Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 26

first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  seal
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last
EN
The article concerns the iconography of the seal of Anne of Bohemia, Duchess of Silesia. In the analysis of its message particular attention was given to the object held by the duchess in her hand, which has been contradictory interpreted in historiography. The author has proven that it is the fleur-de-lys, symbolizing purity and sanctity – important values in life of the duchess to whom the sigillum belonged.
EN
In the 19th century, there were 15 goldsmiths‘ masters working in the guild of Banská Bystrica. Beside the greatest and most famous goldsmith Samuel Libay (1782 – 1866), there were also goldsmiths who had tried to save the glory and shine of this craft. Francis Rosenberger (1799 – 1882), a goldsmith master from Pest had belonged to them. He had trained numerous young goldsmiths with his son and goldsmith master Anton Rosenberger among these apprentices. Francis Rosenberger was several times at the forefront of the goldsmith's guild in the position of a superior. One of his most famous pupils was William Emler (1839 – 1897), who had made an extraordinary contribution to preserve a part of the goldsmith's workshop of the masters Francis Rosenberger and Samuel Libay.
EN
Leonhartus Albertus, a poet of the age of Rudolph II, describes in a poem addressed to Heinrich Bohrmann his seal displaying an hourglass, a skull and (cross-?)bones as a sign of human ephemerality. Albertus’ explanation of the three elements is traditional. It is impossible to determine whether Heinrich Bohrmann, whose origin is paraphrased by Dalensis Belga, is identical to Henricus Borman Kessel Dalensis Iuliacus, whom we find in the register of the Faculty of Law in Padua on 9 July 1603. Albertus’ motto Lucem amo, which refers to Jesus Christ and was versified two times by the poet, is in contrast to the seal. The Latin text of all three poems is edited, accompanied by a German translation and commentary.
DE
Der germanische Tiername *selxaz m. ‘Robbe’, vorzugsweise ‘Gemeine Robbe, Phoca vitulina L.’, wurde bislang nicht zufriedenstellend vom etymologischen wie morphonologischen Standpunkt her hergeleitet. Im vorliegenden Beitrag wird dafür plädiert, hierfür in der indogermanischen Protospra­che *(t)sel-ə2k-s m. ‘kleines Kriechtier; Schnecke, Schildkröte’, eine diminuierende Suffixbildung – mit dem Suffix *-ə2k- – zum Verbalstamm *(t)sel- ‘kriechen’, als Etymonvorlage anzusetzen. Die damaligen Germanen dürften im Norden den Robben, großen Seesäugetieren, die sich am Lande schwerfällig fortbewegen, begegnet sein. Sie nannten sie dementsprechend *sel-ə2k-o-s m. ‘großes Kriechtier’ > ‘Robbe’ > germ. *selxaz m. ‘Robbe’, indem sie die bereits existierende Suffixbildung *(t)sel-ə2k-s m. ‘kleines Kriechtier’ nunmehr um das Augmentativsuffix *-o- erweitert hatten.
EN
The Germanic term *selxaz m. ‘seal’, especially ‘harbor seal, Phoca vitulina L.’, has not been ex­plained so far from the etymological and morphological point of view. It is suggested in this paper that there was an Indo-European word *(t)sel-ə2k-s m. ‘small crawling animal, snail, tortoise’, derived from the verbal root *(t)sel- ‘to crawl’ by means of the diminutive suffix *-ə2k-. The Proto-Germans in Northern Europe met seals, i.e. big marine mammals, which move on the earth with difficulty. They called this animal *sel-ə2k-o-s m. ‘big crawling animal’ > ‘seal’, hence Gm. *selxaz m. ‘Phoca’.
EN
Stamped bricks with the names of the king Amenhotep I and his mother, queen Ahmes Nefertari, were found throughout Deir el-Bahari, including the Temple of Hatshepsut investigated by a mission from the Polish Centre of Mediterranean Archaeology University of Warsaw. All of the bricks came from the edifice raised by Amenhotep I at Deir el-Bahari that was demolished before the construction of the mortuary temple Djeser-djeseru and then reused in a structure that emerged at the same time or later
PL
Pieczęcie cechowe są ważnym i nadal słabo rozpoznanym działem sfragistyki. Interesująca kolekcja tego typu zabytków jest przechowywana w Muzeum Diecezjalnym w Płocku. Jej twórcą był Franciszek Tarczyński, a skatalogował ją ks. Tomasz Kowalewski. Znalazły się w niej pieczęcie cechów z Chodzieży, Kowala, Łowicza, Sandomierza, Starej Warszawy, Płocka i Włocławka.
EN
Guild seals are an important and still poorly recognized in the historiography of science department of sfragistic. Interesting collection of monuments of this kind has been collected in the Diocesan Museum in Plock. It was created by Franciszek Tarczyński, and cataloged by priest Tomasz Kowalewski. The stamps have been affixed to his cardboard boards. Stock of the guilds of Plock, Lowicz, Sandomierz, Old Warsaw, Kowal, Chodziez, and Wloclawek.
EN
In the autumn of 2010, a humble intact burial in a reed coffin was found during the excavation of the Old Kingdom stone mastaba of the chief physician Neferherptah (AS 65) at Abusir South. The burial was positioned directly on the superstructure of Neferherptah’s tomb. The body of a more than fifty-year-old woman had been wrapped in linen, as indicated by eight fragments of fabric. The only burial equipment of the deceased consisted of a mud brick used as a headrest and a pyramidal stamp seal with a Bes-shaped figure on its base found on the breastbone. This latest addition to the corpus of stamp seals represents the first amulet of its type to come from a documented primary archaeological context at the Memphite necropolis. Although this tiny find is small in size, it is of particular importance for the study of the burial customs and beliefs of the lower social strata in the Memphite necropolis. The seal most probably provides one of the earliest examples of iconographical evidence for the archetype of the god later known as Bes. Some of the archaeological material from the excavations was destroyed during the Egyptian revolution in 2011. The remaining material is examined in this paper, together with an anthropological and textile report.
PL
Akt unii polsko-litewskiej z 1569 r., tak zwanej Unii Lubelskiej, przechowywany jest w Archiwum Głównym Akt Dawnych w Warszawie w zbiorze dokumentów pergaminowych (sygn. 5627). Jest to szesnastowieczny dokument pergaminowy z liczną grupą podwieszonych pieczęci woskowych. Dotychczas uważano, że znajduje się pod nim 77 pieczęci. Podczas prac konserwatorsko-dokumentacyjnych prowadzonych w Centralnym Laboratorium Konserwacji Archiwaliów AGAD ujawniono jeszcze jedną – nieznaną wcześniej pieczęć. W tekście opisano tę pieczęć oraz dokonano próby identyfikacji jej właściciela.
EN
The act of the Polish-Lithuanian Union of 1569, so-called The Union of Lublin, is preserved in the holdings of the Central Archives of Historical Records in Warsaw in the collection of parchment records (ref. No. 5627). This is the 16th c. parchment document with a large group of pendant wax seals. Until now it was thought that 77 seals were attached to the document. However, during the restoration work carried out in the Central Laboratory for Conservation of Archive Materials in Warsaw was revealed another previously unknown seal. This article describes this seal as well as the attempts to identify its owner.
EN
The iconographic motif of the birdman emerged in Mesopotamian glyptic art in the Early Dynastic period and disappeared at the end of the Akkadian period. Its meaning remains ambiguous, particularly due to the fact that the figure is represented in scenes of varying character and it cannot be identified with any character known from myths. Sometimes, the creature may be recognised as a deity based on a horned crown, yet this is not always the case. Among the deities attested in the scenes with birdman, one can easily identify Shamash and Enki. The examined material contains 62 published seals or seal impressions with the birdman motif, both from the Early Dynastic and the Akkadian period. The latest monographic studies of this subject were published in the 1950s. Interpretations presented by the authors of said works, though often quoted in the research on the motif, seem to lack proper argumentation and, to an large extent, are outdated due to a considerable progress of the research on Sumero-Akkadian iconography and an increase, although modest, in study material, among other things. In light of the above, it is worth analysing this motif one more time.
Zapiski Historyczne
|
2010
|
vol. 75
|
issue 2
66-85
EN
The article is devoted to documents of armistice concluded during the war of Poland and Lithuania with the Teutonic Order in the years 1409–1411, and also to documents of the Peace Treaty of Thorn. The first of the armistice treaties, written on 8 October 1409, was exceptional, as it was made through the agency of the Roman and Czech king Wenceslaus IV. This was the reason why the Teutonic and Polish documents were written in German. Seals were also not typical of armistice: the Grand Master Ulrich von Jungingen affixed the great seal of the Teutonic Order whereas Władysław Jagiełło put his bigger seal with the coat of arms. There also appeared seals of guarantors from both sides. The armistice was made until 24 June, whereas on 26 June 1410 Jagiełło issued a document prolonging the armistice until 4 July. It was an act written in a simplified form, without guarantors, with a smaller seal of the monarch. The Teutonic equivalent did not survive. Diplomas from the armistice of 9 December 1410 survived. The Polish document causes interpretation problems as it includes mistakes in the list of guarantors, and the number and order of the seals affixed. The preliminary documents of the First Treaty of Thorn were recorded and enumerated on 1 February 1411. They were made in the name of the monarchs, affixed with smaller sigils and seals of negotiators. The main peace documents were sealed and enumerated on 10 May 1411 near Złotoria. The Teutonic document bore 41 seals; the emblem of the Master Henrich von Plauen did not survive. The Polish-Lithuanian document is known exclusively thanks to descriptions in notary devices. It bore 38 seals, including the sigil of Władysław Jagiełło and the Great Prince Vytautas. Probably the act, like many others, was passed on to the King Sigismund I the Old by the Duke Albert of Hohenzollern in 1526. Soon after it disappeared and it was not recorded in the inventories of the Crown Archive preserved from the mid-16th century.
EN
Chaos, visible in the municipal heraldry of the town of Biała after 1945 and further exacerbated during the period of political transformation in the 1990s, caused the need among the members of the municipal authorities to set this issue in order and legally regulate it. The article, based on rich iconographic material, discusses the course of work on restoring the historical form of the coat of arms of Biała and developing and designing its flag and official seal.
14
63%
EN
The present article is an attempt to look at a seal in the broadest possible context of humanities, with an aim of finding novel fields and paths of research. The author discusses several directions of exploration of a seal – linguistic, anthropological, semiotic, and sociological; utilizing methods and results of research of art history and history of cognitive history, he present seal, regarded as a “symbolic form”, not only as a carrier, but also a memorial.
EN
In his article, the author presents a critical analysis of an unknown seal of the Republic of Mosina from 1848, stored in the PAN Kórnik Library.
PL
Zarys treści: Na podstawie dziesieciu zachowanych odcisków pieczęci prowincjałów polskich dominikanów z XIV i XV w. można wyodrębnić cztery typariusze. Wszystkie są hagiograficzne, a w ich polu wyobrażona została Matka Boska z Dzieciątkiem oraz klęcząca i modląca się postać symbolizująca dysponenta. Wyobrażenia i legendy są stereotypowe, co umożliwiało przejmowanie typariusza przez kolejnych następców na tym samym urzędzie. Dysponentami jednej pieczęci było kilku prowincjałów (dwóch lub trzech), a jeden tłok funkcjonował przez ok. dwadzieścia-trzydzieści lat. Pieczęć prowincjalska miała charakter urzędowy. Ponadto, odgrywała znaczną rolę w propagandzie ich władzy, była symbolem jej ciągłości i jedności prowincji. Prowincjałowie pieczętowali nią swoje listy oraz współpieczętowali dokumenty wystawiane przez konwenty.Abstract: Four stamps may be distinguished upon the basis of the preserved imprints of seals used by Polish Dominican provincial superiors in the fourteenth and fifteenth century. All are hagiographic and their field displays the Madonna and Child as well as a kneeling and praying figure symbolising the holder. The images and legends are stereotypical, making it possible for the stamp to be passed to successors holding the office in question. A single seal was at the disposal of several (two or three) provincial priors and a single stamp functioned for about 20–30 years. The seal was official and performed a prominent part in the propaganda of the holders’ power as well as being a symbol of its continuum and the unity of the office. The provincial superiors used it to seal both their letters and the documents issued by monasteries.
EN
Dominican documents at the State Archive in Wrocław offer an opportunity for taking a close look at seven imprints of seals used by provincial superiors during the fourteenth and fifteenth century. Another three such monuments are kept at the State Archives in Opole and Toruń. An analysis of the iconography and legends makes it possible to determine that we are dealing with four stamps. The first was at the disposal of Maciej of Cracow (I), the second – of Piotr Wasserrabe (II), the third (III) – of three provincial superiors: Andrzej Rusiniec, Jan Arnsberg and Jan Biskupiec, and the fourth (IV) – of Jan Advocati and Jakub of Bydgoszcz. All four are hagiographic, with a field featuring the Madonna and Child as well as a kneeling and praying person symbolising the provincial prior. The legend is stereotypical, making it possible for the stamp to be passed on to successors to the office. The seals remained at the disposal of several (two or three) provincial superiors, with a single stamp functioning for about 20–30 years. The provincial superiors used an official seal attached below their letters and the documents of assorted monasteries, which they attested. The corroboration of the former described the seal as: sigillum mei provincialatus. In the second instance, information about the consent of the provincial superior was included in the contents of the document and the corroboration mentioned: sigillum prioris provincialis. Only Jan Arnsberg, by way of exception, added his own formula below the basic contents. The seal of the provincial prior was attached in the middle or as the first seal to the left. The seal in question played a considerable role in the propaganda of the provincials’ power by symbolising its continuum and the unity of the given province. An analysis of the mediaeval seals of provincial superiors allows us to assert that their constant programme involved the Madonna.
PL
Zarys treści: Głos w dyskusji na temat sposobu opisywania wyobrażeń pieczęci publikowanych w wydawnictwach źródłowych.Abstract: A voice in a discussion about ways of describing seal imagery in source publications.
EN
Two significant sphragistic source publications issued in 2012 and 2015 deal with seals on documents from the State Archive in Bydgoszcz and seal stamps from the State Archive in Poznań. Descriptions of seal images, contained in the cited publications, which could become models for future editions, inclined the author of the article to present his reflections on editing seals. The majority of the remarks pertain to the manner of constructing a description of armorial seals from the viewpoint of heraldry. Theses concerning the method of characterising seal imagery can be presented as follows: 1. A description of the seal image should not double information accessible in the illustration; 2. A description should contain expanding information (e.g. an identification of the motifs of deciphering the symbolic message); 3. All descriptions should possess a unified form and normalised contents; 4. A description must be maintained in a language adapted to the described contents, i.e. heraldic language and terminology must be applied to designate coats of arms, and descriptions of tools should use the names of specialist instruments in accordance with the terminology of suitable crafts and professions; 5. A description of armorial seals must take into account their dual character: a seal with a coat of arms (in the field a shield with an emblem) and a seal with an emblem (in the field an emblem without a shield); names of coats of arms should be used suitably for formulating descriptions of coats of arms; 7. In the course of depicting state emblems on “government’ seals one should take into account legal regulations upon whose basis the described emblem was created or modified. The use of precise terminology will make it possible to avoid interpretation misunderstandings, which at times are the consequences of the ambiguous language of the description..
PL
W artykule rozpatrywane są pieczęcie sądów ziemskich i ich urzędników w WKL (w dziewięciu powiatach województw wileńskiego i trockiego) w latach 1564–1792. Materiał empiryczny do badań stanowiło około dwustu niepublikowanych pieczęci sądów ziemskich i ich urzędników. Artykuł dzieli się na trzy części. Część pierwsza zawiera analizę sposobu określania w statutach litewskich i Volumina legum zasad używania pieczęci sądów ziemskich i ich urzędników oraz realizowania tego w praktyce. W części drugiej pieczęcie sądów ziemskich zbadano pod względem heraldycznym i sfragistycznym. Takiej samej analizie w części trzeciej poddano pieczęcie urzędników sądów ziemskich – sędziów i podsędków. W artykule postawiono tezę, że zawarte w II Statucie litewskim z 1566 r. i trzecim z 1588 r. oraz wprowadzone w ramach reformy z 1764 r. normy określające używanie pieczęci sądów ziemskich i ich urzędników były przestrzegane. The article deals with seals of land courts and their officials in the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (in nine districts of the Wilno (Vilnius) and Troki (Trakai) voivodeships) in 1564–1792. The study is based about two hundred unpublished seals of land courts and their officials. The article is divided into three parts: part one presents an analysis of how the use of seals by land courts and officials was described in the Statutes of Lithuania and the Volumina legum, and in what way those regulations were implemented in practice. Part two is devoted to a thorough heraldic and sphragistic analysis of the seals of land courts, and part three – to an analysis of land court officials: judges, and sub-judges (singular: podsędek, subiudex). The article puts forward the thesis that the norms included in the Second (1566) and Third (1588) Lithuanian Statutes, and those introduced by the reform of 1764, regulating the use of seals of land courts and of their officials were abided by. The article is supplemented by an annexe with the photographs of seals of land courts and their officials.
PL
A few words on the seal of bishop of Włocławek Jan Pella of Niewiesz on the document of Mełno Peace of 1422The purpose of the article is to present trials and tribulations with the attachment of the seal of Bishop of Włocławek Jan Pella of Niewiesz to the main Polish document of the 1422 Mełno Peace. Despite the fact that the sealed document of the treaty was handed over to the Teutonic Knights at an assembly at Wielona in April of 1423, there was no seal of Bishop Jan, who was one of the Polish guarantors of the peace. It was not until 14 April 1426 that the seal was put to the document as a result of the agreements made at a Polish-Teutonic meeting at Grodno in December 1425. The bishop’s seal was brought to Toruń by a delegation made up of Jan Pella’s nephew, Piotr of Niewiesz, and a few low-ranking clergymen. The actual attachment of the seal to the document especially provided for this occasion was made by the bishop’s nephew, and the seal was described in great detail in a notary’s instrument issued for this reason. The article is supplemented by an appendix in the form of edition of two sources related to the attachment of the bishop’s seal, that is the notary’s instrument of 14 April, and a letter of Toruń Commander Henryk Marschalk to the Grand Master of the Teutonic Order Paul von Rusdorf of 15 April 1426.
PL
Instytucję tajemnicy spowiedzi należy rozpatrywać w kontekście sakramentu spowiedzi. Tajemnica spowiedzi odnosi się do treści wyznanych w czasie spowiedzi indywidualnej, podczas gdy penitent w sposób sekretny wyjawia spowiednikowi swoje grzechy. Tajemnica spowiedzi w prawie kanonicznym ma charakter bezwzględny. Ustawodawca kościelny stwierdza, iż nie istnieje żadna władza, która byłaby w stanie zwolnić podmiot zobowiązany do zachowania tajemnicy spowiedzi z tego obowiązku. Naruszenie tajemnicy w prawie kanonicznym postrzegane jest jako złamanie prawa i jako takie jest usankcjonowane właściwymi karami. Ustawodawca w kan. 1388 Kodeksu Prawa Kanonicznego z 1983 r. czyni rozróżnienie między bezpośrednią i pośrednią formą naruszenia tajemnicy, które obwarowane są obligatoryjną karą. W pierwszym przypadku spowiednik podlega ekskomunice wiążącej mocą samego prawa, zarezerwowanej Stolicy Apostolskiej, w drugim – powinien być ukarany stosowną karą. Ponadto, tajemnica spowiedzi oraz przestępstwo naruszenia tajemnicy spowiedzi zostało uregulowane w Normae de gravioribus delictis z 2001 r. i Normae de delictis reservatis z 2010 r.
EN
The seal of confession should be considered in the context of the Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation. The seal of confession involves information that was revealed during the individual confession while the penitent reveals his sins to the priest. The seal of confession in canon law is absolute and inviolable. It is stated that there is no authority that is able to let the priest betray the seal of confession. Betraying the seal of confession is considered as a breach of the law and as a consequence it is sanctioned by appropriate penalties. The legislator in can. 1388 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law distinguishes between direct and indirect form violating seal of confession. Both are subject of the mandatory punishment. As a result of direct betrayal of seal of confession the priest is excommunicated latae sententiae (this punishment is reserved to the Apostolic See), while the indirect betrayal of seal of confession should be punished with an appropriate penalty. Moreover, the seal of confession and the crime of violating the seal of confession is regulated also by Normae de gravioribus delictis (2001) and Normae de delictis reservatis (2010).
first rewind previous Page / 2 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.