A kálvinisták ördöge : Pázmány Péter eddig ismeretlen latin nyelvű röpirata = The Devil of the Calvinists – A Previously Unknown Latin Pamphlet by Péter Pázmány

Báthory, Orsolya (2024) A kálvinisták ördöge : Pázmány Péter eddig ismeretlen latin nyelvű röpirata = The Devil of the Calvinists – A Previously Unknown Latin Pamphlet by Péter Pázmány. MAGYAR KÖNYVSZEMLE, 140 (1). pp. 28-44. ISSN 0025-0171

Preview

Text BathoryO_MKsz_24-1.pdf - Published Version Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

A political pamphlet entitled Calvino-praedicantium Ungarorum Genius malus (The Devil of the Hungarian Calvinist Preachers) was published in Vienna in 1620, without the author’s name being given. The 21-page work is one of the pieces of the pamphlet war of 1620 started by the also anonymously published Secretissima instructio. The Secretissima instructio, which served as the propaganda of Habsburgs against the Bohemian Revolt (1618–1620), is a travesty of the literary genre of the mirrors for princes. Its fictional narrative framework and ironic tone may have reminded Péter Alvinczi of Öt szép levél (1609) written by Péter Pázmány against him. In his conviction that the Instructio was also Pázmány’s work, Alvinczi wrote the Machiavellizatio as a response to this and repeatedly addressed the Archbishop of Esztergom on the title page of his book and in the work itself. Two responses to the Machivellizatio were written, Tamás Balásfi’s Castigatio and the anonymous Genius malus mentioned above. Alvinczi refuted only Balásfi’s pamphlet, the Genius malus remained unanswered. Looking through the opusculum, its text is reminiscent of Pázmány Péter’s earlier Latin-language treatises. The style of the work, its passionate tone, certain characteristic phrases, the special forms of address of the opponents, and the numerous neologisms remind us of Pázmány’s Peniculus papporum and its extended version, the Logi alogi. A closer reading of Genius malus also reveals further textual parallels with Pázmány’s Diatriba theologica (1605) and Vindiciae ecclesiasticae (1620), writings based on rational rather than emotional argumentation. As my research progressed, it became apparent that Pázmány’s authorship had already been suggested. Kálmán Révész, reformed bishop and church historian declared with absolute certainty that the pamphlet was the work of the Archbishop of Esztergom. However, Révész formulated this claim only incidentally, and since his article was essentially about the works of Péter Alvinczi, he did not provide any specific evidence to support Pázmány’s authorship. The present study undertakes to carry out this task.

Actions (login required)

Edit Item