marie bláhová We learn about the will of the South Bohemian nobleman Bavor I of Strakonice, who died in 1260, and bequeathed some plots in nearby Horažďovice town with all income to St. John’s Monastery in Strakonice, almost twenty years later, when the testator’s son Bavor II replaced with other land five of the plots that had to be used for the construction of the city’’s moat.33 Similarly, Vok of Rosenberg, Supreme Marshal of the Kingdom of Bohemia34 and a member of another of the oldest and wealthiest noble families in Bohemia, knowing that he was at the end of his days, included all of his assets, both movable and immovable, in his last will. Accordingly, he declared in front of witnesses (as evidenced by a document he commissioned, dated 4 June 1262)35 that his wife together with the children were entitled to use Vok’s estates, if she remained a widow. If she remained a widow but separated herself from the so-called undivided share, in which the widow usually lived with her children after the death of her husband, she was to keep three villages and the income assigned to her by her husband in the marriage contract. She was to keep most of the estates even if she married again. Provisions to pay off Vok’s debts occupy a large portion of the last will. Furthermore, Vok of Rosenberg remembered his servants, religious institutions (namely the Vyšší Brod Monastery), and those orphans in his domain. He too made his will before witnesses, clergy, and officials. Likewise, the Moravian nobleman Hartleb of Myslibořice included all his possessions in his last will, which was written in 1271 prior to his military campaign to Hungary.36 Unlike most of the previous documents, 309 32 Šebánek – Dušková 1974, no. 108, pp. 182–184. Cf. Štachová 2012, pp. 250–251. A claustrum is mentioned in the deed, but in Kněžice was only the provostship of the Želiv monastery. Cf. Foltýn 2005, pp. 363–364. 33 V areas sitas in Horawitz cum omni proventu ... in testamento pro sue anime remedio allegatas. Sviták–Krmíčková –Krejčíková 2006, no. 74, pp. 232–233 (1279, Oct. 16). 34 Šebánek – Dušková 1974, no. 335, pp. 496–498. Cf. Štachová 2012, p. 251. 35 Dušková 1971 tries to clarify the discrepancies regarding the dating of the charter, which was probably issued the day after Vok’s death. She assumes that Vok of Rožmberk declared his will orally just before his death and the notary wrote it down the next day, when Vok was no longer alive, and used his seal. Although the contents of the document cannot be doubted, the document itself is obviously an office forgery. 36 Šebánek – Dušková 1981, no. 632, pp. 241–242. Cf. Štachová 2012, pp. 251–252.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=