,11 although we cannot be sure that the trial was based on his printing activities. A strict order was issued on 9 October 1547. The order prohibited printing of books or other products in all the Kingdom of Bohemia except by one single printer.12 The licensed printer was Bartoloměj Netolický.13 At first he printed the collection Akta všech věcí, which was still in stock years after its publication.14 Netolický was supervised by the newly established office of the royal sheriff. The assumption of state control over book printing was confirmed by Ferdinand’s letter to the printers and booksellers from 13 December 1549,15 which again prohibited book printing except 9 Klement BOROVÝ, Jednání a dopisy konsistoře katolické i utrakvistické [Acts and Letters of the Catholic and Utraquist Consistory], Praha 1869, pp. 62, 64. 10 Josef JANÁČEK (ed.), Sixt z Ottersdorfu: O pokoření stavu městského [Sixt of Ottersdorf: The Humiliation of the Bourgeois Estate], Praha 1950, p. 126. 11 Mirjam BOHATCOVÁ, Knihtiskařská linie Olivetských [The Book Printing Line of the Mount of Olives People], Časopis Národního muzea — Řada historická 151, 1982, No. 3–4, pp. 129–160, here pp. 143–146. 12 NA, Královská registra, Vol. 35, fol. 158r, a Stará manipulace, Sign. B 56/7 (without pagination). Mandate partially edited Josef VOLF, Dějiny novin [A History of Newspapers], Praha 1930, pp. 20–22. “[…] abyšte hned v dnešní den, jakž vás tento mandát náš dojde, v našich městech, městečkách, na statcích a gruntech našich žádných impressátoruov neboližto knih, traktátuov ani jinejch věcí, jakž by jmenovány býti mohly, tištění neodpouštěli, konečně podle mandátu našeho zapověděli a nikdež tisknúti nedali, leč při našem impresátorovi, v kteréhož sme v Praze k tomu svoliti a zříditi ráčili […]” Cited by P.VOIT, Moravské prameny, p. 27. 13 Karel BERÁNEK, Tiskařská privilegia České dvorské kanceláře v Státním ústředním archívu v Praze [The Book Printing Privilegia of the Bohemian Court Office in the State Central Archive in Prague], Strahovská knihovna 12–13, 1977–1978, pp. 69–104, here pp. 73–74. 14 J. JANÁČEK (ed.), Sixt z Ottersdorfu, pp. 143–144. 15 NA, Královská registra, Vol. 35, fol. 240v–241r. “[…] I správu jmíti ráčíme, že by někteří dadouc jinde v německých zemích i v Moravě knihy všelijaké tisknouti, je zde v Městech pražských prodávají a tudy proti jistému rozkazu a zápovědi naší činí a tu přestupují, čehož nechtíc my žádnému dopouštěti, nébrž nad tím, aby rozkazové naší spravedlivý pruochod svój měly, ruku skutečně […] jednú a pod obojí spuosobů a hajtmanu našemu Hradu pražského, nynějším i budoucím, věrným našim milým, poroučímě přístně přikazujíc, abyšte to s pilností obzvláštní zření a pozor svuoj měli a ve všech bibliotékách i na jiných všech místech každého času přehledáváti dali a sami k tomu dohlídali a kdež by se jakéž koli knihy bez povolení našeho prodávaly, je buď pobrati a do komory naší dodávati rozkázali a dadouc ty osoby, kteréž se toho dopustí, poznamenati, kterýmž se hajtman náš Hradu pražského dostatečně ujistiti má, nám o tom oznamovali, jináče nikoli nečiníce […]” Cited by P. VOIT, Moravské prameny, pp. 27–28. 114 HISTORIE — OTÁZKY — PROBLÉMY 2/2015 OPEN ACCESS by the authorized book printer and also prohibited the import of books from abroad. Nevertheless, a letter from Bartoloměj Netolický from 1551 reveals a discrepancy between the proposed control and everyday life. Netolický complains about the boycott of his books, numerous competitors, naturally illegal, false imprints, and thriving black market for books, even with non-Catholic Lutheran or Brethren treatises. More or less exaggerated though it may be we can see that the book market did not disappear, it was only forced to go underground.16 Netolický’s statement reveals a wide gap between the intention of Ferdinand’s administration and the everyday reality in the field of book printing and book marketing. The state and municipal authorities, until then accustomed to the prevailing guild system of production, were not ready for such stringent control in this new type of business.17 Therefore, the actual impact of the censorship measures was limited. A case in point was Jan Roh’s hymn-book Písně chval božských (1541), initially cleared by the censor, but two years later forbidden.18 Now we will observe the situation in other countries because we cannot do without the broader context. In 1468 the Mainz Archbishop and the City of Frankfurt established the first censorial offices. However, the promulgated restrictions did not necessarily apply to all. It was not within the power of an Archbishop to imposee censorship throughout his diocese. Pope Innocent VIII had done his part to suppress subversive literature with a Bull ordering printers to submit texts for scrutiny and empowering episcopal authorities to destroy any they deemed heretical. It had been reissued in 1501 for the benefit of the Archbishops of Cologne, Mainz, Trier and Magdeburg, prompting complaints from Cologne booksellers. More recently, in the wake of the Reuchlin controversy in 1515, Leo X proclaimed a sweeping Inter solicitudines, which not only prohibited vernacular transcriptions from Latin, but also Latin translations from Greek, Hebrew, and Arabic. It also took aim at libellous pamphlet literature. The fines and excommunications prescribed for authors and printers provided a means by which bishops and papal inquisitors could attempt to control dissemination at the diocesan level.19 Since 1520s the imperial towns had the authority to create their own ad hoc censorship regulations.20 Other strict measures against Luther’s books were set in the Edict of Worms (1521).21 The Edict of Worms also stated that no books should be printed 16 For Netolický’s life and production see Petr MAŠEK, Význam Bartoloměje Netolického pro český knihtisk 16. století. Příspěvky ke knihopisu 4 [The Importance of Bartoloměj Netolický for Bohemain Book Printing of the 16th Century. Papers for Bibliography 4], Praha 1987. 17 The discrepancy between the administrative intention of censorship and its real use was described by Jaroslav PÁNEK, Cenzura v době předbělohorské [Censorship before the Battle of White Mountain], Studia Comeniana et historica 18, 1988, No. 36, pp. 97–102, mainly 98–99. 18 P. VOIT, Český knihtisk, p. 378. 19 John D. FUDGE, Commerce and Print in the Early Reformation, Leiden 2007, p. 38. 20 Ibid., p. 42. 21 Werner WUNDERLICH, „Wir verdanken dem Bücherdruck und der Freiheit desselben undenkbar Gutes.“ Zur kulturgeschichtlichen Bedeutung von Gutenbergs Erfindung, in: Werner Wun- BOřEK nEšKuDLa 115 OPEN ACCESS without prior permission of the secular or ecclesiastical authorities. Censorship decrees were introduced in many states and dominions of the Holy Roman Empire by the Diets of Nuremberg (1524), Speyer (1529), Augsburg (1530 — an order was issued here that every book must bear the name of the printer and the place where it was printed), and Regensburg (1541). Disobedience was severely punished. Politically sensitive and religious texts were naturally censored in other countries. French King Francis I forbade on 18 March 1521 the printing of religious books unless authorized by the Theological Faculty of Paris University. Every book had to bear a seal of approval placed below the title. By 1535 medical books had to be approved by three doctors of the Faculty of Medicine. From June 1523 the rector was allowed to burn the books of German reformers. According to an Edict of 13 January 1535 no book could be published without permission under the pain of death. The first catalogue of censored French books was compiled in 1543. Some book sellers were licensed to distribute officially approved prints (libraires jurés). In England, the first press licensing system was created by King Henry VIII in 1538. The import, sale or publication of books without a royal licence was prohibited. Ferdinand I established a censorship office in Vienna under the control of the Bishop of Vienna in 1528. An ordinance of 24 July 1528 forbade book printers and book sellers to print and sell books of sectarian provenance. Shortly after this printing workshops were only allowed to function in provincial capitals. Ferdinand I needed to gain control over such an influential medium as book printing and after the short ban new printers could start their business only with granted privilegia. This step provided the legal grounds for the printing and editorial business as it was practised in Western European countries since the beginning of the century. Now there is a new aspect. Control over print production was desired not only by the ruler, but also by the printers themselves as protection against the competitors and for confirmation of their copyrights. Here we can see the beginning of issuing of the printers’ privilegia.22 They were issued for a certain place, period, printer or book.23 The condition necessary for getting a privilegium was usually prepublication censorship of manuscripts (for example, the Chronicle of Václav Hájek of Libočany). To determine whether the manuscripts or edited books were religiously or factually correct, censorship boards were also set up. The first royal privilegium was issued to Gershom Kohen (1527) for publishing of a Hebrew book print in Prague. In 1545 a privilegium was issued to Jan Olivetský of Olivet for administrative prints and calendars, in 1547 to Bartoloměj Netolický, in 1549 to Jan Günther, Jan Kantor Had, and Ondřej Kubeš of Žípy.24 derlich — Sascha Spoun (edd.), Medienkultur im digitalen Wandel. Prozesse, Potentiale, Perspektiven. Facetten der Medienkultur 2, Bern — Stuttgart — Wien 2002, pp. 35–62. 22 Karel KADLEC, Počátky práva autorského. Studie o vzájemných poměrech tiskařů a spisovatelů v minulých stoletích [The Beginnings of Copyright. Study of the relations between printers and writers in the past centuries], Časopis Českého muzea 67, 1899, pp. 105–132. 23 Knihopis Digital: České prvotisky a staré tisky (1476–1800) [Digital Bibliography: Czech First Editions and Old Prints], No. 6276, 5969 [on–line]. 24 K. BERÁNEK, Tiskařská privilegia, pp. 76–77. 116 HISTORIE — OTÁZKY — PROBLÉMY 2/2015 OPEN ACCESS THE IMPACT OF FERDINAND’S CENSORSHIP According to recent research, the results of the Czech book culture the arrival of book printing in Bohemia was slower compared with Western Europe and the neighbouring countries. Th is was caused by the specifi c situation in Bohemia aft er the Hussite revolution. Th e dominant Utraquist religion was unacceptable in other Catholic countries and Bohemia experienced deep cultural and economic isolation. Together with the scepticism of Czech society to novelties, the breeding ground for book printing was not favourable. Soon the quality and quantity of the Czech book printing was on a lower level compared with the situation then prevailing in Western Europe, but also compared with the neighbouring countries, such as Austria or Poland. As we can see in Graph 1, the quantity of book production was almost constant with a single exception in the year 1547, which marks a steep rise in printing of texts concerning topical issues. Because of the low production in the years before 1547, a return of quantity on the pre-Schmalcaldic level was imminent. Th e anticipated decrease in production aft er the censorship measures is not proved because of the low volume of production before the prohibition. To see the quantitative level of Czech book printing, we can compare the entire Czech and Moravian production with the production of the single city of Nuremberg. graph nr. 1: Comparison of book-print production in Bohemia and Nuremberg. graph nr. 2: Print Production in Bohemia and Moravia 1525–1565. Bohemia/Moravia Nuremberg BOřEK nEšKuDLa 117 OPEN ACCESS Both the typography and the thematic structure were deeply rooted in medieval patterns; the former because of insufficient capacities and abilities of early Czech printers, the latter because of insufficient educational base of recipients and continuous emphasis on bonum commune which dominated other interests. The overall low standard of typography is easily seen at the level of printing type. While the majority of German and Swiss incunabula print shops had ten different font families at their disposal, sometimes even twice as many, in Bohemia, from the beginning of book printing in 1476 up to 1506, just one font family was usually regarded as sufficient, the local Bastarda type, a late Schwabacher type. The first, and for decades the only, printer to abandon this rather stark simplicity and to try his hand at highly refined typesetting was Pavel Severín of Kapí hora (died 1553?) who collected ten font families between 1520 and 1541. As there was no adequate typeface available to distinguish different parts of text visually, printers were unable to highlight titles or headings or to insert explanatory marginalia. The reluctance to overcome this technical limit stemmed — as in the case of the Antiqua type — from the attitudes of most of the Utraquist readership and the minority readership of Unitas Fratrum. For both groups the two types had papal associations, although the hostility was not equally intense. Moravia found itself in a different situation. Printing shops there worked with font families that printers of German origin had brought from abroad. As a result, from 1504 the craft of printing went into a period of decline and had no influence on the typography in Bohemia. Print shops in Plzeň, Mladá Boleslav, and Prague were exclusively reliant on Nuremberg for the purchase of type-founding tools. THEMATIC POINT OF VIEW Let us see some concrete figures illustrating the development of Czech book printing around the middle of 16th century and let us see whether and how the censorship measures affected this development. One of the factors is the thematic structure of print production. We can observe the thematic structure from the perspective of the whole 16th century, as did transparently Josef Janáček. Based on Knihopis českých tisků (Bibliography of Czech prints) he made a table of the most frequent re-editions of the books first published in first half of 16th century.25 As the Knihopis was not complete, the table showed as most frequent two language manuals. But the implementation of all parts of Knihopis and its supplements showed us other results. 25 Josef JANÁČEK, České dějiny. Doba předbělohorská I/1 [A History of Bohemia. The Time before the Battle of White Mountain], Praha 1971, p. 267. 118 HISTORIE — OTÁZKY — PROBLÉMY 2/2015 OPEN ACCESS Title Published between Number of re-editions New Testament (1513–1599) 25 Žalmy sv. Davida [Psalms of St. David] (1508–1618) 25 Ondřej Klatovský, Knížka v českém a německém jazyku složená [The Book Composed in Czech and German] (1540–1614) 10 Petr Codicillus, Vokabulář latinský [Latin Vocabulary] (1546–1600) 10 Sebald Heyden, Puerilium colloquiorum formulae (1529–1586) 8 Johann Spangenberg, Česká postilla [Czech Postilla] (1546–1566) 7 Testamentové dvanácti patriarchů [Testaments of Twelve Patriarchs] (1544–1603) 6 Jan Černý, Spis o nemocech morních [Treatise on Pest] (1506–1582) 6 Křišťan z Prachatic, Lékařské knížky [Medicine Books] (1544–1609) 6 The most frequent Czech books (first published in 1500–1550, and reedited before 1618). A closer look at the larger groups gives us the following results. till 1526 1526–1547 1547–1575 Religious 106 146 75 Non-Religious 65 85 179 Religious and Non-Religious books. The numbers give us a clear image. Until the critical year 1547 there was a significant prevalence of religious books. After 1547 the ratio is reversed. The shift from religious themes to secular ones was surely based on the privilege. As we can see in the extant privilege, they are mostly issued for almanacs, mandates, and vocabularies. We can suppose less interest in the publishing of religious books because of the possible penalties for publishing controversial themes. until 1526 1527–1547 1548–1575 Theological literature Bible and Parts 7 14 10 Bible Apocrypha and Paraphrases 6 15 9 Patristics 9 8 7 Catholic Literature 8 8 17 Hussite and Utraquist Literature 12 19 14 Protestant Literature 11 36 7 Unity of Brethren 31 23 6 Polemics 19 19 5 Religious Satire 3 4 0 BOřEK nEšKuDLa 119 OPEN ACCESS Non-theological literature Religious and Moral Education 31 12 21 Fiction/Popular Prose Romances 11 1 10 Poetry 0 9 63 Languages/Dictionaries 10 15 36 Arithmetics 0 1 5 Medicine 4 11 19 History (incl. Turkish Studies) 3 12 7 Law 6 12 6 Economics 0 8 7 Astronomy 0 4 5 Thematic structure of printed books in Bohemia. The rapid increase in poetry means an increase in Latin poetry. Behind this development are two printers: Jan Had in Prague and Jan Günther in Olomouc. They brought in early 1540s the Antiqua letter type from Nuremberg and started to print Latin dedications and Latin accidental poetry. The hitherto prevailing Gothic letter types were not suitable for this type of texts. In the years after 1547 a more neutral types of production was demanded. Accidental poetry was the right genre. These two printers then stand at the craddle of the expansion of Latin humanistic poetry associated with Prague University in the second half of the 16th century. *** The evolution of Czech book printing until the middle of the 16th century was unrestrained and precipitous, lacking any regulation or legal grounds. It was a time of almost anarchistic freedom on either side, mixed with zealous enthusiasm striving to improve the moral profile of society by the propagation of bonum commune in the vernacular language. In the 1520s begins slowly a tendency to professionalism and a broader thematic choice. Ferdinand I with his measures on book printing in Austria and in Bohemia followed the procedures employed in other countries to keep book printing under state control. The Estates uprising and the Schmalkaldic War allowed him to apply these measures quickly and firmly and to confirm his previous efforts. We cannot see any detrimental impact of this situation on the Czech book printing as has been implied by some researchers. The regulation, based on censorship and the printers’ privilegia, reduced the production of polemics and confessional texts. The suppression of numerous active printing houses of reformation churches (Czech Brethren, Anabaptists, Habrovany Brethren) was replaced with a more varied thematic structure with larger interest in educational literature, and the specific subject of panegyric poetry opened the space to more secular themes, mainly concerning education.