The censorship of the Church of Rome and its influence upon the production and distribution of literature, volume 2 (of 2)Putnam, George Haven
History
The censorship of the Church of Rome and its influence upon the production and distribution of literature, volume 2 (of 2)
Putnam, George Haven
Freedom of the press; Liberty of conscience; Prohibited books
The Church and the Holy Roman Emperor finally took the ground that
every writing that came from the pen of a Protestant author, even
though it had nothing whatsoever to do with religion or politics,
must be classed as libellous. In 1548, the Emperor issued a new
series of most strenuous laws for the control of the press. The
penalties were brought to bear at one point or another with full
severity, but it proved to be impracticable to secure in the Germany
of the time any uniformity of obedience. In Austria and in Bavaria,
the penalties included the use of the rack for authors, printers,
and sellers of publications that came under condemnation. In 1567,
a _Flugschrift_ was printed in Frankfort under the title of
_Nachtigall_, which was at once interpreted as a libel on the
Emperor. Fourteen hundred copies were sold within a few hours of its
issue and there were various reprints within the next few weeks. The
Emperor ordered the punishment not only of the printer, but of the
magistrates of Frankfort. The former was placed in prison for two years
and the magistrates were fined thirty thousand gulden, an enormous sum
for those days.[58]
The Emperor Ferdinand was a more faithful, that is to say, a more
bigoted, son of the Church than Charles, but he refused to admit that
the control of the press was a Church matter. He took the ground that
censorship was a matter pertaining to the State, that is, to the Crown,
and that the bishops could take part in it only as delegates of the
authority of the State. This was the contention asserted, and finally
maintained, in France by Francis I and his successors.
In an official document of 1580, occurs the phrase, “The regulation of
books (_das Bücher-regal_) which has for many years been within
the control of the emperor.” Schurmann is of opinion that the authority
for the regulation of books was derived from, or connected with, the
rights reserved to the imperial authority under the Golden Bull. A
century after the issue of the Golden Bull, at the time namely of the
invention of printing, the reserved powers (_Reserva-rechte_) of
the empire had become materially weakened, and were being in large part
exercised by the local authorities, and the attempt of the emperor to
enforce control over literary production and distribution was from the
outset met by antagonism and protest on the part of princes and of the
municipal magistrates, and was also opposed by the contention of the
Church that such supervision properly belonged to her. The question
was raised as to whether the decrees of the imperial Diet contained
any references to the imperial control of book publishing. The
omission was explained on the ground that such control was exercised
as a personal right of the emperor. It was under such imperial
authority, for instance, that an approval or privilege was given to
the _Germania_ of Aeneas Sylvius (afterwards Pius II), originally
issued in Italy in 1464 and printed in Germany in 1515.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account