Ponte, Oldradus de

Royal folio (389 × 270 mm). Collation: [1⁸ 2-3⁶ (1r blank, 1v dedication, verse; Table); 4-9⁸ 10¹⁰ (chs. 1-123); 11-19⁸ 20-21⁶ (chs. 124-253); 22⁸ 23⁶ (chs. 254-264); 24-30⁸ (chs. 265-333; colophon 30/5v, chapter table 30/6r, quire register 30/8r, verso blank); 31⁶-32⁸ (Johannes Franciscus de Pavinis: Responsum, 32/8v blank): 246 leaves. 2 columns, 59-60 lines. Type 1:98R (text), 2:103G (headings). Initial spaces. Rubricated red (initials, paragraph marks). Nineteenth-century vellum with vellum straps, spine ink-lettered, edges sprinkled in bands of red, blue and white. Repairs on corners of first leaves, marginal soiling, last leaves wormed, last leaf dirty with marginal repairs. 

Augustinian canons of Gars, Upper Bavaria.

Goff L-80; Hain 9934* including 12537*; BSB-Ink O-40 + P-116. See Wolfgang Treue, Der Trienter Judenprozess (Hannover, 1996), 144-152; Diego Quaglioni, “I giuristi medievali e gli Ebrei: Due consultationes di G. F. Pavini (1478)”, in Ebrei e Cristiani nell’Italia Medievale e Moderna, ed. M. Luzzati (Rome, 1988), 63-73.

Nineteenth-century vellum with vellum straps, spine ink-lettered, edges sprinkled in bands of red, blue and white. Repairs on corners of first leaves, marginal soiling, last leaves wormed, last leaf dirty with marginal repairs.
In response to your inquiry, we are pleased to provide you with a general report of the condition of the property described above. Since we are not professional conservators or restorers, we urge you to consult with a restorer or conservator of your choice who will be better able to provide a detailed, professional report. Prospective buyers should inspect each lot to satisfy themselves as to condition and must understand that any statement made by Sotheby's is merely a subjective qualified opinion.
NOTWITHSTANDING THIS REPORT OR ANY DISCUSSIONS CONCERNING CONDITION OF A LOT, ALL LOTS ARE OFFERED AND SOLD "AS IS" IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SALE PRINTED IN THE CATALOGUE.

Second, enlarged edition, prepared under the auspices of the Auditor sacri palatii, Giovanni Francesco de Pavinis.
Oldradus de Ponte had been an advocate at the papal court of Avignon in the early fourteenth century, known to Petrarch who referred to him as the eminent jurist of his time. His Consilia were first printed in Rome by Adam Rot, 1472 (Goff L-79). That edition contained 264 consilia, as reprinted here in quires 4-23. The remaining quires contain additional consilia 265-333, many of which the editor refers to as being found in a particular old codex. The editor dedicated the work to Pavinis and remarked on his help in preparing it, including sending the printer, Vitus Puecher, to the eminent jurists of Rome, and even to the cardinals, in a search for relevant manuscripts.

The two supplementary quires, found separately in a few copies and so sometimes treated as a self-standing edition, contain a lengthy responsum by Pavinis in the matter of Simon of Trent. In the summer of 1475 Sixtus IV was unsettled when he learned of the rapid trial and executions of the Jews of Trent, for this seemed to impinge on papal prerogatives. He sent a representative to investigate the matter, Battista dei Giudici, Bishop of Ventimiglia. Dei Giudici, a Dominican and no friend to the Jews, was soon convinced that the trials had been corrupt, and that the Jews had been entirely innocent. This created a problem for Sixtus, for the Bishop of Trent who had supported the trials, Johann Hinderbach, had powerful allies in both church and empire. Sixtus appointed a commission of cardinals to investigate further, with Pavinis as their legal consultant. Pavinis was co-opted by Hinderbach, resulting in a delayed and mixed judgment, embodied in Sixtus’ papal bull of 20 June 1478. Sixtus declared that no cult of Simon as martyr was to be allowed, but that the original judicial process had been right and fair. Pavinis convinced his friends in Trent to contribute 30 ducats for the costs of printing 300 copies of his Responsum, to be attached to his enlarged edition of the Consilia of Oldradus; and he seems to have been given an additional reward by Hinderbach. Besides defending the legitimacy of the trial against the Jews of Trent, Pavinis argued that the forced conversion of the women and children of Trent was proper, despite Thomas Aquinas’s statements against forced conversions.