ISTORIE

COMITET ŞTIINŢIFIC
ADVISORY BOARD

Alexandru BARNEA, Jean Godefroy BIDIMA, Lucian BOIA, Ovidiu BOZGAN,

Stelian BREZEANU, Ion BULEI, Francesco GUIDA, Bernard HOURS,
Antal LUKACS, Gheorghe Vlad NISTOR, Viorel PANAITE, Zoe PETRE,
Lucia POPA, Christophe PROCHASSON, Mihai RETEGAN, Tudor TEOTEOI

COLEGIUL DE REDACŢIE
EDITORIAL BOARD

Alin CIUPALĂ, Simona CORLAN, Marius DIACONESCU, Rudolf DINU,

Ecaterina Gabriela LUNG, Daniela ZAHARIA (redactor şef)

SECRETARIAT DE REDACŢIE
EDITORIAL ASSISTANT

Silviu HARITON

Redactor: Irina Hriţcu

Tehnoredactor: Emeline-Daniela Avram

Redacţia ANALELE UNIVERSITĂŢII

Şos. Panduri nr. 90-92,
050663 Bucureşti
ROMÂNIA
Tel./Fax +40 214102384
E-mail: editura_unibuc@yahoo.com
Internet: www.editura.unibuc.ro
Librărie online: http://librărie-unibuc.ro
Centru de vânzare: Bd. Regina Elisabeta nr. 4-12,
030018 Bucureşti – ROMÂNIA
Tel. +40 213143508 (int. 2125)
 ANALELE
UNIVERSITĂŢII
BUCUREŞTI

ISTORIE

2 0 1 1 – Partea II

SUMAR • SOMMAIRE • CONTENT

CRISTIAN OLARIU, Field Surveys in the Dunavăţ Peninsula .......................................... 3

MARIAMA GUEYE, Attitudes feminines dans la guerre des juifs : Flavius Josèphe et le
discours monétaire des Flaviens ............................................................................. 23
ECATERINA LUNG, Neglecting Barbarian Identity in Barbarian Kingdoms in the
Writings of the VIth-VIIIth Century Historians ....................................................... 41
MARIUS DIACONESCU, On the Isidore’s Encyclical Letter Addressed from Buda on
March 5th, 1440, to the Romanians, Ruthenians and Serbs in the Kingdom of Hungary .. 49
OANA-MĂDĂLINA POPESCU, The Diptych of the Holy Trinity Monastery in
Bucharest ................................................................................................................ 65
ARMANDO MARQUES GUEDES, Répétition et innovation: généalogie et architecture
dans les processus de formation de diplomates depuis le XVIIIème siècle .............. 81
ELENA OLARIU, I. D. Berindei (1871-1928) and the Formula of an Exuberant
Eclecticism (between Rococo, Art Nouveau and Romanticism) ............................ 105
ANDREI ALEXANDRESCU, The Place of the “National Cathedral” in the Process of Defining
the Romanian Identity in the XIXth-XXth Centuries ............................................... 131
MIHAELA GRANCEA, The Process of Mythifying Romanian Outlaws in Historical
Films during the Communist Regime ..................................................................... 147
AYMERIC JEUDY, The George Enescu Festival or the Building of a Musical and
National Monument in the Post-Communist Era .................................................... 155

*
Recenzii şi note de lectură ................................................................................................... 163
Necrolog .............................................................................................................................. 197
 ON THE ISIDORE’S ENCYCLICAL LETTER ADDRESSED
FROM BUDA ON MARCH 5TH, 1440,
TO THE ROMANIANS, RUTHENIANS
AND SERBS IN THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY

MARIUS DIACONESCU

Abstract

The analysis of the Metropolitan Isidore’s encyclical shows that it was addressed to the
Ruthenians, Serbs and Romanians in the Kingdom of Hungary, and not to the Christians from the
territories subjected to the jurisdiction of his legation. Furthermore, Isidore has negotiated with
the Hungarian dignitaries on the effects of the Florentine Union in favour of the Orthodox.
The encyclical of Isidore in Buda in March 1440 had success, at least at the Romanian
noblemen and Romanian clergy from the north of Hungary, in Maramures County because in
Maramures County there was a Romanian nobility who protected their monastery, which was
stavropegial of the Patriarchate of Constantinople
Keywords: Union of Florence, Metropolitan Isidore, Romanian noblemen, Orthodox
Churches in Hungary, Romanian monastery in Maramureş county, Florentine Union in Hungary.

The most fervent promoter of the Florentine Union in Eastern Europe was
Isidore, Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus’. His activity in the Russian territories
is well known to the historiography. By contrast, his role in promoting the
ecclesiastical Union in the Kingdom of Hungary was neglected or briefly and
erroneously analyzed, although Isidore promoted the Florentine Union and
intervened in favour of the Orthodox Church in Hungary on the occasion of his
two visits to the Hungarian capital, Buda, in March 1440 and March 1443.
In 1436 he became Metropolitan of Kiev and all Rus’, supported by the
Patriarch, against the will of the Grand Duke of Moscow, who had supported
Jonah instead, the future adversary of the unionist Metropolitan1.
In Moscow, the seat of the Metropolitanate, Isidore resided for just five
months, a period in which he persuaded Grand Duke Basil to allow him to
attend the Council of Union and to represent the Russian Church. The Grand

1
ADOLF ZIEGLER, “Isidore de Kiev, apotre de l’Union florentine”, in Irenikon, tome
XIII, no. 4, 1936 (hereafter cited as Isidore de Kiev, apotre de l’Union florentine), p. 403;
JOSEPH GILL, S. J., “Personalities of Council of Florence and other Essays”, Oxford, 1964
(hereafter cited as Personalities of Council of Florence), p. 68.
 MARIUS DIACONESCU
50

Duke offered him a retinue in accordance with his rank, composed of a Bishop,
an Archimandrite, priests, monks and servants. The route of the Russian delegation
from Moscow towards Italy avoided the Kingdom of Poland because of the
opposition of the Catholic hierarchy there against Pope Eugene IV and against the
Council he had organized. The initiator of the unionist Council was Sigismund of
Luxembourg, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire and King of Hungary.
Because of the threats of the route through Poland, the Russian delegation was
transported by ship from Riga, in the land subjected to the Teutonic Knights, to
Lübeck, the German port at the Baltic Sea. From here they passed the German
states heading south, then, through Innsbruck, they reached Trento across the Alpes,
and then continued their journey towards Ferrara, where the conciliary debates had
already started. The Russian delegation arrived in Ferrara in August 14382.
Isidore actively engaged the conferences of the unionist Council and
distinguished himself by his disposal for the accomplishment of the ecclesiastical
Union, even by taking coercible measures against some of the members of his delegation
who had refused to sign the act of Union. Isidore had negotiation skills, and was asked,
even during the Florentine Council, to mediate between the divergent camps3. After the
Council, Pope Eugene IV appointed him apostolic legate a Latere for the regions of Russia,
Lithuania and Poland, and charged him with promoting the Union in those territories.
The return route of the Russian delegation from Italy to Moscow was
long, both in distance, as in time. They left Florence by mid September 1439
and spent the remaining months of the year in Venice. The news of the death of
Albert, King of Hungary (he died on October the 27th) initially determined a redesign
of the return way. Because Hungary was considered a high security risk country,
the Pope suggested the change of the course, through Constantinople and by sea4.
Probably one of the reasons for which the Pope had suggested this proposal was
the strengthening of the unionist camp in the Byzantine capital5. The news of his
promotion to the cardinalate found Isidore still in Venice, on December the 18th.
Four days later he resumed his journey, passing to the Adriatic coast that was in
Venetian hands, and then entering Croatia.
In Zagreb he met George Branković, the Serbian despot. His wife was a
Greek from the Cantacuzène family. Their daughter, Catherine, was married
with a member of the Cilli family, an influential Croatian nobleman who
resided in Zagreb. Branković was a refugee in Zagreb after his defeat by the
Turks in the battle of Smederevo6. The despot met the unionist Metropolitan,

2
J. GILL, Personalities of Council of Florence, p. 68-69.
3
A. ZIEGLER, Isidore de Kiev, apotre de l’Union florentine, p. 402-403.
4
The letter of the Pope to the Byzantine Emperor on November the 28th 1439: Epistolae Pontificiae
ad Concilium Florentinum Spectantes, ed. G. Hofmann, pars II, Romae, 1944, no. 233, p. 143-144.
5
OSKAR HALECKI, From Florence to Brest (1439-1596), Rome, 1958, p. 53-54.
6
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini ad fidem manuscriptorum edidit addita versione Latina
JOANNES KRAJCAR, S. J., Concilium Florentinum Documenta et Scriptores, vol. XI,
Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, Romae, 1976, p. 37, footnote 94.
ON THE ISIDORE’S ENCYCLICAL LETTER ADDRESSED FROM BUDA ON MARCH 5TH, 1440,
TO THE ROMANIANS, RUTHENIANS AND SERBS IN THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY
51

although he had refused to send delegates to the Council of Florence. Even

afterwards, the Serbian despot had an anti-unionist stance, which he modeled in
accordance with his timely interests7.
The Russian delegation visited the Catholic cathedral in town, where they
admired the relics kept there. They then crossed the Drava and entered Hungary itself,
heading towards the Kingdom’s capital, Buda, on a route unsafe because of the robbers.
In the Hungarian capital Isidore arrived in early March 1440. It is certain
that he was in Buda by March 5th, when he issued an encyclical letter
announcing the Florentine Union.
He spent between 10 and 14 days in the Kingdom’s capital, because only
on the 14th of March he crossed the Danube and headed north, towards Košice
and the border with Poland8.
What did Metropolitan Isidore do in the Hungarian capital a relatively
long period, of 10 to 14 days? Hungary was in that period in the turmoil caused
by the death of King Albert and the election of the Polish King, Vladislav, as
King of Hungary9. The nobility was divided in two camps, and the widow
Queen was negotiating with insistence the future of her newly born son. The
country was practically governed by the high-ranking dignitaries, emanated
from the high nobility, which exerted their attributions in virtue of the functions
gained from the departed King.
A record on the back of a parchment sheet in a church manuscript copied
in Russia in 1411, which was in Isidore’s possession, kept at present in the
Vatican, offers a number of precious information on the activity of the Russian
Metropolitan in the Hungarian Kingdom’s capital. On this manuscript there is a
short Greek note written by Isidore himself, which was already edited by
Giovanni Mercati in 192610. The Greek text contains the name of four
dignitaries in Hungary. It is a numbered list: “No. 1. Laurent of Hedervára, and
Palatine / No. 2. Ban of Dalmatia, Croatia and Slavonia, and it is Matkos / the
third Voivode of Transylvania, whose name is Dezső of Losonc / four Ban of
Timiş, whose name is Andreas Botos”.

7
MARIUS DIACONESCU, Les implications confessionnelles du Concile de Florence en
Hongrie, in Mediaevalia Transilvanica, tom I, 1997, no. 1-2 (hereafter cited as Les implications
confessionnelles), p. 38-39.
8
JOANNES KRAJCAR, S. J., “Metropolitan Isidore’s Journey to the Council of Florence.
Some Remarks”, in Orientalia Christiana Periodica, 1972, vol. 38, fasc. II (hereafter cited as
Metropolitan Isidore’s Journey), p. 382-384. The original text of the description of this part of his
journey in Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p. 36-40.
9
PAL ENGEL, The Realm of St. Stephen. A History of Medieval Hungary 895-1526, translated
by Tamás Pálosfalvi, I. B. Tauris Publishers, London-New York, [2001], p. 280-282. See also
JAN DABROWSKI, Władisław I Jagiellończyk na Węgrzech (1440-1444), Warszawa, 1922, passim.
10
GIOVANNI MERCATI, Scritti d’Isidoro il Cardinale Ruteno, Roma, 1926, p. 71-72. We
would like to thank professor Vasile Rus from the “Babeş-Bolyai” University of Cluj-Napoca, for
his kindness in translating for us the Greek text.
 MARIUS DIACONESCU
52

The editor, Giovanni Mercati, was uncertain whether the record was
made during Isidore’s first visit to Buda, that is in March 1440, or three years
later, when he was on the way to Rome11. A few years ago the Romanian
historian Adrian Andrei Rusu wrongly dated the record as being from 144312.
Without hesitation, we can date this meeting of the Metropolitan with the
Hungarian dignitaries in the spring of 1440. Dezső Losonci was Voivode of
Transylvania until January 144113, while “Botos” Andreas Harapki was count of
the Timiş County between 1439 and 144114, therefore only on the ocassion of
the Isidore’s first visit in Buda could they have met.
The dialogue with Palatine Laurent Hédervári was presumably of political
nature, since he practically led all the country’s administration and he was the supreme
authority in the Kingdom15. King Vladislav was still in Poland, in his Krakow
residence16. Of course, we can’t exclude the religious discussions on the occasion
of this official meeting with the Palatine, who had under his direct jurisdiction
the counties in the north-east of the Kingdom, with Orthodox inhabitants17.
As we have already noticed, on a different occasion18, the Metropolitan
met with three dignitaries that had under their direct control areas with
Orthodox population: Matkó Tallóci, the Ban of Dalamatia and Slavonia, Dezső
Losonci, the Voivode of Transylvania, and “Botos” Andreas Harapki, the count
of the Timiş County. The last two are the only interlocutors from whom the
Metropolitan found out about the Romanian Orthodox population in the
Kingdom of Hungary. The confessional stake of these meetings is beyond dispute.
In the Kingdom of Hungary there lived a numerous Romanian Orthodox
population, in the voivodeship of Transylvania and in the counties west of it,
from Timiş to Maramureş; Ruthenian Orthodox from Maramureş to Ung and
also Romanians and Ruthenians spread in the mountainous region in the north
of the Kingdom; Serbian Orthodox in southern Hungary, recently immigrated
because of the Ottoman conquests in Serbia. Although he did not have any
authority over the Orthodox in Hungary, neither from the Pope as Apostolic
legate, nor from the Patriarch in the Byzantine capital, Isidore must have spoken
with the Hungarian dignitaries about the situation of the Eastern faith inside the

11
Ibidem, p. 71. G. MERCATI considers the four Hungarian dignitaries as “lords of the
Danube region”.
12
ADRIAN ANDREI RUSU, Ioan de Hunedoara şi românii din vremea sa, Editura Presa
Universitară, Cluj-Napoca, 1999, p. 93-94.
13
PAL ENGEL, Magyarországi világi archontológiája 1301-1457, Budapest, 1996, I, p. 14.
14
Ibidem, I, p. 204.
15
A. A. RUSU, op. cit., p. 94 excludes the political stake of these meetings and considers
that the discussion “of actual unionist issues” was the reason for which Isidore noted down the
political officials that had under their direct authority Orthodox faithful.
16
Isidore met in Krakow with King Vladislav Jagello. Cf. Acta Slavica Concilii Florentinae, p. 40.
17
Among the counties subjected to the Palatine’s jurisdiction, not only Maramureş had an
Orthodox population, as wrongly underlines A. A. Rusu (op. cit., p. 94, footnote 72), but also
Bereg, Ugocsa, Ung and others.
18
M. DIACONESCU, Les implications confessionnelles, p. 33.
ON THE ISIDORE’S ENCYCLICAL LETTER ADDRESSED FROM BUDA ON MARCH 5TH, 1440,
TO THE ROMANIANS, RUTHENIANS AND SERBS IN THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY
53

Kingdom. In the absence of jurisdictional rights, he could only announce the

Union by means of the encyclical letter on March the 5th 1440 and presumably
by his discussions with the Catholic officials of the country.
It can’t be excluded that Isidore intervened in favour of the Orthodox
Church in the Kingdom of Hungary, now officially united. A letter of the
Metropolitan to the magistrate of the city of Chelm, in Poland, preserved in
copy in two codices from the following centuries, shows clearly Isidore’s broad
vision on the effects of the Florentine Union upon the Orthodox. By intervening
in favour of an Orthodox priest, the Metropolitan stresses the parity between the
Catholic and Orthodox clergy: “for we, the Poles and Ruthenians, are
Christian, we must protect the Church of our Lord and its priests, and not
offend It. We are right now, by the will of God, one Church (una sodalitas
Christiana), of Catholics and Ruthenians”19. As the most recent editor of this
letter, Jan Krajcar, underlined, Isidore promoted the parity in the public and
social life between the Catholics and Orthodox. Since the Poles and the
Ruthenians were united in one Church, by consequence the clergy of the two
sides should benefit of the same honour and should be protected the same way
in their ecclesiastical rights. The case of this Ruthenian priest is a singular one,
on which Isidore wanted to be enforced the general principles20.
The political steak of Isidore’s meetings in Buda with the Hungarian
officials is not to be ruled out. In Florence the Catholics had promised to
support Byzantium against the Turks. Isidore was convinced of the Catholics’
potential role in the fight against the infidels. He was spiritually bound to the
Byzantine capital, where he gained his education and acted as a monk. Isidore
arrived in the Hungarian capital shortly after the Polish King, Vladislav, became
also King of Hungary, which, at least in theory, offered a new prospective in
addressing the future crusade21. Let’s not forget that the Kingdom of Hungary
was the main power in Central Europe that had the burden of the anti-Ottoman
crusades from the times of the long reign of King Sigismund of Luxembourg.
Both the Ban of Slavonia, Croatia and Dalmatia, and the count of Timiş were
major Hungarian leaders in the anti-Ottoman front. Already in early 1438,
before the official opening of the unionist Council, but right after the coronation
of King Albert, Pope Eugene IV sent to Hungary John, Bishop of Segna, in order
to mobilize the Hungarian noblemen for a new crusade against the Turks22.

19
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p. 145.
20
Ibidem, p. 143.
21
ADOLF ZIEGLER, Die Union des Konzils von Florenz in der russischen Kirche,
Würzburg, 1938 (hereafter cited as Die Union des Konzils von Florenz), p. 86, talks about a real
enthusiasm of Isidore in front of this new situation, which offered a new prospective in the fight
against the Turks. JOSEPH GILL, S. J., The Council of Florence, Cambridge University Press,
1959, p. 358, considers that Isidore was enthusiastical about this personal political union of
Vladislav, that could have facilitated the ecclesiastical union.
22
Vetera monumenta historica Hungariam illustrantia maximam partem nondum edita ex
tabulariis vaticanis deprompta, collecta ac serie chronologica disposita ab Augustino Theiner, tom
II, Romae, 1960, no. 371, p. 215-217.
 MARIUS DIACONESCU
54

We should also note that in the anti-Ottoman crusade plan discussed in

Florence, that was going to have the financial support from the Papacy, the
King of Hungary was designated as leader of the crusade. Pope Eugene IV
communicated on September the 23rd to the Byzantine Emperor that “I have
asked first and foremost to our beloved son in Christ Albert, King of the
Romans, of Hungary and Bohemia, that at the right time he would command a
powerful army from the territories of Hungary against those Turks”23. For a
better progress of the whole operation, Albert, the King of Hungary, was to lead
personally the crusade24. Even though the crusade, that had been planed to start
in March 1440, never took place, because the death of the King of Hungary
changed completely the projects, its idea penetrated the political and military
environments in Hungary.
Isidore was treated by the Hungarian dignitaries as the Papal envoy,
because he was Apostolic legate and cardinal, armed with a series of official
documents. The Polish chronicler Jan Długosz saw that Isidore carried with him a
formal copy of the decree of union in Latin, Greek and Slavonic25. A Latin copy
remained in the possession of the Polish Archbishop Zbigniew Olesnicki, for
the chronicler transcribed it in its integrity in his work. The source could only
have been the Olesnicki family archive or that of the Krakow Archbishopric. It
is known that Długosz was the protégé of Archbishop Zbigniew Olesnicki.
For certain Isidore showed these diplomas to his official interlocutors in
Hungary. Only armed with the decree signed by the Pope and by the Byzantine
Emperor could he sustain his cause in front of the Hungarian dignitaries, that is
promoting Union in a Catholic state with a numerous Orthodox population. We
can’t exclude the possibility that a copy of the decree of union was handed at
least to the Palatine, as chief of the Kingdom’s administration in the absence of
the yet uncrowned King. Unfortunately, the destruction in the mid 16th century
of the royal archive by the Ottomans deprives us today of a great number of
sources that could clarify many obscured parts of our medieval history.
For the Hungarian officials the news brought by Isidore of the Florentine
Union did not represent a complete novelty. The background of the problem
was already known, since Pope Eugene IV kept correspondence with King

23
Epistolae Pontificiae, pars II, no. 217, p. 114: „Sollicitabimus quoque omni cum instantia
carissimum in Christo filium nostrum Albertum Romanorum ac Hungarie et Bohemie regem, ut eo
tempore ex partibus Hungare contra eosdem Turchos potentem conducat exercitum”. In the same
document the Pope mentiones that he asked for the cooperation of the Albanians and other Christians
in those regions (per Albanenses et alios illarum partium christianos). Certainly, among these must
also have been the Romanian rulers, although the letters sent to them have not been conserved.
24
Ibidem: „Dabimus etiam operam nobis possibilem, ut pto feliciori huius rei executione
ipse rex Romanorum huic expeditioni personaliter intersit”.
25
IOANNIS DŁUGOSSI sev LONGINI, Historia Polonica, Francofvrti, 1711, liber
duodecimi, col. 727-728 (1440): „ferens secum Apostolicas literas seu bullas eiusdem Eugenii,
sub plumbea, et Constantinopolitani Imperatoris sub aurea, bullis munitas, unionem Latinae et
Occidentalis Ecclesiae cum Graeca et Orientali continentes, lingua quidem Latina scriptas, sed
Graeca atque Ruthenica subscriptas”.
ON THE ISIDORE’S ENCYCLICAL LETTER ADDRESSED FROM BUDA ON MARCH 5TH, 1440,
TO THE ROMANIANS, RUTHENIANS AND SERBS IN THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY
55

Albert of Hungary. Right after Albert had succeeded Sigismund of Luxemburg,

in December 1437, the Pope sent an envoy to the new King in order to ask for
his cooperation for organizing the unionist Council26. The departed King, Sigismund,
had been actively involved during his long reign in the ecclesiastical questions and
he even sustained the idea of the Church Union. For instance, in 1433 Sigismund
had been directly involved in the talks for the religious Union held by the
envoys of the Byzantine Emperor in Rome27, and in 1435 and 1437 the Pope had
asked him to choose a city which could host the unionist Council, because of the
dispute between the Pope and the Council of Basel28. Certainly the Papacy expected
the new King, Albert, to continue the religious politics of his predecessor29.
In November-December 1438 the Pope notified King Albert of the
solemn dialogues inside the Council30. Immediately after the signing of the
Decree of Union, the King of Hungary received, as well as all other princes and
kings in Europe, a letter from the Pope, which notified to him the successful
outcome and the Union of the Greeks, Ruthenians and Romanians31.
These are sufficient proofs that the dignitaries whom Metropolitan Isidore
met in March 1440 were aware of the background of the problem. The way Isidore
presented it instead was completely original and must have produced a response just
as important. At least the rumour mechanism must have functioned, because both
the Russian delegation’s visit, led by a Metropolitan erected Cardinal by the Pope, as
well as the solemn procession during which he proclaimed the Union in the Kingdom’s
capital, were two uniquely and famous events. From this communicational mechanism
missed the Orthodox clergy, which was not adequately educated from a dogmatic
point of view, nor organized well enough. Despite these local “shortcomings”, the
news of the Union spread in the whole Kingdom of Hungary.
On March the 5th 1440, a short time after his arrival in the Kingdom’s
capital, Isidore issued from Buda an encyclical letter addressed to the Orthodox
in Hungary. As it has been justly considered, the encyclical represents a true
program of union of Isidore32. The letter was preserved in the Russian
chronicles and more of its variants have been published in the frame of those
histories in the 19th century33. In 1963 it was re-edited by the Jesuit Joseph Gill,
undisputed specialist in the history of the Florentine Union, accompanied by an

26
The papal instructions for the envoy who was to be sent to Albert were given immediately
after the death of King Sigismund and before Albert’s coronation: Epistolae Pontificiae, pars I,
no. 112, p. 114-116.
27
Ibidem, no. 42, p. 32.
28
Ibidem, no. 53, p. 47; no. 69, p. 71-72.
29
Ibidem, no. 69, p. 72.
30
Vetera monumenta historica Hungariam illustrantia… ab Augustino Theiner, tom II, no. 374,
p. 219; Epistolae Pontificiae, pars II, no. 158, p. 58.
31
Epistolae Pontificiae, pars II, no. 178-182, p. 81-83.
32
A. ZIEGLER, Die Union des Konzils von Florenz, p. 88; J. KRAJCAR, Metropolitan
Isidore’s Journey, p. 383-384.
33
For the manuscript variants and for the Russian editions, see Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p.
140 and then 138.
 MARIUS DIACONESCU
56

English translation34. The most recent edition we know belongs to the Jesuit Joannes
Krajcar, which included it in the volume of “Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini” in
1976, where, besides the Slavonic text, he also published a Latin translation35.
The Russian versions of the document follow after a brief introduction of the
narrator, in which it is being said that, after he had received high dignities from the
Pope, on his way from Rome to the Russian Metropolitanate, the Metropolitan arrived
in a city called Budin on the 5th of March. From here he sent his letter to the countries
inhabited by the Orthodox Christians, to Poland, Lithuania and all of Rus’36.
Starting from this narrator’s introduction, the majority of the historians
(P. Pierling, A.M. Amman, J. Gill, Borovov, J. Krajcar) that have studied this
letter have taken the information as such and have considered that the encyclical
had been sent by Isidore before him to announce the Union in the countries
where he had been appointed Apostolic legate and where the Orthodox
Christians were under his jurisdiction37.
Only the Ukrainian Bogdan Bučinski remarked a century ago that Isidore
addressed, besides the Russians, to the Serbs and Romanians that were not
under his jurisdiction38.
Adolf Ziegler believed that Isidore, boosted by the personal union of the
two realms led by King Vladislav – Poland and Hungary, in which he saw a
new victorious prospect in the fight against the Turks in the Balkans “had
announced freedom and peace to the Serbs, Bulgarians and Romanians
subjected by the Turks”39. Encouraged by this perspective, the Metropolitan

34
JOSEPH GILL, S. J., Isidore’s Encyclical Letter from Buda, in Analecta Ordini Sancti
Basilii Magni (Miscellanea in Honorem Cardinalis Isidori 1463-1963), series II, sectio II, vol. IV (X),
fasc. 1-2, Romae, 1963 (hereafter cited as Isidore’s Encyclical Letter), p. 1-4. A German translation
was published in 1938 by A. ZIEGLER, Die Union des Konzils von Florenz , p. 87.
35
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentinii, p. 140-142.
36
“Оттуду пославшу ему своя писания в Лятьскую и в Литовьскую землю и на всю
Русь православнаго хрестьянства”, apud J. GILL, Isidore’s Encyclical Letter, p. 2.
37
PAUL PIERLING, La Russie et le St. Siége, I, Paris, 1896, p. 52: „Rendu à Bude, il
adressa, le 5 mars 1440, une lettre circulaire aux Russes et aux Lithuaniens pour leur annoncer
l’union de Florence et les exhorter vivement à l’accepter”; A. M. AMMAN, Storia della Chiesa
russa e dei paesi limitrofi, Torino, 1948, p. 123: „Da Budapest stessa egli inviò a tutti i « Russi »
(gli Slavi orientali) una lettera per informarli dell’unione conchiusa ed invitarli ad accettarla, poi
percorse i paesi «russi» occidentali e di sud-ovest”; J. GILL, The Council of Florence, p. 359:
„From Buda Isidore issued an encyclical letter to all the territories in his metropolitanate”;
VITALY BOROVOV, The destiny of the Union of Florence in Poland and the Great Lithuanian
principality (Byelorussia and the Ukraine), in Christian Unity. Council of Ferrara-Florence
(1438-1439), coord. Giuseppe Alberigo, Leuven 1991, p. 559; J. KRAJCAR, in Acta Slavica
Concilii Florentini, p. 140: „Isidorus, Budae commorans, litteras encyclicas in plures partes suae
metropolitae misit, unionem Florentiae factam esse annuntiavit...”. Mea culpa! In the article from
1997 I have not paid enough attention to this letter and I have assumed the historiographical
interpretations: M. DIACONESCU, Les implications confessionnelles, p. 33.
38
B. BUČINSKI, “Studij z istorij tserkovnoj unij, I, Isidorova unija”, in Mitteilungen des
Sevcenko-Gesselschaft der Wissenschaften im Lemberg, t. 85, 1908, p. 26.
39
A. ZIEGLER, Die Union des Konzils von Florenz, p. 86-87.
ON THE ISIDORE’S ENCYCLICAL LETTER ADDRESSED FROM BUDA ON MARCH 5TH, 1440,
TO THE ROMANIANS, RUTHENIANS AND SERBS IN THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY
57

wrote to the people of Orthodox faith on the news of the Union. The German
historian states that “besides the Russians, he addressed to the Serbs and
Romanians, which was not exceeding powers on the part of Isidore; the
Romanians from Moldavia had participated to the Council of Florence and their
delegation had subscribed [the decree], and the ruler of Moldavia was a vassal
of the Polish King”40. We must accept that Ziegler’s interpretation is completely
overweighed by the historical reality. The Turks had not yet subjected Moldavia, an
aspect that could not have escaped the Russian Metropolitan’s attention41.
Oscar Halecki treated more briefly the issue, considering that Isidore
addressed himself to the Slavs, not only to the Russians, but also to those in the
Balkan Peninsula, which he invited to accept the Union42.
Recently, Iulian Mihai Damian, claimed that Isidore addressed to “all
Christians in Central and Eastern Europe”. He believes that the Orthodox peoples
in Hungary were declared “de facto” and “de iure” united with Catholic Church43.
The letter itself starts with the Metropolitan’s title, followed by an
address and a general salutation. It then announces the union of the two
Churches, that have been separated for a long period of time, but that have now
come back into their original unity: “Rejoice and cheer all now, for the
Churches of East and West, that for so long have been separated and loathed
each other, have now united into one true union, the union in their beginning
and peace and old understanding, without any division”44.
Only now follows the real address, that is the reference to those that the
letter is being sent: “To all the people who bear the name of Jesus, both Catholics
and Orthodox45 or all those that depend upon the Holy Ecumenical Church of
Constantinople, that is Ruthenians and Serbs and Romanians and other Christian
people, receive this blessed unity with great spiritual joy and veneration”46.
It is obvious that this letter was not sent to the Christians in Poland,
Lithuania and Russia, as wrongfully the historians have assumed following the
Russian chroniclers. The Ruthenians, Serbs and Romanians (rusi i serbi i
valahi) who were submitted to the Patriarchy in Constantinople were aggregated
only in the Kingdom of Hungary: the Ruthenians in the northeast, the Serbs in
the southern parts, and the Romanians in Transylvania and in the neighboring
counties. Undoubtedly, this encyclical was meant to announce the Florentine
Union in Hungary, particularly among the Orthodox there.

40
Ibidem, p. 87.
41
Unfortunately, we do not know to exist a study or at least any direct information about the route
the Russian Metropolitans followed when arriving or leaving Constantinople towards Kiev or Moscow.
42
O. HALECKI, From Florence to Brest, p. 56.
43
I. M. DAMIAN, “Unire bisericească şi societate creştină în regatul Ungariei la mijlocul
secolului XV”, in Crisia, XXXVIII, 2008, p. 53.
44
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p. 140.
45
The exact translation would have been “Latins and Greeks”, but we have prefered the
variant “Catholics and Orthodox” because this is the true meaning in nowadays language.
46
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p. 140-141.
 MARIUS DIACONESCU
58

Of course, the Romanian researcher may find intriguing this order, since, from
a numerical point of view, the Romanians were outnumbering the other Orthodox
in the Kingdom of Hungary. The mentioning in the beginning of the Ruthenians is
natural, because of the relations between the Ruthenian churches in the Hungarian
Kingdom and Halych (Lwow), the Orthodox Bishopric (in some historical periods
it used to have a Metropolitan rank) that was subjected to Isidore, but also because
of the affinities with the Russian delegation. The privileged place reserved to the
Serbs can be explained by the fact that, on his route from Rome to Buda, Isidore
met in Zagreb with George Branković47, the Serbian despot, that had recently found
refuge in Hungary in front of the Ottoman assaults48, therefore the Metropolitan had
taken direct knowledge of the Serbian religious life.
Isidore had his first contact with the Romanians in Walachia and with Hungary
in the year 1434, on the occasion of his trip to the Council of Basel. During that
journey, the Greek delegation was robbed and only in Buda did they receive a sum of
money that allowed them to reach Ulm and King Sigismund, to whom they transmitted
a letter from the Byzantine Emperor49. It is likely that on the occasion of this visit
Isidore found out more about the Orthodox inhabitants in the Kingdom of Hungary.
The issue of this letter in the Hungarian capital was not in contradiction
with the Papal mandate by which he was appointed Apostolic legate in the Polish,
Lithuanian and Russian territories50. Hungary was the first country he crossed on
his way to Russia, where Catholic and Orthodox Christians lived together. In the
same time, King Vladislav of Poland had been elected as King of Hungary not
long before. In the context of the mission Isidore assumed, of promoting the religious
Union, the announcement of the Florentine Union in the capital of the Kingdom
of Hungary appears as a natural fact in those political and confessional conditions.
The first message addressed to the Ruthenians, Serbs and Romanians in
this encyclical speaks about the parity of the baptism: “I conjure you in the
name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that has spared us with His mercy, let there be
no division in the future between you and the Catholics, for you are instruments
of our Lord Jesus Christ and are baptized in His name”51.
Right away he transmits to the Latins, that is the Catholic faithful, to accept
without reservation the Orthodox Christians, who are baptized and their baptism is
sacred, approved by the Catholic Church as true and equal to their own: “You, those
of the Catholic breed, do believe truly and without hesitation to all those who are of
47
J. KRAJCAR, S. J., Metropolitan Isidore’s Journey, p. 382.
48
Les Serbes de Hongrie, leur histoire, leur priviléges, leur eglisé, leur état politique et
social, Gregr. et Dattel Libraires Editeurs, Praque, 1873, p. 35.
49
J. GILL, Personalities of Council of Florence, p. 66. The Greek delegation came by the
sea from Constantinople, presumably all the way to Chilia, and then crossed Walachia. To reach
Buda they could have followed one of the trading routes that passed through Transylvania.
50
The diploma of his designation as Apostolic legate in Epistolae Pontificiae, pars II,
no. 202, p. 93-94, and the safe-conduct at no. 203, p. 95.
51
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p. 141.
ON THE ISIDORE’S ENCYCLICAL LETTER ADDRESSED FROM BUDA ON MARCH 5TH, 1440,
TO THE ROMANIANS, RUTHENIANS AND SERBS IN THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY
59

Orthodox faith, for all are baptized and their baptism is holy and it was recognized
by the Roman Church as true and equal as the baptism of that Church”52.
On a commanding tone, he then asks that in the future there are to be no
more disputes between them on this topic of baptism, because they all belong to
the same Church, now united: “And from now on let there be no evil thought
between you on those things, both Catholics and the above mentioned Orthodox
look up to the same Church, for there is one, now united”53.
A century ago Paul Pierling considered that Isidore insisted on the
question of baptism because in Moscow the Catholic baptism was not
recognized54. The Jesuit Joseph Gill found odd that Isidore admonished the
Catholics, but not the Orthodox too, in order to accept the other’s baptism. He
tried to give a dogmatic explanation, referring to the disallowance of the
Catholic baptism by the Greeks and Russians and to the actual way of baptizing
by the Orthodox – the number of immersions and the formula recited55, without
knowing the confessional realities in medieval Hungary. He wasn’t in fact even
interested in those, as he assumed the Russian narrators’ affirmation that the
encyclical was sent to the provinces of the Russian Metropolitanate. The Jesuit
historian considered that Isidore addressed himself to the Catholics and asked
them to recognize the Orthodox’ baptism as a consequence of the Papal
practices in the previous century. Although the author acknowledges that the
issue of baptism was not discussed within the Council of Florence, he thinks
that Isidore probably knew of certain cases of rebaptizing from the Polish-
Lithuanian Kingdom, which determined him to ask in the encyclical letter for
the recognition of the Orthodox baptism by the Catholics56.
By not paying attention to whom the encyclical was addressed and not
knowing the Hungarian realities of the 15th century, the historian Joseph Gill
approached the problem in a completely wrong manner. There is little direct
evidence of the second baptism practiced in the first decades of the 15th century.
For example, the members of the Dragfi family were rebaptized after 1400. Of
course, the Romanian historiography must revise the tone by which it considers
this question of the second baptism, which, from individual and voluntary
situations, is transformed sometimes into a national tragedy. It is certain that in
the case of mixed marriages, the Romanian nobles were to be rebaptized.
The words: “the above mentioned Orthodox” were used by Isidore to
refer to the Ruthenians, Serbs and Romanians mentioned in the address of the
document. To them, as well as to the Catholics, he drew attention that there was
now a single Church, united, and that there should be no more disputes on the

52
Ibidem.
53
Ibidem.
54
P. PIERLING, op. cit., I, p. 52.
55
J. GILL, Isidore’s Encyclical Letter, p. 5-7.
56
Ibidem, p. 7.
 MARIUS DIACONESCU
60

matter of the baptism. Isidore tries actually to implement the Florentine Union
in Hungary by insisting on the main theme of contest between the Catholics and
Orthodox of the Kingdom. As a matter of fact, the second baptism regarded the
Orthodox aristocrats, not being reported a single case of mass conversion of the
Orthodox villages in Hungary up to that point. This appeal for the recognition
of the baptism, which concerned directly the Orthodox nobility (the majority of
which was Romanian), suggests at least a contact in Buda between a group of
nobles and Isidore’s delegation, perhaps the Metropolitan himself. At least the
Romanian nobles from Maramureş or the Banat counties could have been present in
Buda in the context of the political agitations for the election of the new King. It
can’t be excluded the possibility that Romanian nobles from Haţeg were present
in the retinue of John Hunyadi, which was at that moment at the beginning of a
rapid political career thanks to the projects of the Council of Florence.
The Metropolitan Isidore went even further in his vision of the Union and
its effects. When the Orthodox live on the lands of the Catholics or if a Catholic
church is built on their lands, they all would have to attend the Holy Mass there,
to communicate and show respect, as they would have done in their own
churches: “And if the Orthodox live on the lands of the Catholics or if on their
land exists a Catholic church, they all shall attend in faith the Holy Liturgy and
have the body of Jesus Christ and show respect with their humble heart as they
would in their own churches”57. The urge to attend without hesitation the
churches of the other was a practical application of the principle adopted in
Florence: unity in faith, diversity in ritual58. But here, in Hungary, this
exhortation had a special significance. The majority of the Orthodox population
in the Kingdom was of an inferior social condition, serfs on the estates of the
Catholic nobles. These aristocrats took care that minimal requirements were met
on their estates in order to have a church and an Orthodox priest serving the
spiritual needs of their subjects, otherwise there would have been a risk of
emigration. This urge addressed to the Orthodox to attend Catholic churches can
also be seen as a concession made to the Hungarian nobility.
The Orthodox can confess their sins and receive the communion from
Catholic (Latin) priests: “They can confess to the Catholic priests and receive
from them the body of our Lord”59. In compensation, Isidore urges the Catholics
to frequent the Orthodox churches, to attend the Liturgy and to receive the Holy
Communion, which is consecrated by the Orthodox priests in leavened bread,
just as the Catholic priests consecrate it in unleavened bread.
During the Council there had never been questioned or at least the sources
did not keep any information about the topic of the Sacrament of Penance60.

57
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p. 141.
58
P. PIERLING, op. cit., I, p. 52.
59
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p. 141.
60
J. GILL, Isidore’s Encyclical Letter, p. 7.
ON THE ISIDORE’S ENCYCLICAL LETTER ADDRESSED FROM BUDA ON MARCH 5TH, 1440,
TO THE ROMANIANS, RUTHENIANS AND SERBS IN THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY
61

However, unleavened bread was an important topic on the Council’s agenda and
the parity between leavened and unleavened bread was decided in Florence.
Isidore’s vision of Union is extremely generous and he tried to make the
decisions of Florence overcome the level of theory and become a practical reality,
to be implemented in day-to-day life61. In the same exact period, on March the 8th
1440, the Pope mandated Fantino Valaresso, the Catholic Archbishop of Crete, to
accomplish the Union on the ground: to promote Union and the peace of Christians,
to administer the communion to the Greeks with unleavened bread, to preach the
God’s word, to avoid any conflict between the Catholics and the Orthodox etc62.
Both Isidore and the Pope did not enter the core of the dogmatic questions. Instead,
on July 15th 1440, the new Patriarch of Constantinople, Mitrophan, notified the
monks and the Greek priests in Crete about the achievement of the ecclesiastical
Union and asked them to acknowledge Filioque and to remember the Pope Eugene
IV in the diptych during the celebrations63.
Isidore’s encyclical letter was in fact a proclamation of the Union in the
Hungarian capital, addressed both to the Orthodox, as well as the Catholics (Latins).
Certainly, there is the problem of the way in which this letter reached the Orthodox
clergy. It is unlikely that in the interval of 10-14 days of his stay in Buda,
Isidore managed to meet any representative of the Orthodox Churches – Ruthenian,
Romanian or Serbian. The orthodox population lived at a great distance from
the Kingdom’s capital, in the eastern, northeastern and southeastern regions.
Even more, the Orthodox Church in Hungary, including Transylvania, did not
yet had a high ranking hierarchy residing in the territory, therefore, practically,
Isidore had not a corresponding official, at least in the rank of Bishop.
The sources tell us nothing about the way in which this circular letter was
published in the capital of Hungary. We can, however, infer by comparison with
the similar situations in which Isidore promoted the Union.
Already in Venice he started celebrating the Orthodox Liturgy in Catholic
churches64. In the Polish city of Tarnów the Orthodox Metropolitan consecrated
a Catholic church dedicated to the “Blessed Virgin Mary”, together with a
Catholic Bishop65. In Krakow, the capital of the Polish Kingdom, he celebrated
an Orthodox rite Liturgy in the Catholic cathedral, with the aid of cardinal
Zbigniew66. In Lwow, the capital of Galicia, Isidore repeated the celebration of
the Orthodox Liturgy in a Catholic cathedral in the first half of May 144067. The

61
Ibidem, p. 8.
62
The integral text in Epistolae Pontificiae, pars III, no. 237, p. 3-4.
63
Patriarchatus Constantinopolitani. Acta Selecta, I. Collegit et in linguam gallicam vertit
Sac. Ioannes Oudot, Fonti, serie II, Fascicolo III, Sacra Congregazione per la Chiesa Orientale, Typis
Polyglotis Vaticana, MCMXLI, p. 172-175 (the original text in Greek and its French translation).
64
P. PIERLING, op. cit., I, p. 50.
65
A. ZIEGLER, Die Union des Konzils von Florenz, p. 90.
66
Ibidem, p. 88.
67
Ibidem, p. 90.
 MARIUS DIACONESCU
62

seat of the Orthodox Bishopric in Lwow was vacant, and the Catholics from
1412 occupied the Orthodox cathedral there. In the Galician capital Isidore
consecrated an Orthodox bishop68. Of course that in Galicia he was already in
the territory of his jurisdiction. Isidore had to fight the Catholic hierarchy in
order to promote the Union and to recover the rights of the Orthodox clergy
seized by the Catholic priests, and he remained there for about two months69. He
also met the Lwow Catholic Archbishop, Jan Odrowacz70.
By comparison, we can estimate that the encyclical was promulgated in a solemn
ceremony in Buda, most likely during a Mass hold in a cathedral in the Hungarian capital.
How did this message reach the knowledge of the Orthodox clergy in
Hungary? The only way was by the mediation of the dignitaries with whom
Isidore met in Buda. The direct communication channel was formed by those
Romanian nobles who were in a relationship with the noblemen that occupied
various offices at the royal court or around the Transylvanian voivode. Only by
the mediation of this Romanian nobility in the entourage of the great Hungarian
aristocrats could Isidore’s unionist message be forwarded up to a certain level in
the territory and foremost to the Orthodox clergy.
It is well known that the visit of a high hierarch represents a joyful
moment all around the world, not just for the Romanians. The presence of an
Orthodox high religious figure in the Kingdom of Hungary was a rarity that
could not have passed unnoticed by the Romanian nobles which were in the
Hungarian capital at that time. The absence of details regarding his stay in Buda
in the description of the Russian delegation’s journey, except for the encyclical
letter, is explainable by the context in which the author of the diary was
changing right in those moments71.
Isidore also met the Hungarian primate, the Archbishop of Esztergom72, on
his way to Krakow, where he paid his homage to King Vladislav. Unfortunately, we
don’t have in this case either a source that would inform us on the details of this
meeting, but by comparison with the conferences held in Poland, we can estimate
that this dialogue concentrated on the subject of religious Union.
The conclusions that have to be drawn after the analysis of the above
information are that the Metropolitan Isidore’s encyclical was addressed to the
Ruthenians, Serbs and Romanians in the Kingdom of Hungary, and not to the
Christians from the territories subjected to the jurisdiction of his legation.
Furthermore, Isidore has negotiated with the Hungarian dignitaries on the
effects of the Florentine Union in favour of the Orthodox.

68
MIRON STASIW, Metropolia Haliciensis (eius historia et iuridica forma), ed. 2, Romae,
1960 (Analecta OSBM, sectio I, Opera, vol. XII), p. 42.
69
A. ZIEGLER, Die Union des Konzils von Florenz, p. 90-91.
70
O. HALECKI, From Florence to Brest, p. 58.
71
Acta Slavica Concilii Florentini, p. 6.
72
We found this information about the meeting of Isidore with the Archbishop of Esztergom
just in B. BUČINSKI, loc. cit.
ON THE ISIDORE’S ENCYCLICAL LETTER ADDRESSED FROM BUDA ON MARCH 5TH, 1440,
TO THE ROMANIANS, RUTHENIANS AND SERBS IN THE KINGDOM OF HUNGARY
63

The message of the Union was perceived as such at least by the

Romanian noblemen in Maramureş and through them by the monks in the
monastery from Perii Maramureşului (today Hrusevo, in Ukrain).
The perception of the Union in the Romanian society, at least in the
Maramureş region, is revealed by two documents regarding the monastery in
Perii Maramureşului, issued by King Vladislav in 1442. The first of them is an
endowment act by which the King granted the monks the village of Peri, by way
of nova donatio73, and the second is a royal mandate issued to the Oradea
chapter to send its witness so that the King’s representative could introduce and
put the monks into possession of that estate74. The release of the two charters
respected the legal procedure in Hungary for the acquisition of an estate: the
King issued in parallel an endowment letter and a mandate of introduction and
only after it was reported that there has been no opposition he would release the
final act of donation (if that was asked by the beneficiary).
The new approach is given by the description of the monks in the two
royal documents: “fratres seu calugerii… nunc Deo propitio nobiscum fide
uniti” [our emphasis M.D.]. Two years after Isidore’s visit in Buda the
Orthodox monks from Perii Maramureşului were considered united in faith to
God, exactly in the spirit of the Florentine Union. As it is being declared in the
preamble of the two documents, the King at the request of the Romanians in
Maramureş made the donation! We can see that the encyclical of Isidore in
Buda in March 1440 had success, at least at the Romanian noblemen and
Romanian clergy from the north of Hungary, in Maramures County. Why here?
Because in Maramures County there are a Romanian nobility who protected
their monastery, which was stavropegial of the Patriarchate of Constantinople.75

73
National Archive of Hungary, Budapest, DL 13687.
74
National Archive of Hungary, Budapest, DL 13688.
75
Our research on the consequences of the Florentine Union in Hungary started when we
discovered in the National Archive of Hungary the above mentioned two records about the
Romanian monastery in Maramureş. Our first study on this question was published in
1997. See M. DIACONESCU, Les implications confessionnelles, p. 29-62. Of course, the subject
of the Florentine Union in Hungary has to be developed in more studies, not just for the
ecclesiastical but for the political consequences, too. The wars between Hungary and Ottoman
Empire at the middle of the 15th century cannot be explained out of the Union of Florence.
Tiparul s-a executat sub c-da nr. 520/2012 la
Tipografia Editurii Universităţii din Bucureşti