Biographical details of significant Slovak polymath Adam František Kollár were already in 176 d!

e to political criticism of ecclesiastical no"ility e#cl!ded from literary st!dies and dropped o!t of the "ooks as the most important "i"liography a!thors Boh!slav $a"lic % &o'ef (iloslav )!r"an% &aroslav *l+ek % ,tefan Kr+m-ry% or .!dov/t 0/'ner1 $o the "ook )istory of Slovak literat!re this Slovak writer got !p in the thirties of the twentieth cent!ry% and in connection with his political censored "ook 2e origini"!s et !s! 3erpet!o potesasis legislatoriae circa sacra aposticol!r!m 0eg!m 4ngariae li"ell!s sing!laris 5 $he origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power of the )!ngarian kings in religio!s matters 6 7ne "ook of "eginnings and eternal !se of legislative power in respect of the sanctity of the apostolic Kingdom of )!ngary 8 % iss!ed in Fe"r!ary 176 1 9ork "eca!se of his ideas on ta#ation of ecclesiastical and sec!lar aristocracy in )!ngary ca!sed s!ch a stir that a"o!t him r!ling class disc!ssed the )!ngarian 2iet and finally p!t him to destroy1 3olitical treatise on the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power was conceived at the initiative of :!een (aria $heresa in ;ovem"er 176< and was to serve as the ideological preparation for softening of )!ngarian aristocracy in terms of ta# lia"ility "efore the ne#t meeting of the )!ngarian State Assem"ly in Bratislava 1 :!een (aria $heresa anticipated resistance of the no"ility and the ch!rch considered it necessary to st!dy the written reasons which administers ta# arrangements and confirming the opinion of the imperial co!rt% which made Adam František Kollár 1 $he p!rpose of the work on the origin and contin!o!s !se of the legislat!re was to prove that% !nder the principles of enlightened a"sol!tism )!ngarian kings % incl!ding :!een (aria $heresa also have wide discretion to the religio!s matters that !nder this law can appoint "ishops % move them from one diocese to another and ta# their ch!rch properties % there"y ena"ling the )!ngarian =!een (aria $heresa !sed her title Apostolic :!een of )!ngary and escape the control of the )!ngarian administrative apparat!s of the ch!rch from the infl!ence of the 0oman >!ria 1 ?egislative power and sovereignty of :!een (aria $heresa in religio!s matters according to the principles of the doctrine of enlightened a"sol!tism had "ecome a"sol!te and !nlimited1 $he work on the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power Adam František Kollár critici'ed e#empt from ta#ation )!ngarian ecclesiastical no"ility % her little "enefit for the state and partic!larly diffic!lt position vassal of the )!ngarian people 1 (aria $heresa was officially invited to 2iet @ &!ly 176 1 Already the fifth session of the lower pane of the )!ngarian parliament A &!ly 176 "egan to negotiate a KollárBs "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power 1 )!ngarian no"ility was political writings on the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power partic!larly o!traged "eca!se it to!ches the sensitive iss!e of the ta#ation of ch!rch properties and "eneficial to o"tain f!nds to maintain the standing army1 $he record states of the )!ngarian 2iet was written C D $his Kollar according to the interpretation % "reach of canons and privileges of the co!ntry % ins!lting )!ngarian government and the incitement of hatred "etween nations and kings dare to ignorantly distort the laws of the co!ntry 1 D Book of the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power "y no"les formed )!ngary !nfavora"le rep!tation in domestic and foreign soil and therefore re=!ested that a representative of the lower "oard assem"ly Fran' Eaver Koller in their competence contri"!ted to averting a maFor inF!ry and reproach % which had threatened d!e to its p!"lication )!ngarian nation 1 3resented proposals were to "!rn "ooks % proscri"ed a!thor and his ostracism from the p!"lic comm!nity into e#ile 1 Fran' Eaver Koller is the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power stood and tried to diss!ade him from the aristocracy to "ook Adam František Kollár address 1 ;o"ility "egan "eca!se Francis Koller and Fran' Kollar entertain disgracef!l diatri"e 1 *erse no"les pointed to poor origin of the two namesakes C D Kollar with Koller profiteers are one or the other% this fr!it

comes from when something "ecomes poor man!re 1 D wicked Kollar proscri"es in the co!ntry and that of Koller was not Kollar % making it only the letter 1 G D 3roscri"es against lawless co!ntry Kollár % to "ecome Kollár Koller % ca!sing a single letter 1 D D wicked Kollar is given to c!rse at home and that was not Kollar from Koller % only one Fot matter 1 Both are declared profiteers and careerists% "oth rackers of )!ngarian laws 1 D Hn the ?atin original &o'ef IaFdoš *ševlad typescript preserved verse that confirms version translated "y (ichal Jliáš C D Hmpi!s in 3atras Kollar proscri"it!r % !t not sit Kollar Koller % ?ittera sola facit 1 D 6 D 3roscri"es against lawless co!ntry Kollár % to "ecome Kollar Koller % ca!ses a single letter 1 D Hn another diatri"e that wrote the aristocracy Adam František Kollár likened his glory to the ancient )-rostrat of Jphes!s % who % not knowing how he "ecame famo!s % lit in his hometown of "ea!tif!l $emple of Artemis % one of the seven wonders of the world 1 Beca!se of criticism of ch!rch policy nicknamed him the representative of the conspiracy &!li!s >aesar % ;icola (achiavelli% Br!t!s% or illegitimate son of 3ope Ale#ander *H 1 >esare Borgia1 Hn the contemporary pamphlet *e#atio data intellect!m 6 5 tri"!lation "rings to mind 8 from &!raF 0ichvaldskK was over Kollar !ttered a threat that he remains in his hatred !ntil they will live only )!ngarian no"leman 1 ;either sal!tation D Slovak Socrates D to Adam František Kollár didnBt so!nd too favora"ly "eca!se !ndermine the moral profile of the a!thor 1 7pponents writer of the no"ility associated adFective D Slovak Socrates D with malicio!s statement D d!e to the sa!cepan greasy it was not possi"le to o"tain a good thing forever 1 D Adam František Kollár no"les to their ins!lts replied C D ;on 0e# proscripsit % ne=!e le# proscri"ere Kollar ;ec Koller fry% Ire# 0ational inops 1 >!r ne=!eat % :!aero % =!i non regit regend!s ipse =!od non Ire# regnet % ?ittera sola facit 1 Hmpi Ire# hear Falion 2ig!e =!id infers 0egis Sacrilege % in &!ra sacra man!s L D $his mockery in the ?atin original lang!age offers a toy "ased on the e#change markings word 0JE 5 king 8 for word I0JE 5 flock 8 % which marked the no"ility Kollar 1 Another mockery % written "y Adam František Kollár called Kollár their haters ended with verse C D$he tr!th is dangero!s to write % false g!ilt 1 D 7n !rgencies gradient aristocrats had dignitary Fran' Eaver Koller agree that their comments and complaints a"o!t Adam František Kollár s!"mit !pper "oard assem"ly % the )o!se mog!ls 1 ;o"les "oth panes condemned the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power and "eca!se they aro!se the impression that :!een (aria $heresa approves KollárBs D rave D reviews the imposition of the ta# "!rden on ecclesiastical and sec!lar no"ility 1 Francis Koller their !nc!ltivated arrogance prove that the work on the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power has Adam František Kollár even royal assent % which act!ally "y "oth no"les namesake ins!lted maFesty the :!een 1 Arch"ishop of Js'tergom Francis BarkMc'y acc!sed Adam František Kollár from that attempts to challenge the privileges and rights of the )!ngarian nation and reached the )!ngarian 2iet appla!se almost all present 1 After the speech BarkMc'y Fran' Eaver Koller despite efforts failed to prevent a series of F!icy c!rses on KollárBs address 1 Adam František Kollár the co!rse of negotiations on the )!ngarian 2iet informed co!nselor of the State >o!ncil Breitenfeld 1 >o!ncillor Breitenfeld had the 2iet secret o"server % the same man with the pse!donym Schwa" % who sent him anonymo!s messages on disc!ssion 1 $he KollárBs estate to retain three letters from Schwa" of the tenth % twentyNthird and thirtieth &!ly17O 1 $he first letter % which was addressed personally to Adam František Kollár % &án $i"enskK concl!ded that the addressees Kollar and the Schwa" each other very well and know intimately 1 )istorian 2es'P 2Qmmerich note in the negotiations on the )!ngarian 2iet named Adam František Kollár moral corpse and nonNfree man in the secret service of the imperial co!rt % which Kollár allegedly "etrayed his e#traordinary talent and historical knowledge 1 After settling the Assem"ly 1R &!ly 17O no"ility agreed to ask the :!een (aria $heresa %

to give work 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power to destroy and Adam František Kollár e#ile 1 Both "oards co!ncil agreed to the esta"lishment of a Foint commission % which had ela"orate report complaints Jmpress (aria $heresa of KollárGs work 1 Aristocrats headed "y the Bishop of ;itra &ohn I!stin S!"rohlavskKm iss!e a work of 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se legislat!re illegal and offensive =!otes Adam Fran' Kollár % which add yo!r own attit!de 1 7"Fections to KollárGs "ook % along with other complaints sec!lar and ecclesiastical aristocracy of 16 &!ly read "efore proceeding to :!een (aria $heresa 1 Adam František Kollár to &oseph ?o!is Batthyánya of 16 &!ly 176 letter mentioned that "efore writing the contents of "ooks cons!lted with State >o!ncillor Jgydi!som Boir-m who later checked the part of the man!script 1 $he finished man!script reviewed Br!ckenthal % Festetics and Sporges 1 Based on o"servations of the state mentor KPnig and favora"le review of the work gave :!een (aria $heresa Kollar consent to print "ooks with proper "ypassing censorship 1 9hen the director of co!rtyard printer in 3aris &oannes $rattner wanted to p!t the "ook )!ngarian censor censorship % Adam František Kollár wo!ld not let him on the gro!nd that in )!ngary there are no people who wo!ld "e dealing with the legal history of science 1 3!"lished "ooks to "e satisfied with the recommendation of the Jmpress (aria $heresa 1 Hmperial co!rt after complaints no"les worked on interventions !sed to prevent disc!ssion of the "ook at the "ottom and top sheet assem"ly thro!gh personal recr!iters :!een Fran' Eaver Koller and Arch"ishop &oseph ?o!is Batthyány 1 Stocks lower and top sheet assem"ly "!t not the negotiation of the "ook and proposals (aria $heresa satisfied % "eca!se the doc!ments of origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power concerning the ann!lment of the no"ility and nonNta#a"le appointment of new "ishops % and th!s their person1 Adam František Kollár at the Schwa" letter from the tenth day of &!ly t!rned to the arch"ishop of Kalocsa &oseph ?o!is Batthyány % which aspired to the position of Arch"ishop of Js'tergom Francis BarkMc'y to personally intervene and indignantly no"ility somehow calmed 1 Batthyány in a letter Kollar recommended to prepare a defense works % which sho!ld clarify and defend positions Jmpress 1 2eal with the opposition of the no"ility against the "ook % which pro"a"ly conceived even himself1 Batthyány wanted Adam František Kollár ill!minate the reasons for the acc!sations directed against the pope % 9er"Pc'yho >ode % against the no"ility and against the )!ngarian homeland 1 )e asked Kollar % which was an incentive for the p!"lication of his "ook 1 0oman c!ria "y clergy or ch!rch Batthyány not "e the ca!se of the disp!te % they deny the apostolic a!thority of :!een (aria $heresa 1 Kollar !rged to censor "ooks and on the possi"le falsification % in which he wo!ld personally give my contri"!tion 1 7n <@ &!ly 176 sent an anonymo!s friend Schwa" Adam Fran' Kollár final message of the >ommission% which alleged that he learned that &M'sef As'alay relying on the advice of the clergy prepared in a separate file complete denial of "ook reviews 1 0ef!tation Kollárovo work 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of the legislat!re !ltimately did not prepare for !nknown reasons &M'sef As'alay % "!t made it &!raF 0ichvaldskK % s!"sidiary canon primate BarkMc'y Francis % in his forty Npage p!"lication *e#atio data intellect!m 5 tri"!lation "rings to mind 8 1 Arch"ishop of Js'tergom Francis BarkMc'y also write a paper on KollarGs work % which is "roader than the )o!se ela"orate and contained 61 o"servations s!pplemented "y o"servations ecclesiastical no"ility 1 $his ela"orate sent (aria $heresa % who forwarded it to the State >hancellery 9enceslas Ko!nic'ovi 6 Ka!nit' 1 Storm "ooks a"o!t Adam Fran' Kollár the :!een (aria $heresa !npleasantly affected % "eca!se the doc!ments of origin and contin!o!s !se of the legislat!re wanted the )!ngarian no"ility !sed as a prete#t for odsa"otovanie ta# pro"lem into an impasse 1 After a series of protest writings )!ngarian regnikolárneF dep!tations % 3rimate and Arch"ishop Francis BarkMc'y % (aria $heresa finally end the de"ate a"o!t the fact that Kollar refer the dossier to assess sec!lar state chancellor Ka!nit' 9enceslas ch!rch and assessment of the *ienna >ardinal >hristoph Anton 3rimate

(iga''i 1 (iga''i review KollárGs "ook was not favora"le % "eca!se >hristoph Anton (iga''i was as an administrator *A>7*SKT arch"ishopric interested in the iss!e of ta#ation of )!ngarian ecclesiastical "enefices % and therefore from a religio!s perspective to the "ook delivered a negative opinion 1 *áclav >hancellor Ka!nit' in a letter dated <6 &!ly 176 did not want to p!"lish the proceedings against the opponentsG Adam Fran' Kollár and advised to p!t the file on the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power as closely as possi"le to conceal 1 A"o!t Adam Fran' Kollár said that a response and is a"le to defend the new opposition Arch"ishops most of their ideas and s!ggestions so perfectly that e#plain and reFect false tendency to !nF!stifia"ly attri"!ted to its form!lation 1 0egretted that the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power appeared in print and recommended monarch resist press!re no"ility and find a way o!t of the sit!ation so as to avoid conflict of (aria $heresa of the 0oman >!ria 1 Ka!nit' monarch advised to stop selling "ooks on the gro!nds that the "ook was against the o"Fections and do!"ts in religio!s matters 1 H removed the 0oman >!ria opport!nity to lodge a complaint against the miscond!ct of (aria $heresa % who wanted the ta#ation of the clergy and the appointment of new "ishops "ypass papal permission 1 $emporary "an "ooks sho!ld "e considerate to Adam Fran' Kollár % "eca!se the imperial co!rt directly reFect or one of his designs 1 Ka!nit' was despite the criticism of Adam Fran' Kollár )!ngarian no"ility personally convinced that the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power does not antireligio!s views 1 :!een (aria $heresa referred the o"Fections Kollár >hristoph Anton (iga''i on the iss!e KollarGs views to!ching the official religion "y re=!iring Kollar defense % which wo!ld e#plain his controversial religio!s views 1 Ka!nit' report sent !horsk-m! >hancellor Fran' Js'terhá'yho its anne# additions to comment regnikolárneF dep!tations 1 7n <A &!ly 176 Adam František Kollár sent "y :!een (aria $heresa and 4horsk-m! assem"ly work Apologia "ook 7n the 7rigin of Adam Francis and contin!o!s !se of legislative power in ecclesiastical matters apostolic kings of )!ngary % sent her (aFesty and the Assem"ly of the Kingdom 1 $he Apology to Adam František Kollár tried to prove that )!ngarian laws confirm his statements in his "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power and e#pressed concern that the censorship of the )o!se of dep!tations also "ecome known among J!ropean scientists 1 )e "elieved that if the royal co!rt convicts him for his "ook $he 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power into e#ile % he does not ask for an e#emption "eca!se it is convinced that any nation to go into e#ile % will "e accompanied "y love of co!ntry and sense of inactivity 1 Adam František Kollár mentioned note inactivity also "eca!se he was knowledgea"le e#pert in canon law state and lived for some time in the central workshop mechanism a"sol!tist state power % the *iennese castle % where pres!ma"ly negotiated "etween (aria $heresa and the 0oman >!ria on the independence of (!kachevo diocese 1 $he "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power forward was precisely timed and as a "om" e#ploded at a meeting of the )!ngarian parliament 1 Adam František Kollár yo! were personally aware that his "ook will ca!se the opposition )!ngarian no"ility 1 $his is f!rther corro"orated "y the =!ote at the "eginning of the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power % which paraphrased from the work of Andor >'i'madia C D 9ell H know that many do not like mine N as they say N cra'y and a"s!rd e#ploration of old doc!ments % "!t H think H am doing a o"ligation "rave citi'en when m!ltiyear tedio!s work collect doc!ments % ill!minating the constit!tional law of the land 1 $heir pen H serve the king and co!ntry and sacrosanct swear in his life% he passed 1 $he apologia "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power Kollar mentioned that he appreciates the )!ngarian no"ility and clergy % "!t this reverence is not so "ig that it e#tends its respect for the tr!th 1 $herefore% if the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power and said things

that are !ncomforta"le to read or listen % to "e charged to the tr!th 1 3rovincial parliament to hearing apologia Adam Fran' Kollár have not addressed % "eca!se "y rescript of @R &!ly 176 work 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power contained conflicting principles of the r!ling religion % and therefore (aria $heresa "anned imports to )!ngary !ntil his thoro!gh review 1 ;ámestná )!ngarian royal co!ncil in Bratislava called circ!lar of A!g!st 176 the first co!nty % co!nties and cities that all items "ooks confiscated and sent to her 1 7n 1@ A!g!st 176 was the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power on the initiative of >ardinal >hristoph (iga''i and primate Francis BarkMc'y placed on the Hnde# ?i"ror!m prohi"itor!m 5 Hnde# of prohi"ited "ooks 8 1 0oman secret agent primate BarkMc'y 3into 3oloni on 1O A!g!st 176 :!een (aria $heresa confirmed that the p!"lication 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power has "een identified for the !pcoming inde# 1 Andor >'i'madia e#pressed the view that direct BarkMc'y Francis "efore the start of the )!ngarian State Assem"ly intervened in 0ome to Kollárova "ook was the inde# p!"lished as soon as possi"le 1 3opeGs decree on iss!ing "ooks to Hnde# ?i"ror!m prohi"itor!m record date of 1U a!g!st 176 th 2ate immolation "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power is shro!ded in a veil of secret % altho!gh &ohn $i"enskK the work of Slovak Socrates mentions that the papal n!ncio <U A!g!st 176 he reported to 0ome that if when Adam František Kollár came to )!ngary % wo!ld not yo! make s!re yo!r life 1 Adam František Kollár after widespread criticism of the )!ngarian no"ility lose the favor of (aria $heresa 1 Ht is very interesting that altho!gh the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power of the 0oman >!ria at the *atican led "y 3ope "anned % Adam František Kollár worked since 176 to work addressed the 0oman >!ria 1 >atholics Bishop 7lšavskiF was in thrall to the 0oman >atholic Bishop of Jger% headed "y >hancellor Fran' Jsterhá'y % so he decided to !se his pop!larity with the imperial co!rt of (aria $heresa and recover from the *atican independence of his diocese 1 Ht was fo!nded memorand!m )!millim!m 3ro(erit de (erc!ry % 3rogress in )!ngaria et Hncol gentis 0h!tenicae 5 )!m"le opinion on the origin % evol!tion and life 0!thenians in )!ngary 8 % who in 176A was sent to the 0oman >!ria in the *atican 1 Kollar wrote a political treatise on the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power that it sho!ld have :!een (aria $heresa right to appoint new "ishops independently of the papal c!ria in 0ome 1 Andor >'i'madia states that the "ishops of Jger legal academy even develop a report on the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power % which was partially identical to the te#t % which processed the )o!se committee headed "y the Bishop of ;itra I!stin 1 For the )!ngarian no"ility remained Adam František Kollár thro!gho!t his life most hated 4hrom 1 9hen in 1767 the >ham"er >o!nsellor 2vorsky Festetich to nominate Adam Fran' Kollár for 0ector archive )!ngarian >ham"er of >ommerce in Bratislava % 3resident of the )!ngarian >ham"er Irassalkovich referring to the D fatal diet on the )!ngarian 2iet D him to do so 1 Adam František Kollár has indeed "ecome a favorite of (aria $heresa and F!st after the )!ngarian 2iet "egan his career % disp!te the )!ngarian 2iet % however% interfered with his plans for research of )!ngarian history 1 Hn case erár! with Js'terhá'yovcov where Kollár as a legal e#pert took the rights of the imperial co!rt of (aria $heresa % do not avoid intrig!es and indignant Jmpress (aria $heresa wrote that faces option to sell his li"rary and collection of )!ngarian doc!ments % stepped aside and pay only leads 1 7n 1O April 177@ in a letter to Adam František Kollár wrote (aria $heresa said C D B!t H% as a native eel working =!ietly at my history and indeed with the firm p!rpose that did not look the light of day "efore H see him H will not "e a"le to last and not e#pect temporary F!st to "e forever freed from degrading pandering 1 D Kollar instead of p!nishment event!ally won in 1777 "y (aria $heresa enno"led and property in the village Kere't-nyi Sopron co!nty 1 9e will try to determine the most important reasons why the work was 7n the 7rigin and

contin!o!s !se of the legislat!re prohi"ited 1 9e divided them into three points % we have decided to f!rther clarify C 1 Adam František Kollár dare raise ideological post!late distorting the integrity of hereditary prerogatives and privileges of the fe!dal aristocracy 1 $he work on the origin and contin!o!s !se of the legislat!re called the )!ngarian no"ility % that part of the ta# "!rden shifted to the s!"Fects themselves 1 )e called in to the principles of fairness % e=!ality and >hristian solidarity 1 &!stify their arg!ments C D 9ho does % H ask % looking forward to live and procreate children in s!ch a co!ntry where the p!"lic can not tolerate the "!rden e=!ally % where the rich have claimed any "enefits in the state % a charge is reFected % which is against the law and the principle of e=!ality % and against holy law of o!r kingdom and the !nfort!nate peasant serf and !"iedenK all people wallowing L Gwork on the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power and "eca!se of this statement later res!lted in a large smear campaign against the writer 1 < 3olitical treatise on the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power % the professional legal o"Fections to the a!thenticity and "inding decrees )!ngarian kings 1 Adam František Kollár compared decrees of the )!ngarian kings 1 For specific e#amples % he tried to prove that the content decrees changed or >o!nterfeit their depreciation % which disagreed with the )!ngarian no"ility 1 Kollar is in his apologia work 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of the legislat!re stated that he saw in the imperial li"rary parchment code# with the original version of the decrees of )!ngarian King Stephen H % ?adisla!s and Kolomana 1 Hn $ransylvania "e hidden a!thentic decree Andrew HH 1 in 1<<< % decorated with a gold seal 1 )e knew well % which ho!sed several original decrees Sigm!nd % ?o!is H1 % (ary % Al"erta % ?adisla!s and other )!ngarian kings 1 $he apologia work 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of the legislat!re e#pressed the wish that these decrees were confronted with each other and with p!"lished scientific papers 1 @ Hn the "ook 7n the 7rigin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power to F!stify the finite power s!preme hierarchs of the >atholic >h!rch in canon law 1 Adam František Kollár from the "eginning of work on the origin and contin!o!s !se of legislative power =!estioned the a!thenticity of the B!ll of 3ope Gs Jve HH 1 % 7n the "asis of which was Stephen H1 crowned the first king of )!ngary 1 Hnclined to the opinion Belsha''ar Ker+eli+a and "elieves that the papal "!ll and has not tampered with it % 3ope Silvester HH 1 % B!t to his s!ccessor% Sergi!s H* 11 >o!nterfeit "!lls sho!ld perform a Franciscan priest 0afael ?evakovi+ 1 2!ring the reign of (aria $heresa match took place on the right to appoint "ishops 1 $itle Apostolic :!een of )!ngary % (aria $heresa% who came from the papal n!ncio 3aoll!ciho in 17 1 % to widen its scope in the conte#t of the J!ropean canon law 1 Arch"ishop Jmerich H* 1 (aria $heresa p!t on the head of the )!ngarian crown of St1 Stephen 1 $he fact that in the past% 3ope Silvester HH 1 sent St1 Stephen H1 royal crown % "!t he himself personally nekor!noval % confirming Stephen H1 increased royal powers in ecclesiastical law 1 $he position of the first )!ngarian king Stephen H1 then imply that the 3ope >lement EHHH 1 the Jmpress (aria $heresa decides who will "e in )!ngary "ishop 1 3ope >lement EHHH 1 had in canon law therefore limited in scope and had to respect the decision of the Apostolic )!ngarian =!een (aria $heresa on the appointment of new "ishops of the >atholic >h!rch 1 Hdeological work 7n the 7rigin of finite and contin!o!s !se of the legislat!re was to tr!st in the power of a"sol!tist monarch 1 Vet Kollar tried his writings prove that the views of o"solescence of aristocratic privileges nehodnovernosti )!ngarian decrees and falsification B!ll of 3ope Gs Jve HH 1 are in accordance with historical tr!th 1